amy falls down. jincy willet. (294)

i saw amy falls down on lena dunham's instagram.  i figured since she was reading it, i should check it out.

i have to admit that after the premise, an author, amy, has an falls down in her backyard which then started a series of events that resulted in her career getting its second wind.  in all honesty, i was kind of iffy once i actually read the premise, and figured i would not enjoy it. it seemed like something that an actual writer (which lena is) would love, but the layman like me, would be bored.

however, i was surprised by how much i enjoyed this book.  it didn't change my life, but it was enjoyable.  

as the title explained, amy gallup, fell down one day in her backyard and hit her head on her birdbath.  instead of calling for help or going to the hospital, she decided to instead stay home and be interviewed by a local paper since she had it scheduled.

quick digression, there was a delightful explanation about how amy once didn't call for help while drowning as a child because she was so concern about her word choice.  i appreciated her need to best express herself even during an emergency.  

another time word choice was brought up was about how reviews are written and words like compelling are meaningless.  she also mentioned how difficult it is to review a book that you like, which i totally agree with, books i hate are always easier to write about.  

so the interview, amy remembered nothing about it but she came off as eccentric and had bunch of great quotes.  my favorite was "feelings are not news" which spun by the other reporter was true.  i always had an issue with oprah because i once watched when she had a family with a schizophrenic daughter that had been diagnosed at a young age, "how does it feel to deal with the disease?" i always saw it as insensitive of her and this book made me realized that its because it demonstrated how she was unable to empathize with them.  when we read the news, we need just facts, anyone should be able to understand how that person felt during the crisis or disaster.

i have to add that this book is filled with little gems like this about the book industry, writing, even why we read.  as demonstrated in amy's first panel, amy demonstrated the silliness in people wanting to know the writing rituals of. authors.  i attend a lot of author readings and this question always comes up and always bores me, i mean because it's usually the same kind of answer or super specific to the author.  also i loved how she addressed the whole, "how do authors' ideas come to them" at the convention.  i recently attended a judy blume talk and she had this question asked in various forms and each time, she was like i don't know, they just come to me.  

back to the interview, so it created a lot of buzz about amy going out which thankfully got her living and writing again.  as we learn throughout the novel, she married her best friend, max, who was gay, to stop him from being drafted.  they were happy, but he died from AIDS.  after a bad and rushed second marriage and divorce, amy became a recluse and stopped writing.  so this accident was a blessing because it got her to live again.regrettably, she wasted a lot of years but thankfully found herself again. 

an enjoyable novel, and if you are an avid reader or a writer, a work you should definitely check out.  i have to add that    i also loved reading about her stories and wish i could really read them. 

flimsy little plastic miracles. ron currie jr. (98)

"flimsy little plastic miracles" is another book i came across via emma robert's instagram. the cover definitely enticed me with its books in a bookshelf. it's actually quite clever because the titles used for the books on the cover are reference to events, people, and themes in the story. the author also used one book to namedrop his debut which was a nice spin on "author of". i also noticed there was a book on the bottom shelf that reminded me of "a million little pieces" which i think was a sly reference given the premise of the novel.

"flimsy little plastic miracles" is a novel within a novel. one needs to get into a charlie kaufman frame of mind for a reading. so the book is a book written by ron currie jr. (which is also the name of the author) and his supposed to be the truth about his faked suicide. confused? you should be. another similarity between the author and hid character is that both their father are dead.

so what happens is that the author in the story, ron currie jr., tried to commit suicide and survived but decided to fake his death. the book that he was working on was published and out of nowhere the book becomes a huge success (partially due to his suicide letter going viral). due to it's success, it was then turned into a movie. (btw: i would have never read that book, you know me and the media hype.) then of course it is discovered he is alive. so he writes the book that we are reading "flimsy little plastic miracles" to come clean.

