love, dishonor, marry, die, cherish, perish. david rakoff (150)

since i already read books based on celebrities emma roberts, and mindy kaling's instagram.  i decided to throw another celebrity into the mix, b.j. novak.

(quick digression:  i didn't think much of him on the office looks-wise until he got the glasses, than swoon!!)

b.j. novak posted this:  

so i decided to check out david rakoff's love, dishonor, marry, die, cherish, perish.  based on novak's pic and on the  fact that the cover was really cool.

quick addition, i have to give a shout out to my friend fabian for being in the know and beating novak to posting this.  i even liked fabian's photo but didn't think about checking it out until novak's post.  damn my pop culture media obeying brain!!!

here is fabian's post:  

since i based picking this book up based on b.j. novak's good looks and an interesting cover, i had no idea what this book was about.  i had never read anything by rakoff prior to this nor have i listened to this american life which he contributed to.  i also had no idea that rakoff passed away in august of 2012 due to cancer, and this book was published posthumously.  i had expected a normal size book and was shocked by how thin it was when i picked it up from the library.  but most surprising of all, was that the entire book is written in verse!  yes, verse!  its like dr. seuss for adults! and rakoff was a genius because he made it work with some impressive rhymes!

for example:

news-aperçus 

adolescence-phosphorescence

eyesore-mysore 

bon vivant-confidant

cantilever-fever 

(i could go on and on)

one of my favorite couplets was about the conservative blanche tilly who attacked clifford's gay comics:

"how i wish you would stop up that bile-spewing spigot,

you use when you speak, you rebarbative bigot."  

cruel and articulate!

but as my SAT scores will show you, vocabulary is not my forte, so the dictionary was out to help me with some of the words that rakoff used.

paresis:  slight or partial paralysis

frond:  large leaf

malfeasance:  wrong doing or misconduct 

aperçu:  a brief survey or sketch

bon vivant:  a person having cultivated, refined, and sociable tastes especially with respect to food and drink

(i really need to start a word-a-day program for myself.)

though love, dishonor, marry, die, cherish, perish is written in verse which has a lightheaded feel to it, rakoff's characters stories are quite heavy.  the novel opens with the story of a baby, margaret, born into pitiful conditions, as the midwife saw it, red haired and without a father (he was trampled by horses) and a mother without a family.  and the midwife was right, margaret ends up being raped by her mother's second husband.  luckily, she runs away to california and finds a better life.

margaret's tragic story was a lot to digest especially being the opening story.  but as the reader is introduced to other characters in the novel, suffering is just a fact of life.  mother, lost the glamour life of her youth when her father gambled it away.  clifford, an artist, gay and found freedom in san francisco, and sadly contracted and died from AIDS.  hannah, suffered from dementia and a cruel daughter-in-law.  and josh, who lost is family and ended up finding a picture that connects the all characters in the end, a six degrees of seperation. 

of all the stories in this novel, helen and nathan were the highlights for me.  

helen was clifford's cousin.  her mother was had quite the sharp tongue and would tease helen growing up, and the sarcasm, unfortunately went over helen's head.  but that ended up being the least of helen's problems though it was probably the source of her problems.  

helen's tale is a story told before, probably in amc's mad men (i haven't watched it), and sort of in billy wilder's the apartment (i actually imaged the office set up from this movie as i read).  boss has an affair with secretary.  helen's affair went on for about 5 years (i can't imagine that!) and ended with an abortion.  due to this, she got drunk and caused a scene at the holiday office party but fortunately was not fired (the affairs were quite commonplace so nothing worth being fired over.) but what i loved about helen was that though this occurred to her, she didn't play victim.  she still went to the holiday party every year, even wore her cocktail to work so to not have to go back and forth between home.  she knew people talked and in the end gave a big fuck you to her office tormentor.

