flavorpill's 30 books to read before 30.

today is my 30th birthday and if you have been reading my blog, you know that i have been on a mission to read the 30 books that flavorpill recommends one should read before they are 30. you can check out the article here.  i sadly failed and only read 20 books but figure too much won't happen in the first 6 months of my being 30, so giving myself til december to read the 10 i need.  which won't be too small a feat considering "infinite jest" is still on the list.  

but decided to give you a breakdown of their list:

iliad and the odyssey by homer-  didn't read it.  checked it out from the library but it was in novel form and i think i want to read it as a poem.

the secret history by donna tart- though a good novel, it didn't contain any greatness that demanded it needed to be read before 30.  the characters are undergrad but didn't provide any insight for your college experience except maybe watch out for cultish programs.

jesus' son by denis johnson- this wasn't for me, a great writer but was not interested in the narrator's life.   if i read it at 18, i would have thought it amazing.

the complete stories by flannery o'connor-  i had the library copy for about 6 weeks but couldn't get into it.  all of her stories made me uncomfortable.  i read "a good man is hard to find" because i felt i should at least have that read before i turn 30, but it just scared me.  also not sure if southern goth is for me.

much ado about nothing by william shakespeare- i agree that you should have some shakespeare under you belt before you turn 30, but not necessarily this play.  it had too much dialogue and old school word play for me to enjoy. read "macbeth" instead.

the sun also rises by ernest hemingway- the first book of his i ever read and definitely needs to be on this list.  should be read in your 1st/2nd year of college to guarantee that you study abroad and probably in spain.

the road by cormac mccarthy- didn't read it.

maus by art spiegelman- this was a beautiful book and should definitely be read before 30.  also it's a graphic novel (read: comic book) but very powerful.

ender's game by orson scott card- this should actually be part of a 18 books to read before you turn 18.  it's a young adult novel do read it as a young adult.

pride and prejudice by jane austen-  this is 

a timeless classic and needs to be read.  i love now flavorpill says guys too, because i was surprised when my uncle john told me he was a fan of this work!  also it's worth the read just so you can picture colin firth as darcy! literary eye candy!

cat's cradle by kurt vonnegut- didn't read it though it's on my kindle.

lolita by vladmir nabokov- needs to be read because it is always cited as the best novel of all time.  nabokov has a way with words but still the premise makes me uncomfortable.

lord of the rings by j.r.r. tolkien- still on the library wait list for this one.

1984 by george orwell- definitely needs to be read but again as part of the 18 before 18.  

the catcher in the rye- one of my favorite books of all times.  read it young though. i will love holden regardless of my age but i know some people's dislike grows with their age.

the great gatsby by f. scott fitzgerald- this novel has grown on me but i think if i read it in my early twenties i would have thought it great.  though think "this side of paradise" is better.

beloved by toni morrison- a great novel but not sure why it was on the list. though it is important because it gives a voice to slaves.

infinite jest by david foster wallace- picked it up but didn't have the time to

read it.  also need to read hamlet firsts. will try to get it done while on summer break.

lord of the flies by william golding- this should be read in high school.  and important read for both genders but especially for boys.

don quixote by miguel de cervantes- need to read it.

the trial by franz kafka- need to read it.

to the lighthouse by virgina woolf-  this should be read before 40, but not 30.  

fahrenheit 451 by ray bradbury-  another book that should be read in high school. bradbury is a poet.  i loved this book when i read it in high school but feel like "dandelion wine" is the better book.

invisible man by ralph ellison- need to read it.

to kill a mockingbird by harper lee- this book is amazing at any age.  atticus finch is one of the greatest characters ever! and i love scout, jem, boo and dill. read this before 30 but reread it throughout your life.

treasure island by robert louis stevenson- bought if for a dollar but haven't read it.

much ado about nothing. william shakespeare. (114)

much ado about nothing is right.  i should have listened to the title, there is much ado in this play but it's all for nothing.

i was looking forward to reading "much ado" because the flavorpill team, well maybe just the writer of that post, cited it as their favorite shakespeare play.  but then it turned out to be much ado about nothing.

so the plot is quite simple but also pointless and sadly the result of a bitter man, don john, who hates his brother, don pedro and is jealous of claudio.  actually i found this amazing reviewer on goodreads that does abridged version of shakespeare plays.  i will link it here.  hilarious, right?  but seriously that is all there is to the play.  a bunch of pointless deceit and lies and in the end, everyone is in love and there is a double wedding!  and seriously the whole mask wearing at the wedding? i know it makes everything come full circle but it was so silly.