(this is why i noticed the cover that looked like "a million little pieces" because the author of that book, james frey, turned out to be a liar. his book was supposed to be memoir but it was discovered that he made most of it up. and it was an oprah book so the alot of the public was tricked. i picked it up for $1 but then heard it was a lie so never read it. but imagine the backlash especially from mama oprah!)

so this whole book within a book got me googling but the real ron currie jr. never faked his death. so the book was not true in that sense. but it doesn't mean that it wasn't capital T truth in general. all novels has to have a bit of the author's real life in it and contain some capital T truth because if not people would not be able to relate to characters.

currie addresses this opposite the title page. he starred "true" in true story:

it is true though all novels are based on real events. inspiration has to come from somewhere.

he also has a clever blurb about epigraphs. i personally love them but they have become cliché. in high school, one of my favorite books "girl" by blake nelson quoted "breaking the girl" by the red hot chili peppers. once i read that i knew i would love it and i did. so i started trusting epigraphs. one of my recent favorites is the sandra cisneros quote that junot diaz used in "this is how you lose her". but yeah epigraphs are great if used correctly.

another thing that i loved about this book was the format. there were no chapters. instead each time a new idea or story was presented a new page was started. so some pages were only a paragraph.

the story bounces back and forth between four topics: currie's side of his story, the love of his life, emma (who is also the reason he got caught up in his mess), his dealings with his father's death and singularity (when machines take over because they are more perfect than us).

i don't want to give too much but will
say that ron currie jr. in the story was a coward when it came to love but once he was caught reacted with heart and did the right thing. there was one occurrence in the story that broke my heart. i had no idea that it was going to happen. it made me sad because it shouldn't have happened to that character.

i also have to add that i was weirded out by ron and emma's love. not the violent aspect of it but the fact that they first met when they were in jr. high. i am skeptical when people fall in love so young.

last but not least, singularity was a topic discussed. but it's a future i hope that is never achieved. who wants perfection? life is life because of its mistakes. perfection would mean boredom while our errors and imperfections is what gives life it's color. as we see in "flimsy little plastic miracles", it's the errors in life that helps is grow as a person.

nw. zadie smith. (67)

  

i first came across zadie smith's "NW" in a must reads of september article on flavorpill.  then a recommendation was posted in their fall 2012 books forecast.  and being the flavorpill devotee that i am, put in a request at the library for "NW" along with a handful of others.  of all the books, i looked forward to smith's the most.  i hadn't read any of her prior books, but according to flavorpill, "NW" was her first book in seven years and her last novel "on beauty" was award winning.

maybe i overhyped it.  but the book fell flat for me.  there is no denying that zadie smith is a great writer. however, "NW" was not a great book. perhaps it was because i am not a londoner, at times i was confused because i could not locate the surroundings of the book. the reason i love reading books set in LA is because i can visualize where the characters are. however, my dislike can not simply be an issue of setting, that caused confusion but i think the issue was the characters.

i was not invested in any of the characters. it was "wuthering heights" all over again, where i could not empathize/sympathize with any of the characters because there was always one element of their lives that i didn't agree with. with leah, i was disappointed with how she lied to her husband and how she treated her body. with keisha, i couldn't stomach her double life, denial of her upbringing and obsession with the listings. i was rooting for felix, but even he had to be a guy and have farewell sex with his booty call which demonstrated he wasn't going to change. his fate was sad but by the time it occurred, i lost any faith i had in him really turning over a new leaf in life.

and i hate to be a cynic but did not buy the ending. really? leah suffering so much because she couldn't come to terms with the life she has? it lacked sincerity in my eyes. i wanted to tag her conversation with #firstworldproblems. you made it semi out of the projects, congrats, no need going around throwing yourself a pity party, especially because there are more serious problems in the world. instead of questioning why you didn't become a statistic, be grateful that you aren't one. also i hate to be heartless but if you are drug addict than you deserve the shitty stack that you dealt yourself. when it comes to drug addiction you do it to yourself. i would never see a drug addict and then have a meltdown like why me, how did i not become that? i didn't get leah's meltdown. when i do drugs i am aware of what i am doing to my body and it is choice. everyone has a right to say no, so sorry crackhead on the street you can't have my dollar. you chose to be a crackhead. (btw, please save your CIA giving crack to the project theories.)

