Review: People of the Book by Geraldine Brooks ★★★★

I've had this book on my to-read list for a long time, 3 years or so, but it was one of those books that I didn't really think that I would ever really get to. A 'lifer'. I'd read Brooks' Year of Wonders back in 2008, and I liked it, but about 4 years has passed now, and the more I read in those intervening years, the more I came to feel like it wasn't really all that impressive, after all. I especially feel that way after finishing People of the Book. The writing in YOW just doesn't even hold a candle to the writing in POTB. It's a beautifully written, moving book, and I'm sorry that I put off reading it for so long.

I will say that there were parts of POTB that felt too modern for the historical sections, and even too "British" (mainly because the 'could/should/would have done' phrase sticks out like a sore thumb to me), and I thought that the romantic interest was awkward and didn't really ever sit right with me, but aside from those two things, I couldn't really find anything to criticize in this book.

I read for pleasure, and this book drew me in. I thought it was a fantastic melding of history, bibliophilia, socio-political issues, and life. I thought the characters were interesting, and even though most of them were only bit-players, I never actually felt like that's what they were while reading. They had history, and depth, and personality, and I very much enjoyed reading their stories, even when they were disturbing or heartbreaking.

But mostly, I loved this book for the story of the haggadah itself. I loved the way that the history of the book unfolded, with each clue to its journey through the years being shown as a story in itself, moving backwards in time until the origin of the book is shown. The historical sections were wonderful - they all felt completely real, although they were all horrifying as well, especially the 1492 Inquisition section.

I remember studying the Inquisition in school, and somehow it never really conveyed just how fucked up that shit was. That's probably why we never learn anything. We sanitize history to the point where it's completely lost all meaning, so we just keep doing the same shit over and over. We're still killing each other over differences in opinion regarding which religion is "right", or because a man dares to love another man and want to share his life with him, or because someone's skin is the wrong color, or because... we're just fucking bored and hate-filled. For fuck's sake. When will we grow up?

"You've got a society where people tolerate difference[...] and everything's humming along: creative, prosperous. Then somehow this fear, this hate, this need to demonize 'the other' --it just sort of rears up and smashes the whole society."

/soapbox

Fantastic book. I highly recommend it.

Friday Flashback Review (10): Little Brother by Cory Doctorow ★★★★

Friday Flashback is hosted by Jen @ The Introverted Reader. 

I originally read this book in March of 2010. 

My review:

I have to admit that the first couple pages or so had me rolling my eyes and wondering if I would be able to actually finish this book. There's so much technoslang that it seemed to me to be trying too hard, even though it is a book about hackers and technokids... Like, "Spending Fridays at school was teh suck anyway, and I was glad of an excuse to make my escape." Teh suck? Really. Ugh. (Although, to be fair, at least he spelled out "suck" and didn't write "teh sux" or something. I probably would have just had to close the book right then and there. *shudder*) Another example is using "vibe" rather than "vibration" when talking about receiving a text message, or "h4wt" for "hot", which doesn't make sense to me anyway, because it's longer and more cumbersome to type "h4wt" than it is to type "hot". But then later, the full and unabbreviated word "tarpaulin" is used rather than just "tarp", which felt out of place considering the shortening/slang usage of other stuff. I don't understand the stupidifying slang netspeak anyway, but then I'm older than 25, so I'm probably a lost cause.

Add to that that there is a lot of hacker exposition and explanation that I didn't really think was necessary, and you have the only two reasons that I couldn't give this 5 stars. I appreciate the author/narrator explaining the technical aspects of the story for those of us who aren't technologically super-savvy like the characters in the book, but it seemed like there was a lot that could have been contextualized (like gait-cams) rather than explained for pages.

But these are small nit-picks. Other than these two things, the book was brilliant, relevant and prophetic. I want to buy copies and hand them out at schools. I want my library to pick up 10 more copies and I want them to just magically appear in people's check-out stacks. I want people to read this book. I want people to learn from it and take away the knowledge that our freedom is more likely to be taken from us by Americans than by anyone else, and to fight against it when it happens.