i think the issue i had was that there was too much dialogue and so many character, it was difficult to keep everything straight.  plus everyone was way too witty, i consider myself quick-witted, but given that the play is over 400 year old, most of that wit went over my head.  i mean i didn't even bother with the banter between the watch, it just didn't seem worth the effort to read sparknotes to understand jokes that probably would not make me laugh.

i did enjoy the exchanges between beatrice and benedick.  i even had a crush in my early twenties that started off like theirs.  a co-worker and i used to always tease each other in a non-flirty way, and our other co-workers started to question if we liked each other.  i actually hadn't thought of him in that manner until everyone started to say things and then oddly enough a crush did develop. and  no we did not end up married.

and i know as a girl, i should have been a huge fan of beatrice but i didn't fall in love with her.  i loved how sharp-tongued she was and gave it to benedick.  but after a while i got tired of her oh-i-don't-want-to-be-married-but-secretly-do. maybe her bemoaning of never bemoaning about marriage, just hit too close to home for me.  i mean she said something that i would totally say esp after attending my friend mona's wedding:

"this goes everyone to the world [of marriage] but i, and i am sunburnt. i may sit in a corner as cry "heigh-ho for a husband."

spot on me, down to the idea thinking tanned me is ugly.  lol.  i know she is this great shakespeare female character but she didn't wow me.  i think if i saw her in action aka in play and not on paper, i would have adored her.  i think an actress needed to add the sass needed her to be read.  my mind just read and didn't act.

i don't want to have much more to ado with this play so will wrap up with some random final thoughts:

-wow! way to go friar! for seeing the truth in hero's soul!  and coming up with that plan! so clever.  

-how was margaret not fired for getting it on in hero's bedroom?!?!

-seriously were identities that well hidden at the party?

-why was everyone willing to trust don john?  and what was his problem?!?!

-did anyone find it awkward how willing claudio was so quick to marry hero's lookalike cousin?!?

-also does the phrase "catch my drift" have shakespearen origins? don pedro said "go in with me, and i will tell you my drift." (his drift is the plan to get beatrice and benedick together)

maybe i am have been too harsh, i think "much ado about nothing" needs to be experience as it was intended as a play versus a book.  so i will see it before i make a final judgement.  also there is a movie version coming out or maybe it out so will try to see it.  and one last random fact, keanu reeves played in don john in a 90's film version.  imagine that!

jesus' son. denis johnson

denis johnson's "jesus' son" is a flavorpill 30 before 30 book.  i had heard of it prior to my reading because of the film based on it starring billy crudup but never saw it or thought to read the book.

and since thirty is a week away, i ordered it on abebooks.com (for some odd reason the library did not have a copy) and read it in about two days (due to the quick-paced momentum of the stories).  "jesus' son" is a collection of stories told by the same narrator, a small town junkie.  there is an epigraph at the begging quoting lou reed's "heroin", "when i'm rushing on my run and i feel just like a jesus' son", which is where the collection gets its name.

to be honest, "jesus' son" wasn't for me.  flavorpill said that it would knock you down regardless of your age.  and yes johnson's writing is amazing.  it's just that the content wasn't for me.  i grew up and currently live in a small town (which is how i knew even before the narrator said it that his "work" would be stealing copper wire from buildings and selling it, people actually do this in delano) and don't like the druggies here so reading about one similar to them was of no interest to me.  i think individuals like the narrator are what is wrong with the world today and so i spent most of my time disgusted by what i read.

and i get it.  if i read "jesus' son" back in 92 (more like 99, i was only 9 in 92), it probably would have knocked my socks off.  i did read "trainspotting" when i was in high school circa 00/01 and that knocked my socks off back then.  but whereas i enjoyed reading about mark, sickboy and the gang, i was repulsed by the narrator of "jesus' son".

i tried googling to find an analysis to help me better understand my disapproval

of the content and found a quote in a new york times article:

The narrator "lives in a random world, a certain part of America where wildness is actually expressed rather than depicted," Mr. Johnson said. "Some of us go to the movies to see everybody shooting each other, and then there's another bunch who actually shoot each other." 

and perhaps this is it.  maybe i am

just tired of the lowlives in delano to have the openmindness to find this profound.  i just have no sympathy for people with drug addictions, its not a sickness, cancer and luekemia are.  and to clairfy,  i did grow up in an extremely sheltered househoild and do not know any actual junkies in real life.  but i did lose an uncle (that i never met) to heroin and perhaps that is where my prejudice against junkies comes from?  and due to these prejudices, though johnson didn't intent it to be, i read "jesus' son" as romanticising addiction.

but as i mentioned before denis johnson is a wonderful writer, it was just his subject matter that turned me off.  he did  have many beautiful lines.

"[the bartender] poured doubles like an angel, right up to the lip of a cocktail glass, no measuring. . . . you had to go down to them like a hummingbird over a blossom."