i didn't grow up in the slums but delano is definitely low/working class yet i couldn't connect to "NW". this might also have to do with smith's modernist writing. leah's section was difficult to follow because it was all stream of thought. i guess it's like stein and woolf all over again, i need to get smarter to appreciate it.

i guess in the end it just all seem contrived. i am not sure of zadie smith's back story, but she wrote like an anthropologist would write about the slums versus someone that grew up in them.  the bio on the book's back flap explained she grew up in "NW" and i am not saying that in order to write about the slums, someone needs to be from them, but it surprised me because i felt she didn't know what she was talking about.  its like when oprah tries to talk like she understands the everyday woman experience, sorry oprah you don't, you're oprah, there is absolutely nothing "everyday woman" about you.  its the same with zadie smith, she may have grown up in NW but she is too far removed from it now to be able to write about it, without sounding insincere and elitist. ( also now that i think about it, with the name change and the anthropological lens through which she viewed life, so she could be keisha.)

i expected this book to be provocative but it brought nothing new to the table in terms of class.  regardless of your class, life kinda sucks and no one is really happy. because regardless of where you grew up, you are still human.  rich people's don't have it all and are just as immoral as the next class.  the individuals in a perfect marriage actually cannot stand each other.  the thug you think is a drug addict might be turning his life around.  that crackhead who is begging for money who you want save, probably enjoys her life. i think a more interesting viewpoint would have been a character who grows up disadvantaged in the slums who doesn't recognize it as a disadvantage. growing up in the slums was the crutch for all of the characters, their get out of jail free cards for poor life decisions. and perhaps i am too american at heart but you may be born into a lower class but you definitely do not have to stay there. and yes you may have some fall backs in life that lead you back to the slums but that isn't because you don't deserve more or better in life, it's because regardless the slums are your home and will always be a source of comfort.

though the class issues smith presented didn't interest me, the women issues did. i can admit that as a woman approaching her thirties and being single and childless, it was comforting to read leah and keisha's dealing with the same thing. smith pretty much nailed me with leah's inner monologue of:

"simply: i am eighteen in my mind i am eighteen and if i do nothing if i stand still nothing will change and i will be eighteen always."

is that not what i am currently doing with my life? trying to freeze time. put it on pause?

also this "return of saturn" era of life is even more difficult when you add in the biological clock too. as smith wrote:

"natalie blake and leah hanwell were 28 when the first emails began to arrive. over the next few years their number increased exponentially. photo attachments of stunned-looking women with hospital tags round their wrist, babies lying on their breast, hair inexplicably soaked through. they seems to have stepped across a chasm into another world."

this one doesn't get me too much because my peers have been having babies since i was in high school. actually come to think of it, if they grew up in the slums, getting these photos would not be as pressing. at the risk of sounding classist, it is in my opinion that lower classes have kids at a younger age. actually this is more of an issue of education than class. people with more education seem to wait in life to have kids because that education consumes majority of their time so having kids is kinda impossible. so i guess this an example of smith not being too realistic.

but i understand that smith was discussing the inevitable pressure as women get older that they need to become mothers to progress in life. for me personally, i have more pressure in terms of marriage than having a child. especially since everyone around me is now either married or engaged. but that can be saved for another time.

though i did not love this book, i plan on reading smith's "on beauty".  as i said before smith is an excellent writer.  there is no denying that.  she was very clever when it came to descriptions.  i loved how she would reference something pop culture-y, and versus naming it, she would describe it, kinda like a riddle. there were references to kurt corbain's suicide, friends, the wire and even chatroulette! though i totally missed the amy winehouse reference. and the heading about her was "beehive." i also enjoyed her literary references like "rabbit, run" about a vibrator. i appreciate smith's cleverness but even that could not save "NW" for me. i plan on reading her other books and hopefully will find the writer that flavorpill was so excited to read.

paris, i love you but you're bringing me down. rosecrans baldwin (66)

i normally hate oprah but i have to admit i owe her one. auntie tracey has a subscription to her magazine and while reading the june issue in the water closet, i came across a recommendation for rosecrans baldwin's "paris, i love you but you're bringing me down." i normally would not trust oprah but my love for lcd soundsystem is stronger than my hatred of oprah, so i decided to judge a book by a title and give it a go.