This book is set in the not-very-distant-at-all future, after a "terrorist" attack in San Francisco, which essentially results in SF being turned into a vicious data-mining police state... Now with even more "With us or against us" mentality per square mile! *Used car salesman smile* It's frightening, because it's already happening right now. Innocent people are being held without trial, without representation, without anything, in the name of "security". This terrifies me more than anything, because there's no limit, no boundary. When there's a nameless, faceless, general "threat", "security" must by necessity become ever more pervasive and intrusive in our lives to find it. And the only people who suffer are us.

Benjamin Franklin said "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." The characters in this book understand this concept and they go about fighting for their freedom and their rights as American citizens even when the people they are fighting are the very people who are supposed to defend their rights as American citizens. Color me proud. Considering that this book is told from the point of view of a 17 year old, I can only hope that REAL 17 year olds think about this stuff, like prejudice and fear-mongering and overzealous uniformed officials, among others...

Anyway, I loved Marcus's character. Most of the time, probably because of the technoslang and the gaming, he felt younger to me than 17. More like 15. But in a way, that only made him more impressive to me. I loved that he was smart, and willing to stand up for himself and do the right thing, and learn from the world around him and from his own mistakes. When I have kids, I hope that they are something like Marcus... only minus the skipping school to play games stuff. Marcus carried the book well, and was believable as both a smart, mostly responsible teen, and a freedom fighter. I liked his honesty, and how he was unsure of himself but didn't let that stop him.

I expected certain things to happen as the story progressed, and I was right about many of them. The escalation of the security/police-state, the defenders of the security measures, the dissidents, etc. (They were done in a more high-tech way than we have now, but they aren't far off. RFIDs are already gaining popularity and there are 2 cameras that I can see from my house without leaving my porch.) But I was wrong about some predictions and suspicions that I had as well, which always makes me happy, because I really hate knowing where a story's twists will be.

This book should be a must read for everyone, right along with Nineteen Eighty-Four. Go read it. Look past the slang, and the technical explanations, and read this for the snapshot of our future if we aren't wary and vigilant with this so called "War on Terror". See you on Treasure Island... ;)

View all my reviews

Review: Looking For Alaska by John Green ★★★★

I've been seeing this book around for quite a while, but I never really thought about reading it. I figured that it was one of those "Let's see just how drunk, high and stupid we can get!" books, the ones that glorify the idiocy that is being a teenager. I went through that, I lived through it, even had fun with it at the time, but I outgrew that phase of my life (earlier than most) and I don't care to read about it now. So I was rather "Meh." about reading this book.

And then my friend, influential by persistence, introduced me to John & Hank Green via VlogBrothers on YouTube. Now, if you've never watched any of their videos, I highly recommend them. They are smart, funny, relevant and always make me think. So, via VlogBrothers, I came to understand John Green a bit, and realize that I had underestimated him. So, the next time I came across "Looking for Alaska", I picked it up. And this book did not forget to be awesome.

Right away, I was glad that I "met" John via VlogBrothers before reading the book. I could really feel his personality in it, and his intelligence and sense of humor. But I also felt like it was a story that he took seriously. Not only because of the serious subject matter, but because he captured the permanent impermanence of being a teen without making it feel like a joke. Everything now is forever until what was is yesterday and everything NOW is forever. Looking back on my teenage years, the furthest out I could imagine was 21, and that was only for the legal ability to drink. My friends were still my friends in this imagining, my life was still my life, as if the only thing that would change was my age. We just can't picture where things will take us. By the time I hit 21, I was so far from the predicted life I had thought I'd have that if someone had bet me a million dollars that I would have been there, I'd be out of a million dollars.

My point is that I liked the way that John portrayed these characters as having everything in front of them, to look forward to, but still they live in the moment as if that future never gets any closer. I loved that they were booksmart brilliant, but still make the same stupid mistakes and errors in judgment as anyone else. I love that they latch on to an idea and hold onto it despite realizing that it is slipping away anyway, because everything does and we change despite ourselves.