nathan, i admired as well for giving his life tormentors a big fuck you too and on their wedding day.  he was caught in a love triangle between his best friend josh and josh's girlfriend, susan, and ended up the odd man when the other two married.  susan, being the bitch that she was, something her father also recognized, made sure nathan attended and gave a speech.  i really enjoyed nathan's speech, it was based on the fable about the tortoise that helped the scorpion get across the river.  in the fable, the scorpion ends up killing the tortoise and himself because it is his nature to stab.  it seemed an odd choice at first but he amazingly put it on content. 

he explained:

so what can we learn from their watery ends?

is there some lesson on how to be friends?

i think what it means is that central to living

a life that is good is a life that's forgiving.

we're creatures of contact, regardless of whether,

to kiss or to wound, we must still come together,

like in annie hall, we endure twists, bad torsions,

for food we don't like, in such tiny portions!

but, like hating a food but still asking for more,

it bears standing dry but so lonely on shore.

so we make ourselves open, while knowing full well

it's essentially saying, 'please come pierce my shell.'

love is does leave us open to pain but in the end it is worth it than being lonely.  (this coming from an old maid).  

however, nathan's speech did not end on this pleasant note but in the end, susan deserved the harsh speech.  and i love how in the end, susan's dad corrected nathan, letting him know that turtles swim not tortoises.

nathan's speech also demonstrated rakoff's cleverness.  another favorite passage of mine was clifford's mother talking about being trapped in the valley (san fernando valley for all you non-LA-ers).

"malibu's breezy.  hollywood's shady

but burbank? he might as well've brought us to hades!

i could yip when i think of the crime it,

was moving me out here was 'because of the climate."

the fan in her hand the scene's sole, languid motion,

"i once heard it said that there was an ocean

not terribly distrant from where we sit here,

but, i supoose that was just a bum steer.

escaping me now are the details specific,

but could it be named something like 'The Pacific'?"

i was in the valley when i read it.  and it was a hot day in october!  so the perfect setting for that passage.  plus i plan on stealing mother's little joke about the pacific!  

also aren't the illustrations great?  they were done by seth.  the ending illustration was especially cute:

an enjoyable read, i now plan on reading the rest of rakoff's works.

ps i saw on bj novak's instagram that the la times review was written all in verse.  here is a link.

bunnicula. deborah and james howe. (149)

so i have to admit that it was urban outfitters that inspired my rereading of "bunnicula".  sue me, i have hipster tendencies.  so their site was selling the book for halloween and i decided i should reread it for halloween.  being a kids book i saved it for actual halloween to read and to celebrate.  (it took me like 2 hours to read.)

i remember reading "bunnicula" as a kid, i remember loving how clever the title (and name of bunny) was.  being a gemini, i have always had an appreciate for word play.  and i mean a bunny vampire, too cute.  (ps i am thinking a bunnicula costume next year!)

rereading as an adult, i feel even more in love with "bunnicula" because of its cleverness.  i had forgot how the book is "really" a manuscript the authors found on their doorstep,  so cute! as an "educator", i think this book would be great as the basis for so many lessons:  parody, character analysis (which is mentioned by name and given an example), homophobes, foreshadowing, and prediction. it's almost as they wrote this book with these lessons in mind!

and back to the homophobes, i was very disappointed with chester confusing stake with steak.  he was such an intelligent cat, as demonstrated in his parrot definition that he would have not been an error he made.  also how sad was the image of him beating that poor bunny!

i also appreciated how harold, acted as a means to define words that kids could not understand.  this was very clever since it is a kids book.  often times i forget students do not have the same vocabulary as me, so i appreciated how howe used high-level words but also gave definitions.  (note:  add context clues to the list above.)

if you didn't encounter "bunnicula" in your youth, he is a vampire bunny.  he sucks the juices from vegetables leaving them white.  i have to add i was impressed with the howe's call for eating organic back in 1979.  since the organic trend is so 2010's, i was a bit caught off guard by their discussion of buying organic but way to go "monroes" and howe.  (i don't necessarily buy organic but i would if i bought grocery regularly and cooked.)

the family and harold is obliviously to the fact that bunnicula is the source of the white vegetables.  but chester who is a bookworm and has a wild imagination starts to put two and two together. the story is told from the perspective of the dog, harold, and through his eyes we see all of the wildness that unfolds as chester sets out to stop bunnicula.