and yes the title is an lcd soundsystem reference. how could it not be? for you purists, it was confirmed when baldwin mentioned running to "north american scum" and thanked the band in the acknowledgements. also here's the video for the inspiration for the title "new york, i love you but your bringing me down":
 

so i was a little hesitant about the book. though i have never been to paris, i am in love with it. thanks to "midnight in paris" (and of course cole porter, hemingway, the fitzgeralds, and gertrude stein), "an american in paris" (the gershwin definitely helped), "funny face" (i want to do a fashion shoot with balloons), "amelie" (and maybe bring a gnome with me), "je'taime paris" (i want to visit oscar wilde's grave) and of course "sex and the city" (though carrie did realize paris was not all it was cracked up to be), i am nostalgic for a paris that i have never experienced. so when i saw the title i was worried it might crush my love. but it didn't. i mean an lcd reference and sloan crosley (love her book "i was told there'd be cake") gave an endorsement quote for the back. it couldn't bring me down.

though baldwin did not have the easiest time in paris, it still filled me with a desire to go. for every shitty experience he had, there was an amazing one.  and even he admitted that, a bad day in paris is still kinda great because you are in paris.  it seemed like the worse part about his life there was the langauge barrier.  but i think i could deal with that, i mean the french would hate my bad accent and my inability to speak french but everything else would make up for it.

his book actually made me wish i was married.  well more like married to someone who would have an opportunity to find work in paris, so i could move with them.  or maybe just to married to a french.  oh and before i go on, i'm glad that baldwin discussed how his friend charlie's gaydar was thrown off by the french.  i have the same issue.  i always wonder, is he gay or is he french?!?!?  lol  glad to see that i'm not the only one with that issue.  but back to marrying a french, in a perfect world, he would be a french chef, i mean  reading about the food baldwin ate was driving me insane.  every italicized macaron mention made me sad that i was not eating one.  i mean i was jealous of his description of french air economy food!  but back to this imaginary french chef, he would also have to be childless.  the book discussed that every french man has a child, so i must magically find one that is childless.  so aside from dreams of going to paris, it also gave me this lofty goal in life.  lol

random sidenote.  not really because marriage would be the link.  but i enjoyed how baldwin included stories of sarkozy and carla bruni.  it reminded me about a discussion i had with a friend's cousin from france one night.  i alluded to bruni, who i had just discovered on the "(500) days of summer" soundtrack.  he told me the french hated her, but i didn't understand because i liked her music (kinda like baldwin's co-worker) but after reading this book i got it.

actually, marrying a parisian or living there would not be enough.  after reading this novel, i kinda wish i had been born a parisian.  i always tell people that i'm extremely grateful to have been born in california.  i believe that we do have a sunnier look out on life.  i mean imagine growing up in the midwest.  gag me with a spoon. (that reference was intended).  but to have been parisian would have been exciting.  i want to to be a coquette by blood like little adele from jane eyre (who was described as "coquetry runs in her blood, blends with her brains and seasons the marrow of her bones.") to have a french look on love, to be have wild love affairs, and be crazy.  it all seems so romantic and a little neurotic.  and at the risk of sounding insane, i would also be french since it is apparently acceptable to make black jokes, jew jokes and comments about penis size.  i hate how americans are so pc.  i like dave chapelle, am a equal opportunist when it comes to make fun of people.  also i would want to be french for the work day. i mean how often did baldwin's day end in a random potluck with drinks? though that could be an advertising thing.

but enough of my odd dreams and back to the book.  i thorougly enjoyed this book.  i had to interrupt my reading of "war and peace" because i was unable to renew it, so started after reading part 1 of "war and peace." i found it interesting how both works have a french theme.  but baldwin's work was a nice break.  it was a great read and i couldn't put it down.  i finished it in a weekend.  baldwin is a great story and i would totally be friends with him in real life.  i share stories here but you should really read it for yourself.  my only regret is reading this after "eat pray love" cos now i want to add paris to my list of places to travel.  i also plan on putting in a request for a "how to speak french" book. and last but not least, seriously, when is picard coming stateside?