I loved Miles, or Pudge as he's called. I feel like I understood him. He's bookish, nerdy, a bit of a loner by necessity rather than choice, at least until he's around people who are ready to accept someone like him. Those people primarily being Alaska and Chip, aka The Colonel, who are both outrageous, brilliant and wild, and bring Pudge out of his shell a bit. Pudge forms an instant and close friendship with both of them, one that changes his life.

As much as I loved Pudge, I loved The Colonel more. He is one of those characters that, for me, just hop off the page and into being. I would have been friends with him. I liked that he came from humble beginnings, and that he and his mother weren't afraid to aspire to be better, that they weren't afraid to show how hard they work for something, that they weren't ashamed of who they are but rather proud of it. I loved that while he was as willing to play hard and get into trouble as anyone, he still took his priorities, which were his studies, seriously. I loved his loyalty and his determination to follow everything he started through to the end. He was definitely my favorite character here.

My least favorite character was actually Alaska. I don't know if this is because she's a female teenager written by a man, or if she just represented all (or at least a large chunk) of the things in teen girls that annoy me, but I just couldn't really like her. I can certainly see why Pudge would, why lots of teen boys would, but I just didn't. She was too much. Too wishy-washy, too moody, too impulsive, too flirty, too wild, too mysterious, too smart for her own good, too damaged-and-knew-it, too aware of her effect on others. But not all of these things are bad. And not all of them bother me individually, but all together, it was just too much and I couldn't care about her like The Colonel or Takumi or Lara or even Pudge did. And I find this last the worst, because Pudge is telling this story, so I should understand his feelings for her, but they just seemed shallow to non-teenage me. Attraction and flirtation do not equal love - unless you're 16 and a hopeful idealist.

But the one thing that I think affected me the most about Alaska is her sense of responsibility for others. She seems to take on the well-being and happiness of others as her own obligation, and the burden of guilt when she doesn't succeed. And it struck me that the guilt of failing someone is like a physical thing that can be passed on or spread. Alaska failed someone she loved, and then Pudge failed Alaska, and the guilt spreads.

Shortly after the shift from "Before" to "After" (which was a storytelling method I loved!), I realized why Alaska left the school that night, and I waited for the guys to figure it out as well. Normally, I would be disappointed that I figured it out before the main character, but this is not the type of "mystery" that gets solved like that. It's a human mystery, one where the only person able to solve it is the one you seek and cannot find.

I loved the depth of this book, particularly the philosophical aspects of their World Religions class. I wish I could have taken a class, and had a teacher like that. This book, and the class it depicted, makes you look at life, the world, and meaning itself differently. I am glad that I read it, because it was so much more than I thought it would be. And I officially declare myself to have been wrong. John Green, can you ever forgive me?

View all my reviews

Friday Flashback Review (8): Harry Potter & The Bible ★

Friday Flashback is hosted by Jen @ The Introverted Reader.

So I thought that it would be kind of appropriate to post this review now, since Banned Book Week was not very long ago, and since the 7th Harry Potter movie is coming out soon. I received this book from my friend Kandice, whose son was given the book by some mysterious person at his school. If there's anything I dislike, its creepy people spreading ignorance in schools. Rather than encouraging intelligent thought and analysis, Abanes encourages people to hide behind fear and ignorance in order to avoid anything they don't understand.

So without further ado, my review, which was written way back in February:

Ahh, right. Where to start... I have so much to say! I wish that you could all see my notebook. Aside from my atrocious handwriting, it is 12 full-size pages filled with my scribbled, jotted, many underlined thoughts, reactions and questions, as well as quotes, semi-quotes, references to quotes and page numbers for still more quotes.
It's not pretty. Really. But it WAS necessary. So many of the things that I jotted down had me rolling my eyes, thinking "Is this guy SERIOUS?". I just read this entire book, and I still don't understand most of his claims, arguments, assumptions and conclusions. I like Harry Potter, so I am obviously one of the "undiscerning" readers mentioned in Douglas Groothuis's foreword, in which he proclaims that I am about to read a "rare voice of sanity, reason and biblical discernment" regarding the Harry Potter books. Hmm. Well. Good thing he hasn't started off by annoying me or alienating me as a reader... Oh. Oops.