"she wanted to eat my heart and be lost in the desert with what she'd done, she wanted to fall on her knees and give birth from it, she wanted to hurt me as only a child can be hurt by its mother."

and though i didn't approve of the stories told, johnson is a wonderful storyteller. i loved the inconsistency of it all, the memories of the narrator were all jumbled just like a junkie.  but it's hard to appreciate good writing when you can't stomach the narrator.  however, i do plan on reading johnson's other works, "jesus' son" just wasn't for me.

beloved. toni morrison. (111)

i read toni morrison's "beloved" because it is on flavorpill's 30 before 30 list.  i have to admit, at first i was weary because of the ghost and supernatural occurances in 124.  i am not one for ghost stories but it turned out to be a tragic yet beautiful story of endurance. 

"beloved" is the tale of a family and community coping with a tragedy and the appearance of a mystery woman.  the tragic event was when slaveowners found escaped slave sethe (the protagonist) to return her to the farm and in an attempt to keep her children safe, she kills her infant daughter.  sethe is jailed and the slaveowner frightened by the sight leaves her alone.  this infant daughter haunts her house and the community and then comes back in the form of an actual person, beloved.  

infanticide is a horrible crime yet is justifiable considering the horrors of slavery.  i might sound like a horrible person but i understand why sethe killed her baby.  better for that baby to die at the hands of her mother than later in life by her slaveowner or the clan.  also better to avoid a life of abuse and treatment like an animal.  actually as demonstrated in paul d's (an old friend of sethe who becomes her lover) story about how he was jealous of a rooster when he realized it was more free than him.  its horrible to imagine any situation in which a human is treated less than an animal but sadly this was how the american institution of slavery was.

in my post for art spiegelman's "maus", i discussed how "maus" allows readers to truly understand a part of history that one would only know due to history books but not as a human experience.  the same can be said for "beloved".  in school, we learn about slavery yet we have have no idea what it was really like.  in history books there are excerpts from slave narratives but unless you read one it's can not grasp the full experience of a slave.  furthermore, i would assume american textbooks present slaveflaw oils not be complete honesty about slavery and present it in a sympathetic light because american society would not want its student to see its country negatively.  to get a honest perspective one has to look elsewhere. "beloved" allows the reader to do just that, it puts things into perspective.  

for example, i knew that slaves were separated from their family members; families torn apart because they were viewed as property but it was different when i read about it in "beloved".  reading about baby suggs, sethe's mother-in-law, trying to find out which farms her children were taken to or how paul d was  amazed and envious when he met generations of black families that were able to stay together, framed it in a ways i could relate.  but the best example was paul d thought that sethe love for her daughter denver was "risky":

for a used-to-be-slave woman to love anything that much is dangerous . . . the best thing, he knew, was to love just a little bit; everything, just a bit, so when they broke it back, or shoved it in a croaker sack, well, maybe you'd have a little love left over for the next one.

it sad to imagine a world in which affection and love for your child was

dangerous because at any moment they could be taken away from you.  and yes all parents fear losing a child but for slaves it was a fact of life. furthermore, imagine your family bonds not being respected because you were not viewed as a person.  family relations were ignored because slaves were not viewed as having them because they were property.

another aspect of "beloved" that left an impression on me was the hopelessness of slavery and how individuals coped with it.  all the characters had to deal with it but i believe baby suggs was the best example because she was free and yet did not find happiness.  her son, sethe's husband, had bought her freedom but even than it did not result in peace for her. baby suggs was a spiritual leader but after the tragedy with sethe, her spirit was broken.  like she told her friend stamp when he asked why she didn't preach anymore and accused her of punishing god, she replied "not like He punish me".  it's hard to believe in a god that does not stop the suffering in one's life.  i have always said that i could never be job so i undertstand baby sugg's frustration with god.  as a result of her hopelessness, baby suggs went to bed and stayed there, her "wish was to consider what in the world was harmless" and she did that by thinking about colors because they never harmed anyone.  it was sad but beautiful how she found comfort in colors, she still had hope even if she didn't have faith in god.

another example of this hopelessness was the chain gang that paul d worked on.  it was explained that the gang would sing as they worked:

singing love songs to Mr. Death, they smashed his head.  more than the rest, they killed the flirt whom folks called Life for leading them on.  making them think the next sunrise would be worth it . . .

morrison's analogy of life as a flirt is quite clever though sad.  it's one thing to not have faith in god but quite another to not have faith in life.  