   

most talkative: stories from the front lines. andy cohen. (63)

i adore andy cohen. i literally laugh out loud (by myself) every single time i watch "watch what happens live". i wish one day to get a tweet or retweet from him. and the foursquare badge i desire the most is the andy cohen one. so when i found out he had a new book, i put my request in. 20 something transfers later and it was sent to delano especially for me.

surprisingly, i did not adore the book. the issue is that his writing is a bit too much. i get it (we are both geminis), he writes the way he talks which comes off cheesy. i mean this as no offense. i am the same way, whenever my friends compliment me on my yelp reviews, i politely explain its cos they know me and the average reader would be annoyed. and though i feel like i "know" andy cohen, the book at times had campy-ish moments.

it just wasn't a page turner nor did it have me laughing out loud. i think the best thing about this story was his coming out story and how he dealt with his homosexuality. he was honest and it is a great testament not only to homosexuality being innate with individuals but also to how accepting his family and friends were, that things are getting better. reading it reminded me of my friendship with miguel, and i wonder if he was ever nervous about coming out to me. though we had long discussions about his homosexuality during our senior year, he didn't tell me til our first year of college. i hope that as he decided to come out that he knew that regardless i would love him. i did enjoy reading about how cohen's roommate was so supportive, and how his mom and roommate used to keep tabs on him.

another thing that is interesting to think about was how scared his friends were about him contracting AIDS. i have a lot of gay friends and have never been scared of that. i guess it is because we live in a society where STDs are openly talked about and all of my friends are responsible and get tested frequently. so i am thankful that i never had to worry about them. (i also realize that it is unfair, i should worry about my straight friends too.)

i guess the issue is that i wanted it to be a bravo tell all and it wasn't. i love bravo, i even have a bravolebrities album on fb. however, the best part read like a bravo special because it was one. the chapter on the housewives reunion was pretty much that countdown of real housewives best reunion moments.

i wanted more dirt though i did learn that padma's husband was salman rushdie. it was interesting how the shows came together. it was nice to have light shed on russell armstrong's death but what about brandi in all that drama? also could have done without the oprah chapter but mainly cos i hate
oprah.

it was a nice brain break after reading "anna karenina" and it's good if you want a mindless read or something g to leave as a causal bathroom read.

anna karenina. #translationproblems

before i start, i would like to clear up any confusion about the title. surprisingly, i was never that person who corrected people that mispronounced the title but now i will be that person and . . . with a great vladmir nabokov quote,

"her name was anna karenin.  she was not a ballerina."

cute. clever. and very tongue in cheek. so why is there an a on the end? the a signifies that she is a female. ie my russia-fied name would krisha mendozaa. (though maybe that a is excessive. a better example: keira knightlya)

keira knightly and the new movie were only a small factor in my decision to read "anna karenina". another factor was that on twitter i found an article (but could not find again to link here) which listed that the two greatest novels of all time were "anna karenina" and "lolita" (yes but russkies!). but the biggest factor was that my social life in LA was going on a break so i had time for the 1,000 pages. therefore on my next visit to the library, i checked it out.

as i sat reading it, i was surprised that it was a fairly easy read which got me wondering if my translation was watered down. i then looked at the other copy of it at the library; it was also constance garnett's translation so couldn't do a comparison. i then decided to go home and do some research (aka google) and sort out which translation to read.

i googled "best anna karenina translation" "scholar endorsed translation of anna karenina" "nabokov recommended translation of anna karenina" and came across a lot of info.  though there was no solid answer.  i really wanted to read the version that nabokov liked best cos he did share greatest novel title with tolstoy. there was so much debate about which verison is best that i wish a) i knew russian so that i could read it in the original russian and b) that maybe i would read at least two versions to decide for myself.  (i would have done this but seriously, the book is 1,000 pages.  that is back to back readings of 2,000 pages in total. i read alot but even this seemed too much for me.)