in the end, harold, realized bunnicula is harmless, sure a tomato and cabbage are harmed but they are just vegetables.  chester goes overboard and tries to starve bunnicula, but the family intervened and put chester in therapy and bunnicula on a juice diet (which he stayed on, so no more weird veggies).  and they all lived happily ever after, until the next adventure.  this book is apart of series,  which i will prolly read every halloween.  can't wait til next year!

ps how cute is this book club page that james howe wrote:

unaccustomed earth. jhumpa lahiri (147)

(i forgot got to take a picture of the book i checked out.)

as seen in previous post, i am on a jhumpa lahiri kick.  prior to this i read, the namesake, and afterward will read the lowland.  i am actually proud of myself for reading her works in order of publication!  (sorry it's the same things that excite bookworms).

unaccustomed earth is another collection of short stories, and after having read both a novel and her collections of short stories, i have to say i think she is a better short story writer.  her novel seemed to meander around, uncertain of where to go or now to end.  in retrospect, i felt like things would go off on a tangent and not truly enhance the overall story.  whereas her short stories are concise and to the point which actually allows for a deeper emotional experience.  

if you haven't read this, i would stop here.  highly recommend this collection of short stories, which you should read and experience on your own first.  my post does go i to a lot of detail and has some spoilers.

i absolutely loved part two of the book:  "hems and kaushik".  i was not ready for the ending, and as much as i wanted it to end happily ever after, i know that it wasn't the way things were meant to be and i would have been unsatisfied with a fairy tale ending.  

"hema and kaushik" is three stories.  the first story, "once in a lifetime" is told from hema's perspective. it tells the story of how as an adolescent she fell in love with kaushik, when his family returned to the united states and lived with hema's family while they looked for a home.  kaushik discovered a family's burial area in the woods behind hema's family's home and there he shared with her that his mother is dying from cancer.  something she never shared with her family even when they complained about kaushik's family overstaying their welcome. 

the second story, "year's end", is the story of kaushik dealing with his father remarrying after his mother's death.  his father needing companionship, married a woman from india with two daughter from a previous marriage.  kaushik, initially unable to accept the marriage initially began to accepted it due to his two stepsisters.  however, one night while babysitting the girls, they discover a hidden box of photos of his mother.  overwhelmed by the memory of his mother and his father's new life, he attacks the girls verbally and leaves the house.  he ends up never returning home and begins a career as a photojournalist.

the final story, "going ashore", told from hema's perspective, as fate, would have it, hema and kaushik's path cross again in rome at a friend's lunch party.  they began a relationship but hema is to be married.  kaushik asked her to stay with him but hema realized does not ask her to marry him so she refuses.  a doomed fate as foreshadowed by the leaving of her grandmother's bracelet at airport security.  and sadly in the very end, kaushik died due to an earthquake in thailand.  it broke my heart that things ended this way.  i really wanted them to be together, but life doesn't always work out the way we want them to.  and sometimes we have to thing with our head as opposed to our heart.  furthermore, i was impressed that lahiri had me on a rollercoaster of emotions in just three stories, i kind wished she had turned hema and kaushik into a novel.  i also secretly hope that mira nair turns it into a movie.

the other stories were just as sad and emotional, the same beauty of "the interpreter of maladies" can be found in this collection as well.  four stories compose the first part of the book. i enjoyed "only goodness". it demonstrated what can occur when children are overindulged and addiction is ignored. it was sad that how the family was ill-equipped to deal with addiction and did not get the brother the help that he needed.