though "beloved" demonstrated the horrors of slavery, the lesson to be learn is to not hold on to the past.  (this is also the same lesson of "the great gatsby" which is also on the 30 before 30 list. hmmmm).  as explained before, sethe's dead daughter comes back to life as beloved and at first sethe is happy because it gives her the opportunity to right her wrong.  however, even though sethe wa regretful and tried to give beloved the love she needed, in the end, beloved destroyed her.  and that is how it is in life, if you cling to the past it will ruin you (like seen in "gatsby").  instead one must accept their past, mistakes and all, and continue to life on.  one can not let tragedy stop them.  an individual must learn to endure the pain that life can be at times.

i wonder if this is the one of the overall lesson of the flavorpill list?  so far two books about not holding onto the past.  but regardless, "beloved" was a wonderful novel and should be read regardless of your age.

the great gatsby. f. scott fitzgerald.

before i start, seriously how tender is the dedication page. it's about as tender as night is.

so as i explained in my previous post i wasn't impressed with my initial reading of "the great gatsby". looking back, it's probably because instead of getting a great love story between daisy and gatsby, i got a lesson on how one should leave the past in the past. and since i was looking for love and came up empty handed, i reacted like the cold hearted person i am, indifferent. it wasn't bad but it didn't make leave a lasting impression on me. plus "the great gatsby" is always always claimed as an important american classic but i didn't seem that great to me.

however, on my second read i had a greater appreciation for "the great gatsby". i am embarrassed that on my first reading, i neglected fitzgerald's beautiful prose. i remember finding so many great lines in "this side of paradise" (which was my second fitzgerald read) but didn't find any lines interesting on my first read, but that definitely changed on my second. maybe it's because i have become a more avid reader of the classics and also have read more of fitzgerald's works so am now more qualified to identify great lines. here are some of my favorite:

“if personality is an unbroken series of successful gestures, then there was something gorgeous about him, some heightened sensitivity to the promise of life, as if he related to one of those intricate machines that register earthquakes ten thousand miles away."

“i hope she'll be a fool -- that's the best thing a girl can be in this world, a beautiful little fool.”

“there are only the pursued, the pursuing, the busy and the tired.”

“and I like large parties. they’re so intimate. at small parties there isn’t any privacy.”

“i wasn't actually in love, but I felt a sort of tender curiosity.”

“let us learn to show our friendship for a man when he is alive and not after he is dead.”

"it was the kind of voice that the ear follows up and down, as if each speech is an arrangement of notes that will never be played again.”

“in his blue gardens men and girls came and went like moths among the whisperings and the champagne and the stars.”

“thirty--the promise of a decade of loneliness, a thinning list of single men to know, a thinning brief-case of enthusiasm, thinning hair.”
(god, it sucks getting old).

and of course with this more careful reading, i realized how great of a novel
"the great gatsby" is.  the story line had so many twist and turns. first there is the mystery and suspense of "who is gatsby". my favorite tale was of the girl who ripped her dress at his party and how he sent her a replacement. then, of course the story of love lost then found. and last but not least the surprising ending of gatsby and the demonstration of how horrible and cruel people can be. unfortunately, gatsby's ending was for the best because as horrible as tom was, daisy would have never left him. and loke i said before it is so sad how daisy and tom ruined people's lives and then just moved on with their own.

in my usual fashion with love stories (see: anna karenina, wuthering heights) i could not indulge in gatsby's love for daisy. instead of finding it romantic, i found it pathetic. yes, i believe that everyone has one great love in their life but if life doesn't work out for you than that person was not your true great love. trust me, i spent years pining after one person in my twenties and realize now that i was not in love with that person but in love with the idea of him. and that is what happen with gatsby, he wasn't in love with daisy but the memory of her. daisy was no longer the young girl from louisville, gatsby fell in love with but he couldn't grasp that. gatsby's inability to understand this is because he got stuck in a moment (to quote U2). and that is the saddest part of the book, even more sad than his death. whereas daisy went on with her life: got married, had a kid and lived; gatsby stayed trapped by his love for her. he spent 5 years trying to impress her, some may call this romance but i call it a waste of time.

but of course, it's unhappy ending is what makes it more true. i know i hated it at first but in actuality it is what makes the story great. and my sincerest apologies to f. scott, it is great but still think it would have been more compelling if i read it at an earlier age.

ps. flavorpill had an article about reading "the great gatsby" for the first time at 37 article about reading "the great gatsby" for the first time at the age of 37. it best describes why one should read it at an earlier age though it is good at any age.

ghost world. daniel clowes. (103)

i watched "ghost world" the movie when i was a high schooler and wanted to be all indie movie cool (okay i still want to be indie movie cool). but i remember not getting it. i remember finding it odd that scarlett jo was in it cos she was that "horse whisperer" girl so didn't take her to seriously. lol. also i knew it was based on some book but that was about it.

my opportunity to read the graphic novel (comic book) based on it came via flavorpill's 30 list (sorry i'm turning 30 in 1 month and two weeks so get used to this). but this should be read before you are twenty because beyond that is kinda its whatever. i mean if high school me read it, i would have loved it. but late twentysomething only liked it.