i learned that there are 3 major translations: constance garnett, lousie and aylmer maude, and richard pevear and larissa volokhonsky. majority of people avoid garnett's translation because she was too victorian and interjected a word or two of her own. plus nabokov absolutely hated her. so i instantly ruled that one out.

the next was deciding between maude and pevear/volokhonsky. so here's the deal. i hate oprah and according to my google searches, P/V's translation became very popular due to her book club. i mean no where did i see an article about oprah's great translation woe but only about how P/V got a lot of money cos their translation which was published by penguin which was picked by oprah.  and we all know about oprah's midas touch when it comes to books.  though in my opinion, it was prolly some intern that chose it cos the cover was the prettiest (i actually think the cover is boring, which is sad cos i normally like penguin covers.) i mean seriously does oprah even read? i am going to say no because if she did she would have deeper insight to the human experience and would not have asked her tv guests such insensitive questions. so i initially ruled out P/V's translation on oprah alone.

but it was not that easy to disregard the P/V's version cos everyone recommends it (like gushing recommends). my friend emily endorsed it and told me that their translation was award winning, which made me reconsider.  i mean awards count for a lot in my eyes. i had two other friends recommend it after seeing my fb photo about trying to decide which one to read (the above photo). and lastly james wood of the new yorker was all about it! (not that i seriously read the new yorker but strive to one day do so.) should i let my hatred of oprah stop me from reading the best translation?!?!?

well it wasn't oprah that stopped me but actually an article by gary saul morson (i have no idea who he is, i just came across his article thanks to google, i did google him and he seemed pretty legit.) but he wrote an article called the pevearsion of russian literature which explained why the pevear/volokhonsky translation is not all that its cracked up to be.  as he explained in the article:

[P and V] who are married, work in an unusual fashion.  She, a native Russian speacker, renders each book into entirely literal English.  He, who knows insufficient Russian, then works on the rendering with intention of keeping the language as close to the original as possible.  What results from this atttempt at unprecedented fidelity is a word-for-word and syntax-for-syntax version that scarifices tone and miscontrues overall sense.

he then gives examples from other works in which their translations appear simple and unrefined as compared to others.  there is a tone that is lost because they tend to use very mundane words.  (click on the article to see for yourself.) 

this dealt the blow to p/v as a contender, but to make my final decision, i decided to check out both versions and read the first chapters myself to see which one i would read.  i will admit that the blog entry tolstoy vs. tolstoy did make me slightly biased, i wanted to feel a nostalagic connection to the maude translation like the blogger.

after reading the first couple of chapters, i decided to go with maude. just because i found some of p/v word choice uninteresting.

maude:
"All happy families resemble one another, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

p/v: 
"All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

(i like the use of resemble versus are alike.  i think the novel as a whole dealt with the appearance of happiness versus actually being happy, which would make maude's line a better introduction.)

i randomly flipped to chapter 12 of the part 1 perferred maude's:

"Levin's arrival at the beginning of winter, his frequent visits and evident love for Kitty gave rise to her parents' first serious deliberation as to her future, and to disputes between them."

over p/v's

"Levin's appearance at the beginning of the winter, his frequent visits and obvious love for Kitty, gave rise to the first serious conversations between Kitty's parents about her future and to disputes between the prince and the princess."

and lastly, when reading tolstoy's beautiful description of levin's first encounter with kitty, maude read best again:

"He stepped down, avoiding any long look at her as one avoids long looks at the sun, but seeing her as one sees the sun, without looking."

p/v:
"He stepped down, trying not to look long at her, as if she were the sun, yet he saw her, like the sun even without looking."

i will admit that maude isn't perfect but p/v just seemed too simplistic at times.  there were times when the syntax of maude was confusing and when i looked up the sentence in p/v found it more readable.  also p/v had footnotes which helped contextualize the story.  (i used the footnotes when anna and the count visited the russian painter when aboard.) but in the end, i am glad that i chose maude.  they are sometimes sited as having their translation of "war and peace" approved by tolstoy, but as the great translation blog entry explained that is not true.  also check out the great translation chart. it was hilarious and helpful and i suggest you check it out for giggles and to help you chose your next russian lit read. (i used it to help me choose the the anna dunnigan's translation of "war and peace".)

and to be perfectly honest in a year or so, i will pick up the p/v version of "anne karenina" and see for myself which one is better. 

lord of the flies. william golding.