"hell-heaven" was my favorite because it demonstrated how often we forget that our parents have a history as well.  it's the story of a young girl and how her mother was secretly in love with a family friend, pranab chankarborty.  her love almost resulted tragically after pranab married an american.  the mother planned on setting herself on fire, overwhelmed by grief and love lost but a neighbor with a simple compliment ended up stopping her.  a story the narrator was told after a man broke her heart. 

but yes, another beautiful work by jhumpa lahiri.

the love affairs of nathaniel p. adelle waldman. (145)

 think i heard about "the love affairs of nathaniel p." via my friend julianna's goodreads.  it came up on her "to-read" list so i decided to check it out.  the cover looked cool and the title enticing.  it reminded me of a book i wanted to write in college called "the asshole diaries" (this would have been a great blog if blogs existed back then).  basically it would be a book about all the horrible guys my roommates and i met, dated, hooked up with etc.  though in the great irony of life, it would turned out that we were the crazy ones, well at least i was . . .

but back to the book.  as much as i am impressed that waldman, a female, was able to capture the male mind and perspective, this book did not really do it for me.  trust me i have loved my fair share of literary assholes, (see:  any male in a nick hornby book) but could not get on board with nate.  this could be a testament to waldman's writing, she made such a believable asshole of a guy that i couldn't see things from his perspective even when i saw things from his perspective.  and to get even deeper, it's because he was essentially an asshole that i spent my early twenties trying to get.  like nate, a guy that once admitted via a blog (this was when we were out of college) that he got bored with women once they were invested in him because there was no longer any chase.  (ok, my hate for nate is definitely due to this guy).

i must admit equally annoyed by the females in his life, primarily because they reminded me of myself.  i have hung out with the nate of my life and cried and hashed out why things never worked between us, like elias.  i tried to be the nonchalant girl, okay i'm fine with keeping things casual but not like juliet.  even been hannah, the i'm not that type of girl, girl.  

and the gender/sex politics discussed were kind of on pointe.  when relationship due end, men do focus on the why versus women focusing on the what could have changed to make it work.  i agree with nate's theory that its harder for a guy to say no to sex than a woman because men expect to get shot down but with women feelings get hurt.  (i know i have been shot down for sex, and my feelings were hurt!).  and the double standard about singlehood and maturity, it is true we do judge males as immature but this can not apply to women.  i found this little discussion and thoughts quite interesting.

i mean i probably would have gotten over nate's assholeness (i have forgiven the assholes in my life), but the thing that ruined this book for me were the #whitepeopleproblems.  i love the hbo series "girls" and never understood the critique about it being #whitegirlproblems.  as a girl of color, i could totally relate to what they encountered, granted i never had my parents support me completely after college but other than that never saw girls as a racist show.  this book on the other hand made me want to punch nate and his pretentious friends in the face.  and perhaps waldman discussion of class politics was critiquing brooklynites for their white man's burden guilt but people like this do exist and that is why i upset.  minorities have it bad enough without white people's pity. for example, when hannah shared her story about her ex and the hispanics doing work on his house and him being oblivious about their station in life made me want to dump her.  yes there is an imbalance in the world but her consciousness of this made her look like a snob.  manual labor may be beneath her but can be gratifying work for others.  that hispanic person was probably grateful for the work so he could have his paycheck.  and i know that nate was trying to critique this in his writing but he was essentially apart of the culture as well.  it was great, seeing nate and his friends bitch about injustice but no one doing anything to change it.

weldman did a great job of creating thequintessential male, but didn't blow me away this novel. 

ps had to share this little piece because i totally get aurit:

"the waitress scrolled and walked away.  aurit's nostrils flared.  bad service was a great source of frustration for her, an inerrant that might at any moment set her off, like science was for the medieval church."

i will add that aurit was eating an arugula prosciutto pizza which is my least favorite pizza because it got some annoyingly trendy.  i refuse to eat pizza with arugula on it.  i hope waldman was poking fun at it as well.

pss i get that this is probably one of those ironically being about whatever the hell is generation is called, well done but still annoying.

the grapes of wrath. john steinbeck. (144)

 

i follow the penguin truck online and was excited to discover that it was coming to bakersfield!  it would be joining a group of people that will be retracing the route taken by the joad family from john steinbeck's classic, the grapes of wrath.  i am so excited to be able to purchase books from the penguin truck, we know my love of food trucks, now imagine the bookstore equivalent of one!  since the truck would be in bakersfield for an event for the grapes of wrath, i decided i should read it.