like the critics say it is a honest protrayal of teens on the verge of adulthood. i mean i would have wanted to hang out with enid and rebecca but high school me was definitely not cool enough to hang out with them. i was too school
spirit and preppy to be their friend though i wanted to be alt and indie, i did shop at hot topic in attempt to be. lol.

the novel did have its moments. i liked how enid and rebecca read the personal ads. (i love reading craigslist misconnection.) i enjoyed when they went to cavetown usa, who doesn't love big dinosaurs? i also enjoyed how enid used her SAT words. and of course every girl knows how shitty it is to fight with your BFF.

it was also funny. here were some of my favorite scenes:

sadly, if you have big boobs, your only options is slut.

seeing ugly couples always give me
hope that i will find someone, cos if ugly people can find each other than i will find someone.

loved that cat mask. in the movie too!

i hate oprah.

so like i said i liked it. and now i am
inspired to rewatch the movie. and also
have to add, scarlett jo did well in her role, as i read i realized how brillant she was.

maus. art spiegelman. (102)

i remember learning about "maus" in college, the premise was very interesting, a comic book about the holocaust with the jews as mice and the nazis as cats. but i never picked it up. what brought it back into my life was flavorpill's 30 to read before 30 so i finally read it.

what a beautiful story. the comic book is a memoir, the story of author's father, vladek spiegelman and what he endured during the holocaust. i am always so amazed by how fate worked in favor of those who survived the holocaust and how strong they were to have lived through what they did. however, i would not call their survival a blessing but luck because as explained in a therapy session of the cartoonist:

it was random who survived and who didn't. and surviving is not more admirable than dying. it sad because as discussed in this same session the guilt of those who survived for living. but their fate was out of their hands, it simply was luck. i always think of my friend larry's grandfather who survived the holocaust, because he knitted socks for the nazi. furthermore, he had a wrist injury that allowed him to knit as well as he did. just proving that life really does work in mysterious ways.

i was also impressed by how resourceful vladek was from the very beginning. he took the initiative to find a solution for his problems. vladek's intelligence had much to do with his surivivall. i was amazed by how he was able to deliver food and letters to his wife anja when they were both in camp. i would have never been that resourceful. also he was very innovative, for example how he used the blacket as a hammock while in the trains. it was impressive to see what how clever we was in finding solutions for his survival.

(sorry to the reader, i am sorry for my overuse of amazing and impressive but i am truly in awe of all that happen in vladek's life).

if you haven't read "maus" you should. i couldn't put it down and finished it in a day (granted it is a graphic novel). "maus" is a truly remarkable story and should not be rehashed via me but something you experience on your own.

i do think "maus" is an important read for everyone and not just before 30. we know of the holocaust and how horrible it was but there is still some disconnect from it. we know that hitler and the nazi were evil but for most people, the holocaust is an event in history books. "maus" show us the human experience (though cleverly through animal characters). it gives a soul to the individuals we read about as stastiscs in textbooks. since it is in comic book form, it's presented in a medium everyone can understand and thus relate to. i think it should be used as text for high school students when learning about the holocaust so they can have a better understanding of what occured. for the only way we can prevent history from repeating is knowing our past.

last but not least, i will say that it pained me to see art not wanting to be near his father. his father worked so hard for his son and i wish art was more patient with with him. but then i also get how it can be with parents.

ender's game. orson scott card. (101)

i have no idea how i was an adolescent who read and missed "ender's game" growing up. the cover looked familiar like i probably saw it at the library and book fairs however i still missed it. but thanks to flavorpill's 30 to read before 30, it finally came on my radar.

i was actually surprised by how much i enjoyed this book. the novel which is set in the future is the story of ender, a young boy who may be the world's savior. earth has engaged in previous wars with an alien species referred to as buggers and ender shows promise to be the commander that will stop the buggers from conquering earth.

at first, i was bit thrown off by the children in the book because they were evil. ender's older brother constantly threatened to kill ender (literally not figuratively) and ender's bullies at regular school wanted to cause physical harm to him (it became worse in battle school). but then i started to understand that though ender was 6, he was not a 6 year old of today but one of the future. and sadly these children do not have "normal" childhoods like we know today. the war against the buggers was so important that children are monitor via a monitor in their neck, to see if they show promise to be a commander. if they do they are shipped off to battle school to be trained. ender's sister valentine and his battle school friend dink, both tell ender about a time in the past where kids were allowed to play and went to school to learn instead of battling. they both look back at it as some golden past. ender leaves for battle school at age 6 and as i read i thought of the first graders that i sub for and majority do not show the maturity that ender demonstrated (but that could also be that he was the chosen one).