Anyway, offended by being called incapable of reason and insane before the book even starts, I still tried to read it objectively. From what I could see, Abanes's case comes down to several extremely repetitive points:

1) The setting of the "real world" makes it difficult for kids to differentiate between fact and fiction.
Apparently, because this is a fiction book that takes place in the United Kingdom where people actually live or can visit, it makes it nearly impossible for the reader to understand that it's not real. He makes reference to comments on message boards and letters (etc) which have kids saying things like "Wow! I wish I could do magic..." or "I wish I could go to Hogwarts..." and the like, and claims that these kids are dangerously close to becoming official occult followers. Which is utterly ridiculous and a huge logic leap. Kids whimsically wishing for something doesn't imply that they can't understand it's not real. I used to WISH I had a real My Little Pony to ride, but I didn't actually believe they WERE REAL. Kids know how mundane and normal and boring their life is. School. Homework. Bed. Repeat. They have no control over anything at this point - parents decide their lives. They just wish for some fun.

And, kids are much, much smarter than they are given credit for, in my opinion, although apparently not in the author's. Abanes seems to think that kids who read and like something will then rush off to try it with no thought. And while that may be true of some people, it is untrue of most. He gives an example in his book (after talking about how wormwood is used in HP and is an actual ingredient in absinthe) of someone looking up a recipe for absinthe online, making it and getting sick. He writes it in such a way as to insinuate that the person who did this was somehow influenced by the wormwood mention in HP. Another big leap. He also seems to forget parents, even while writing a book geared toward them. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children, not JK Rowling's.

He goes on later in the book to say how Christian writers CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien both wrote fantasy stories involving magic, but these are OK because their magic is not HUMAN magic, and it is clearly in a fantasy world.

2) The magic described and portrayed in HP is actually representative of the Occult, which is denounced repeatedly and harshly in the bible.
Abanes's argument here seems to be that because JK Rowling researched and used real modern and historical practices, ideas, references, and substances (like wormwood above), as well as mythology and legend etc, that she is "thinly veiling" her belief in the occult, and not only introducing children to it, but grooming them towards it.
His "biblical" definition of occultism is extraordinarily all-encompassing, and ranges from astrology to conversing with spirits as a medium. Anything, essentially, that tries to understand or influence the world or ourselves that is NOT Christian in nature or done for the glory of God, is defined as being of the occult, and therefore dangerous and evil. He references many passages in the bible which denounce occultism, but never answers the ever present "WHY?" question. But hey, rules are rules, and the rule-maker need not explain, right?

Moving on, Abanes makes another huge leap in talking about the pets in HP, stating that they are familiars to their owners. Witches' familiars are defined here as a "low-level demon" in the assumed shape of an animal. He says, "Mrs. Norris, owned by the school's caretaker, exhibits some of the characteristics of a familiar. In Book III, Hermione gets her own familiar -- a cat named Crookshanks." He then quotes a renown Wicca practitioner, Starhawk, on the tradition of familiars, and then quotes a passage from "Witchcraft In England" which rehashes again what familiars are and confirms (again) the belief that witches used them in "the later centuries of [the:] witchcraft-belief". Abanes then says, "Obviously Harry and his friends are indeed making contact with the spiritual world." What? How is that obvious?

Abanes did include a very small section each to explain Paganism, Wicca and Satanism. I think he kind of shot himself in the foot if he was trying to turn people away from these, though. He failed miserably at making them unattractive, and to be honest, actually succeeded in piquing my interest in learning even more about them. Pagan and Wicca followers have a "reverence for the Earth and all it's creatures, generally see all life as interconnected, and strive to attune one's self to the manifestation of this belief as seen in the cycles of nature." Ooooh! DANGER! DANGER! (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
I'm not going to go into the major points and details, but it is interesting, and I would recommend reading about them yourself. I did see a lot of my own "worldviews" represented in Paganism and Wicca, such as my relativism (a view that ethical truths depend on the individual or groups holding them -www.Merriam-Webster.com), which essentially means that what is good for me is not good for everyone else, and what is good for others may not be what is good for me. I'm OK with that. Abanes is not, and apparently has a problem with personal and private beliefs not in accordance with his own. He seems to feel that his way is the only way.