as i mentioned in my post for of mice and men, since steinbeck writes about okies, i perceive his book as being lowbrow, in addition to that i figured it might be tedious and boring at times due to its discussion of the dust bowl but how i misjudged.  the grapes of wrath is a beautifully written novel and well deserving of the pulitzer prize.  i was thoroughly surprised how much i enjoyed it but then again steinbeck is an excellent storyteller.

the thing that surprised me was how much truth was in this book.  there were a handful of topics that steinbeck discussed and shed an interesting light on.  i will discuss each topic as they appeared in the book.

first, since tom joad was an ex-con, steinbeck discussed prisons.  growing up in delano and being a frequent rider of the greyhound (they send prisoners home on it), i have very solid opinions on the prison system.  in a nutshell, i think prisoners have too many rights and luxuries.  furthermore, i believe prisons have become a cesspool of corruption and promotes the same immoral lifestyle the prisoners are supposed to be rehabilitated for.  it is often discussed that prisoners become accustomed to prison life and are therefore unable to function in the "real" world.  steinbeck expressed this same idea and i found it interesting that 50 years ago prisons were considered too comfortable for prisoners and that there has been no call for reform.  about 20 pages later, joad explained that he wasn't rehabilitated in prison but would commit the crime just the same if he situation arouse again.  (he killed a man who had started a right with him, the killing was done as self-defense.)

but again a critique of the US prison for not rehabilitating people.  and before you say, but wait tom joad was an honest man but he had that heart the whole time, he didn't gain it in prison.

another character with a heart of gold was pastor casy, he was filled with wisdom and truth.  i valued what he said about sin in a discussion with uncle john.  uncle john wanted to know if it was a sin that he let his wife die.  casy said "well, for anyone else it was mistake but if you think it was a sin--then it's a sin.  a fella builds his own sins right up from the groun'."  this is true, we can not judge our neighbor and label their wrongdoings as sin.  we can only be responsible for ourselves, and we are the only ones who truly know what our sins are and are the only ones that can ask for forgiveness for them.

there was also a great point steinbeck made about bad mouthing parents.  in today's world, there are some many single parents and one thing that happens is the bad mouthing of the other parent.  i have talked with friends about the negative effects of it on kids.  steinbeck wrote that "it ain't good for a baby to grow up with folks a-sayin his pa ain't no good".  if kids do they will internalize what they hear and think themselves to be no-good as well.

another thing that steinbeck wanted to make clear was the fact that when people are in need it's poor people who will help them out.  ma joad told the store owner, 

"i'm learning one good thing.  learning it all the time, ever'day.  if you 're in trouble or hurt or need--got to poor people.  they're the only ones that'll help--the only ones."  

the reason for this is that poor people understand the need.   they have been down and out with no alternatives so when they see others in that situations they try to help.  my mom was homeless for a while because our house went into foreclosure, and she always tries to help others because of that situation.  Steinbeck further demonstrated this by the story of the family and their little boy that died while traveling.  the family did not have enough money to bury him, but the other poor families that were travelling gave what they could to help bury the little boy.  poor people are often seen being needy but in fact they are usually the most charitable. 

in addition to discussing class, steinbeck also discussed gender roles as well.  towards the end of the novel, ma begins to tell pa what needs to happen in order for the family to be safe.  upset by being told what to do, pa said

funny! woman takin' over the fambly.  woman sayin' we'll do this here, an' we'll gothere.  an'i don't even care. 

to which ma responded

'women can change better'n a man . . . woman go all her life in her arms.  man got it all in his head.

later on in their talk she explained, after pa said that life was over and done:

it ain't, pa.  an' that's one more thing a woman knows.  i noticed that.  man, he lives in jerks--baby born an' a man dies, an' that's a jerk--gets a farm an' loses his farm, an' that's a jerk.  woman, it's all one flow, like a stream, little eddies, little waterfalls, but the river, it goes right on.  woman looks at it like that.  we ain't gonna die out.  people is goin' on --changin' a little, maybe, but goin' right on."