but this made me worry about now and the future. i don't see war being so important that childhoods are lost but i do see kids being exposed to adult things at too early of an age. i will probably shelter my kids and be this crazed tiger mom but i want my future kids to be kids. i am always shocked by children's use of profanity and knowledge of it. i once overheard 2nd graders singing the will.i.am and britney song and saying how they couldn't say the "b-word". it is good that a 7 year old knows bitch is a bad word but how is bitch even in their vocabulary. maybe my family is old fashion but no one cussed around me when i was a child. another thing that worries me is kids exposure to social media, if you are under the age of 14, you do not need a facebook page or instagram. go out and play outside, play with your dolls or action figures, read a book, interact with other kids in real life. you only get to be young once, enjoy it because being an adult means hard work, so be young while you can!

even though i felt bad that ender was never a carefree kid, the flip side is that this book reminds us of, like flavorpill stated, "the power of children". ender saved the world as a teen and he was able to do that because those around him took the time and effort to teach and train him. though the battle school tactics were sometime questionable, it did demonstrate how kids are intelligent and just need direction to become great. all kids are capable of success if they have the right support. the thing that people needs to realize is that the raising and teaching of kids is not the responsibly of the school but of the parents. it was an interesting transition for me to go from working in beverly hills where parents wanted their students to the brightest and best to coming back to delano where parents can't make sure that the students complete their homework. every child is capable of greatness they just need parents and teachers that are willing to help them achieve it.

yes, all of this from an young adult sci-fi novel. but back to the story. it truly is as flavorpill said one of the best science fictional novels of all time. once i was in, i couldn't put it down. ender is great protagonist and you want him to succeed but also worry about all the pressure that is put on him.

since the novel is sci-fi, i was impressed by the portrayal of the nets and politics in ender's world and how it is the same in our current world. ender's brother and sister used the nets to share their political thoughts with the world and become extremely famous though they are only kids (they have usernames to hide their identity). i thought it was interesting considering how today the internet and social media is utilized so anyone can share their political views. life imitating art!

i also appreciated that with all of the competition in battle school and war, in the end the lesson is one of tolerance ad learning about your enemy and discovering that no harm was meant initially.

but you should definitely read this if you never have and do it before the movie comes out!

one last analysis, the author orson scott card is mormon (found out in the introduction) and i couldn't help but draw parallels between ender's mission and LDS missions. the age students left for battle school was 8, which is the age the children are baptized in the church because they can distinguish between right and wrong. also kids in the church are trained throughout all of their sunday school lessons to become missionaries. and then they are set out into the world to save souls. it kinda works.

also last but not least there were a lot of mentions of farts in this book but i guess that is how kids talk!

1984. george orwell. (99)

george orwell's "1984" is on flavorpill's "30 to read before 30" and since i am two months away, i decided i need to crack down on my reading. so i picked up a copy of "1984" at the library. and before i go on, how great is this cover?!?! there was a paperback version i could have checked out but after i saw this cover, i had to read this one.

i guess i should clarify, this was my first reading of "1984". i never read it in high school, it wasn't assigned to us. my sister read it in college and i remember borrowing her copy to read but could never get into it. i tried twice. and thanks to apple and cbs, i knew about "big brother is watching" so was okay on the pop culture front. but in order to get its literary significance i needed to read it.

this book is always noted as a revolutionary novel and it is especially considering the time it was published. i remember checking the publishing year and surprised to find it was 1949. to question and portray governments in such a manner had to be shocking. however, as interesting as the concept of this novel is, i still became bored with it, there were points were i was like, get on with the story already.

let me clarify, i was not bored by the segments on oceania but by some of the story plots. i loved learning about the society of "1984" and how it worked. being a history major, it was interesting to see how the world we know could develop into oceania. for example, i believe that war has become more of a means of economic growth than anything else. just like in the novel, the boundaries for our countries are set, which is why we now fight for concepts like democracy and freedom and against terrorism and islam, fighting wars that truly do not have a means. i know we captured osama bin laden, but are we still at war with afghanistan? honestly, i do not know. can someone clarify this for me? my confusion is also an example of how majority of the united states is now like the "proles" when it comes to being informed about the war. we know nothing other than we need to support it and we have an enemy. also the switching back and forth between the enemies in the novel, foreshadowed what happen with the us and 9/11. i was always confused as to who our patriotism and nationalism was supposed to be directed against because i thought it was al-queida and then all of sudden, saddam hussein and iraq were targeted as enemies. another thing from the novel that reminded me of 9/11 was the labelling of things like "victory" gin or "victory" cigarettes, just like we had our "freedom" fries. and though we did not have "hate week" or "two minute hate" after 9/11, i did feel this odd peer pressure to demonstrated my patriotism via a flag. remember how everyone had flags on their cars and it was unamerican not to have one? it's scary to think of how simlilar the world was post-9/11 to "1984".