;">

surprisingly i was never assigned to read "lord of the flies" in jr. high or high school. (in my defense, i was an honors kids so not sure why i never had to read it.) but being on the flavorpill's "30 list" (see: "their eyes" entry for the list) and june being my 29th birthday month, i was inspired to read it. also it was on my list of children's/young adult books to read from rebecca makkai's "the borrower" (see that entry for that list).

plus my sister's copy is constantly around asking me to read it so i finally did.

i have also never seen the movie. i have a memory of seeing the opening scene in a classroom but i think i left early and didn't see it. i have seen "the simpsons" episode based on it, so kinda knew what to expect. but even then i had no idea that this novel was so intense.

i think what made me most nervous was when i first met piggy. as soon as i discovered he was fat, wore glasses and had asthma, i knew the rest of the boys would eat him alive. as i read the book, i worried about him and was fearful that he would die at any moment. (spoiler alert) and when it eventually happened, i was devastated, i was hoping that the boys would prove me wrong. but like they say boys will be boys.

when i was done reading, i realized that i am extremely grateful i am a girl. sure we can be catty, back-stabbing and cruel (see: "mean girls", "heathers") but our gender expectations are more manageable than that of boys. in addition to this we are not constantly required to prove our "womanhood" as boys their "manhood." rarely do we hear as child growing up, "be a woman!" but "be a man" is a taunt we are all familiar with. also its easier to become a "woman" than it is to become a "man." for girls, we simply get our periods and then hear from everyone "you're a woman now." whereas boys, aside from physical markers via puberty, are required to demonstrate traits to prove their manliness.

this requirement of "manly" appearance, reminded me of something said on oprah after the columbine shootings, "boys don't cry tears, they cry bullets." meaning that the demands to appear masculine results in boys suppressing their true feelings which then becomes manifested through violence. this need to appear brave and strong versus admitting their fear is what unleashes the savage in all of the boys in "lord of the flies". their need to kill and dominate is a result of their need to exert power over something since they feel powerless. and when the boys becomes savages they do turn ruthless, however i don't recognize this as a demonstration that man is innately evil, but instead it shows how in a society where being scared is not consider a masculine trait, man will resort to violence as a means to express his repressed fears.      

this is demonstrated best in ralph.  ralph at first views the island as a place for adventure and fun minus adult supervision.  he is too preoccupied with having fun and is essentially in denial about them being stranded.  (he holds onto hope that is father will save them.) however, when he spots a ship and realizes that the fire (which was to be constantly burning as a help signal) was not being maintain, he finally confronts his fears that they might not be recused.  once he accepts that he is scared and  accepts the facts that a) they may never be saved and b) that he longs for home, then he becomes a rational thinker.  ralph then becomes the leader they need, but by that time it is too late for the boys have turned into a savage tribe with jack.  (by the way, i really wish someone would have killed jack.  if they were grown-ups, jack would have been shot instantly for his selfishness and desire for power.)

i understand that "lord of the flies" has many overaching themes like civilization vs savagry, war, evil vs good, rational thinking vs natural instinct.  however, i saw it more as a warning as to how we are raising our sons.  as i was reading it, i kept thinking to myself, i hope i never raise a boy that would be that cruel or insensitive.  and maybe it is unfair to say that only males can fall prey to these dangers.  but we women have our own burderns to shoulder like the pressure to be sexy or beautiful and have to suffer the cycle of menustration.  however, i still feel it is easier to be a girl in our society.  though i am not one, i can't imagine how tough it must be growing up as a boy.

so should it be read before you are 30?  yes, i am sad that i did not read it earlier.  and i am glad that our kids today read it in school.  i also hope that they recongize in piggy that bullying is inacceptable and cruel