He did portray Satanism as being "bad", although he made clear that modern Satanism is not technically worship of Satan, but worship of the individual. Satanism "emerged when various aspects of all these (pagan, et al) traditions were blended together by persons seeking to fight Christianity's growing theological and moral influence [between 400s -1600s A.D.:]." (I got a real chuckle out of that. Apparently the Crusades and mass murders in the name of Christianity represent the "moral influence" of the faith. Best. Euphemism. EVER.)

He mentioned Sean Sellers, who was physically and sexually abused, neglected, and abandoned as a child and teen, who found himself getting involved with Dungeons & Dragons as an outlet, and later Satanism. There he found acceptance and understanding, until things started getting too deep and cult-like, which is very different from the religion started by Anton LeVey. Sellers, fearing for his sanity, reached out repeatedly for help... his parents, their Christian ministers, church run support groups, etc, and they turned their backs on him each and every time. In the end, he immersed himself in Satanism completely, and ended up murdering three people, being arrested, sentenced to death, and becoming a born again Christian in prison. Abanes blames the D&D as the "gateway" to Satanism for his downfall, but fails completely to mention the many, many people who let Sellers down when he needed help the most. (This is just one of many examples of how Abanes cherry-picks his arguments.)

3) Vulgarity, profanity and general lack of biblical morality in the Harry Potter books. (Characters lying, stealing, cheating, cursing, drinking, etc. And the amount of "gore" in the books, including Nearly Headless Nick and the Headless Hunt.)
His point is that he doesn't feel like there is enough delineation between "good" and "evil". The good guys should be all good, or if they falter, they should pay for it immediately. Bad guys should be all bad, and should absolutely pay and fail.
But MY argument is that the world, and life, is rarely delineated in such stark, black and white terms. Good people do bad things, bad people can do good things, it's the way of the world. And the real world doesn't always mete out appropriate punishment for misdeeds based on a religious belief. The world is impartial... Religion is not.
Abanes's first example of the immorality of the children is that they disobey rules. I think this is the main stick in his craw, because so much of organized religion centers on obeying without question. He also really has a problem with the word "git", which is a derogatory word that means idiot. He claims that this is profanity, which I guess is subjective, but to me, it's slang, not profanity.
Children are children, and they ACT like children. They disobey, mouth off, curse, treat each other unkindly, hold grudges, make enemies, make up, cheat, etc. But even as they do so, they are learning. Holding them to adult standards of behavior is unrealistic and unfair, especially a religious standard that was never intended to be in the equation at all.

He also repeatedly laments the increase of "New Age Spiritualism" in modern times, causing what he calls a "Post-Christian" world, which is helped along by books, movies and media, namely "occult" books like HP, etc. He repeatedly inserts statistical data, which in itself is suspect to me, as 7 out of 8 people know that 60% of all statistics are made up on the spot (as this was... :P), so... I'm a little wary of just accepting his claims. He acts like popularity itself is cause for alarm. More than once, Abanes seems to indicate that because Rowling was poor before she wrote Harry Potter that her popularity was helped along by, if not evil, definitely occult forces. He also seems to take issue with the fact that JK Rowling has not publicly made known her personal religious beliefs. As if it matters. Her beliefs are personal, and her books are fiction. They have nothing to do with each other in my mind and opinion, but Abanes thinks that because she's not proclaimed her Christianity, that she's probably an Occultist. Again with the black and white, 'with us or against us' theme.

I think that's what bothered me most about this book. I tried to read it objectively and fairly, even though I myself am agnostic, but so many of his arguments are just statements without any basis in fact. Comparisons which are... ridiculous. It's like he was writing this for people who think exactly as he does, but just didn't know it yet, and who wouldn't question his claims. At the end of the book, he gives practical advice for Christians (who should now have many, many concerns about the book) to go forth with gentleness and kindness when discussing the book(s) with others that they feel the need to educate. Good advice, yes, because I do not want someone calling me a "heathen" for enjoying these books, BUT this book only succeeded in making claims, not proving them.