another way our world is similar to "1984" is the news and stastistics. part of winston's job was to change the figures that big brother had projected in terms of production so that production was recorded as over what bb had predicted. in the novel, winston pondered how these numbers were all arbitrary. first of all, a prediction is a prediction so if it was not accurate that is fine. why go through the point of lying especially since people know that production is low because whatever was being produced was scarce. this reminded me of our news and the stastiscs it spews at us especially in terms of health. there is always some study that shows this or that but in real life, disease strikes whoever. there is j real means of preventing things. i mean explain ozzy osborne, with how he treated his body, yet he is still alive and kicking. stastiscs are just a means of manipulating society.

last but not least, i am worried that history would be lost like in "1984". not so much because it is being rewritten but because it is not being taught. i recently subbed for a fifth grade class and they only worked on social studies for 15 minutes. i worry that the youth today do not understand the importance of history. because as orwell wrote and zach de la rocha from rage against the machine sang "who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past", so if they learn nothing, they will control nothing.

this is all praise but there were also aspects of the story that i did not enjoy. for one thing i did not like julia. it just seemed so random that her character feel in love with winston. i thought she was part of the thought police and was going to betray him. (also the fact that the shopkeeper was a thought police totally took me by surprise though in the back of my mind, i wondered how his shop was still in existence). once i figured out she wasn't, i didn't care for her character. she wasn't a rebel because of any inner longing for a better life like winston, she was a rebel just to be against the system. i hate to get all women's lib but i felt julia was an unjustly portrayal of women in revolutionary movements. julia was not fully committed to the ideologies against the party and her primary act of resistance was sex. and i am all for women gaining liberation via fulfilling their sexual appetites versus following societies virtues. however, julia demonstrated no intelligence or knowledge when it came to protest against the current system, she often became bored by what winston had to share. she even feel asleep during his reading of the book. it just seemed like a copout to make her so shallow once the real revolting started especially since she was smart enough to get goods like real coffee and sugar and had came up with routes for them to meet. and sadly throughout history women's roles in revolutions sadly get reduced down to their sexual experiences.

since we are on the topic of sex, i was shocked by how much sex was discussed in the novel. and wonder how high schools that teach this present this. or is "1984" one of those banned books? and the sex is why "1984" is banned. anyway, i found it interesting how sex is a means of control. the party takes away the sensuality of sex and turns it into a duty. i know i have discussed it before but i really feel that being raised mormon, the emphasis on purity and chastity resulted in my obedience as teen. i was so focused on being pure, i didn't date in high school. i am not saying that as a teen one should have sex. i am just saying that for me, my abstinence from sex may have been a reason for my obedience as a teen.

also i did not buy that winston was so naive about o'brien. i thought it was too convenient how it all came together. it seemed too easy to become apart of the brotherhood and felt like a trap. but i guess winston was so hopefully that he was too gullible.

last but not least i did not like the ending. i was hoping the human spirit would have prevailed. i didn't expect winston to spark a revolution but i didn't want him to give in. it was also pathetic that he gave in because of rats. i would hope that the human spirit would have been stronger. it was heartbreaking to see all hope lost. i would have been happier with winston committing suicide versus loving big brother.

i enjoyed the appendix on newspeak. it is interesting to think of how important vocabulary is in terms of expressing our views. it is also interesting to think
how lack of a vocabulary restricts our thinking. the focus on language also demonstrated how important it is to read and expand our vocabulary. it is true with my recent reading of classics, i have been about to better expressed my view of the world by using literary examples. so let this be a lesson!

after reading all of that analysis, you are probably wondering, but you said you got bored. i did simply because though
"1984" raises important questions about politics, war, government, and history for someone that is already skeptical about their government it doesn't present anything new. i was a history major and so many of the trends discussed were not new for me. however if i had read this book while in high school or during college, it would have blown my mind. so i guess instead of being a book one reads before they are 30, it actually before 25.

last but not least at the lacma, while looking at the bcam elevator, i was able to imagine what it would like to have big brother watching:

the secret history. donna tartt (89)

i saved donna tartt's "the secret history" for the winter. flavorpill recommended i read it in the winter and as we know, flavorpill says and i try to do. it sounds silly but if i had a real winter like the east coast, it would have been the perfect setting for reading "the secret history". though those random days of serious coldest the last couple of weeks paralleled the weather in the book.

i read "the secret history" because it was on flavorpill's list of 30 to read before 30, and though i enjoyed it, i'm not sure why it made that list. it wasn't life changing, though it was a good story. furthermore, i think it would be a good story regardless of one's age. it didn't shine any light or offer any insight on the undergraduate experience.  but i must add it made me grateful that the worse of my college friends were druggies and not murderers.

what?  a murder?!?! yes! there is a murder but i am not going to spoil it for anyone because i want you to read it. i was surprise by how much i enjoyed this book, because i am not one for murder mysteries or suspense.  however "the secret history" is very well written and had so many random twists and turns that i was on the edge of my seat at times. it was a serious page turner and toward the end i couldn't put it down.

and though i am not a fan of the book turned movie reality of hollywood. the whole time i was reading, i kept thinking, this needs to be a movie!!! i googled and it turns out that gwyneth paltrow and her brother bought the rights to it but the movie never happen. but it seriously needs/needed to. it's would have been the perfect brat pack vehicle. it was like a darker breakfast club but instead of detention, prison would have been where they served their time. but seriously such a good book, i recommend you all check it out. though don't feel pressured that you need to read it before 30.

also sorry i don't go into any kind of detail or review for this.  but if you read it and want to discusses it, message me and we can.

oh and one side note, for me, julian never read as sincere.

okay, maybe two, at first i was confused because since they were studying greek and on the east coast, i kept putting them back in the 1930's like a "this side of paradise" but finally fit them into a more "less than zero"/ "rules of attraction" (though i have never read either of them.)

want to say more but won't. but friends read it so we can discuss!

to the lighthouse. virginia woolf. (64)

who's afraid of virginia woolf? not i, but i was confused by her. it's hard to be scared when you have no idea what is going. i am starting to realize i can not pay attention to modernist writers. as i read, i constantly lost track of who or what woolf was writing about because of her overuse of pronouns and endless addition of clauses to sentences. also there were so many commas, it reminded me of gertrude stein. without periods, my mind wonders and can not focus, so i spent most of my reading, re-reading. in fact, i started it and after being 80 pages in, started it all over again because i felt like i hadn't grasped anything. thankfully, on the second reading i felt like i was actually reading.

i started off with this virginia woolf novel because flavorpill had listed it as one of the 30 novels to read before 30. i was enticed by their description of it being a "gorgeous read" and "an artful and introspective study of time and family". however, i did not find it very profound. yes, woolf had a beautiful way of describing life and love but i couldn't find any true character in any of her characters. i found lily briscoe whiny and her obsession with mrs. ramsay was creepy. in my opinion, lily was too scared to live life and mrs. ramsay was her scapegoat for why she was unhappy in life. mr. ramsay was pompous and self-righteous. i would have joined cam and james in their silent war against his tyranny. mrs. ramsey had interesting viewpoints on life but the way she tried to orchestra the lives of others made her overbearing. (okay i get it lily, but at anytime you could have been your own person). i did have a soft spot for the atheist because his life was quite trying which resulted in him being rough around the edges. but all in all, no one gave me any deep insight for when i embark on my thirties.

as for the family aspect, yes, we all secretly want to kill our parents. i understood james frustration. however, as a late twentysomething, this frustration comes not from a parent being too blunt and inconsiderate of my feelings, but from the fact that at times i feel that i am just as smart or smarter than my parent. this makes life a challenge when a) our parents give advice and b) we want to give our parents advice.

though i will say, cam and james' secret alliance against their father is a true testament of having a sibling. when siblings aren't fighting with each other there is some unsaid bond that comes into effect when one sibling is being treated unjustly by an adult. i always say my sister and i can fight like cats and dogs but when push comes to shove we are always there for each other.

the best section was time passes, which was also very sad. it is difficult to think that the things that mean so much to me today will, as time passes, grow moldy, grow old, deteriorate or eventually die. the people that mean so much to me today may not be in my life in the future (i'm sadly already starting to experience this). and the love that i have for people and things will one day only be a memory instead of a real-life feeling. however, all of this type of talk seems so depressing for someone my age. yes, 30 is a big transition year, but i am just settling into my life versus being in its final stages. i think this type of deep revelation would be more appropriate at my end of thirties versus the beginning of them. so i should put it on my list of 40 to read before 40.

quotations (see, her writing is beautiful):

"Nature has but little clay like that which she moulded you."

"They became part of that unreal but penetrating and exciting universe which is the world seen through the eyes of love."

". . . how life, from being made up of little separate incidents which one lived one by one, became cured and whole like a wave which bore one up with it and threw one down with it, there, with a dash on the beach."

"love that never attempted to clutch it's object, but, like the love which mathematicians bear their symbols, or poets their phrases, was meant to be spread over the world and become part of the human gain."

"A sort of transaction went on between them, in which she was on one side, and life was on the other, and she always trying to get the better of it, as it was of her . . ."

"Love had a thousand shapes."