Not only that, but as I mentioned before, he clearly, blatantly and shamelessly picked around the things that he didn't want to address, and beat into the ground the few points he did.

For instance, he mentions CS Lewis's Narnia series, and *spoiler* Aslan sacrificing himself for Edmund */spoiler*, but Lily's own sacrifice for Harry goes without mention. And he's not unaware, just to be clear, as he quotes Voldemort telling Harry that his mother died to save him, and that she will have died in vain, as well as Dumbledore's explanation of Lily's love sacrifice. He just ignores the sacrifice of the one, and lauds the sacrifice of the other, because it suits his theme.

He claims that the HP books are vulgar and full of violence etc, and that they are inappropriate reading material for children, yet ignores the fact that there is ridiculous amounts of violence and death in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. And the bible, for that matter.

He also derides the use of runes in HP, but makes no mention of the fact that Gandalf used them in Lord of the Rings. Apparently that's OK because, while runes are definitely "Real Occult", LOTR was not set in the real world.

I could go on and on, (12 pages of notes, remember?), but I think this is enough to get my point across. In the end, it seems like Abanes is saying, "Christianity is right, and anything that doesn't shout that from the rooftops is wrong. Period. End of story." That's an opinion, but it doesn't make it the right one. I think people are entitled to believe what they choose, just as readers (of all ages) are entitled to read and enjoy what they choose. Parents have a responsibility to talk to and teach their kids right from wrong, and morals and ethics, etc. That is not the job of the Harry Potter books, or ANY books. Religious texts are wonderful and useful to many people, but that does not mean that fiction and entertainment should seek only to rewrite/retell them.

Read and make up your OWN mind about books. :)

Character Connection (3): Samhain Corvus LaCroix - Scroggins Style

Character Connection is a weekly meme hosted by Jen at The Introverted Reader every Thursday.

It's Banned Book Week, as I'm sure you all know, and in honor of this, I've decided to do another post in the style of censorship's most recently vocal spokesperson: Wesley Scroggins, Morality Judge of the WORLD. Enjoy!

(Note: There will be non-specific story spoilers!)

Scroggins Would Say: "I cannot even express how dangerous "Hold Me Closer, Necromancer" is to impressionable teens. Not only does it seek to corrupt them into practicing occult rituals, but it is underhanded and tricky in doing so. Just look at the main character's name! "Sam" - an innocent and biblical name, or so you think! His name is actually Samhain, which is PAGAN - one step away from SATANIC! And furthermore, "Sam" (I can't bring myself to type that pagan word again), isn't an ordinary teen working at a fast food restaurant like a responsible member of society, as he first appears, but is in fact a NECROMANCER. That's right. He is able, through unholy black magic and pagan ceremonies, to bring back and control the dead.

"Sam" and his friends are vulgar and irresponsible (lying to police and covering up several crimes!) and cruel to the only normal boy in the story. Don't believe for one moment that they are the "good guys"! There are NO "good guys" in a book for young adults that promotes this type of behavior as well as witchcraft and the occult and necromancy and SEX. Oh yes, "Sam" has sex... with a non-human... and enjoys it. Luckily, I do not believe there was mention of prophylactics involved!

This book should be avoided at all costs. It contains subject matter that is unsafe for any moral reader to handle. Do not be fooled by the "humor" or the themes of camaraderie or understanding or acceptance - these are not honestly come by - they are requirements of the cult of which "Sam" is a recruiting member!"

My Thoughts:
Of course the above represents the most ridiculous arguments against the book that I could come up with...  This is a fantasy book, and so, like Harry Potter, the reader understands that the magical and supernatural parts of the story are not real. It seems only those who seek to censor these types of books fail to see the difference.

I personally loved the book, and Sam is a great character. He is brave and loyal and tries to do the right thing even when everything around him is going wrong. Sam struggles with learning who he really is, which is something that ALL teenagers cope with, necromancers or not. Sam is brilliant, funny, honest, and accepting of peoples' differences. These are the things that matter, not those things we cannot control.

For my full and glowing review, click here.

Censorship... That way lies madness.