maybe i'm must biased because i am woman but we are more flexible than men.  we are more easily adapt to adjust to a new situation than men.  i am not sure why this is and will save that analysis for another day.  and of course our ability to go with the flow, i'm going to say has to do with our period.  if you can endure that once a month, that you have the ability to get on life filled with hope!

perhaps the most famous quote of the grapes of wrath, was tom's joad's speech, he gave when he left his family.  he said,

then, i'll be aroun' in the dark.  i'll be ever'where--wherever you look  wherever they's a fight so hungry people can eat, i'll be there.  wherever they's a cop beatin' up a guy.  i'll be there.   if casy knowed, why, i'll be in the way guys yell when they're mad an'--i'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry an' they know supper's ready.  an' when folks eat the stuff they raise an' live in the houses they build--while, i'll be there.  see? god i'm talkin' like casy.  comes of thinkin' about him so much.  seems like I see him sometimes.   

in my high school history class, my teacher was so excited when he shared the rage against the machine song, the ghost of tom joad*.  at the time i loved me some rage against the machine, i even had a band shirt with thequote, "who controls the past now, controls the future . . ." (which i learned found out was actually from 1984, god i was such a tool in high school, lol)  but even then i didn't get the hype.  i mean i thought it was cool that rage decided to be literary in their songs but didn't see why mr. myovich was so excited about sharing it to us, to be honest, i don't recall studying the dust bowl, when he presented the song to us.  however, now as an adult and having read the grapes of wrath, i see how interesting it is that a rap rock band from the 90s decided to have such a politically charged message. 

but back to tom joad's speech, that small speech embodies the greatness of steinbeck.  his words are so simple just they speak volumes (i apologize for being so cliché but it is the best way to define his writing!)  his words are so simple but provoke profound thoughts.  if you look back through the quotes i shared, it reads like hicks talking but there is so much more to the words.

this book is truly a masterpiece and truly deserved the pulitzer.  not only is it a beautiful tale of a family and what they endure to survive, but it works on a whole other level politically about how we treat the lower classes.  this work can applied to all farm workers.  as i read, i was reminded of my grandfather and what he had to endure, not only being a farm worker but also one of color.  the migrant farmers from the midwest had to endure so much hatred that i can't imagine what the mexican and filipino farm workers had to endure since they had to deal with addition of racial prejudices.  i also tried to contextualize it for myself right now.  growing up in delano, which is a migrant farmer worker community, i can admit that i do discriminate against migrant farm workers.  not so much for taking my jobs, this may sound horrible but i always say that my grandfather toiled in the fields so that we didn't have to (meaning we should have a better life because that is what he wanted.)  but for abusing the systems that are in place to help those in need.  being in the school systems i see the amount of aid there is now for the poor and there needs to be reform.  when steinbeck wrote the grapes of wrath, there was nothing to help those in need, however, everyone now just gets a free ride from the government.  if he were to rewrite this today, it would be a different story.  yes, the joads utilized a government camp, which we saw, but we also read how they wanted to be able to make it on their own without the help the government.  if the joads were around today, they still hold tight to their morals and use government assistance to help them get on their feet as opposed to making it their lifestyle and means of income.  there is nothing wrong with working in the fields there is something wrong with abusing government assistance.  my grandfather worked kn the fields and both my grandparents worked to help support my mother and her siblings without any government hand-outs.  aide is fine as long as it is helping those that need it.  the grapes of wrath was not a call to take complete care of the lower classes but rather not to discriminate against them and allow them the opportunity to achieve their american dream. now that i think about it if steinbeck were to write this today it would be a tale of the 99 percent against the 1 percent.  

but politics aside, this is a truly wonderful book and if you have not read it, make sure to pick it up!!!

also it's banned book, for god knows why?  maybe the call to stand against a unjust government and unfair economy?  not sure, but it should not be banned but read and studied as a part of american history.  

*i just now, thanks to wikipedia discovered that this song is actually by bruce springsteen

of mice and men. john steinbeck.

i read "of mice and men" in high school but all i really remember was lenny and his rabbits.  and the dopey voice in which i read lenny's dialogue.

but when "grapes of wrath" jumped to the top of my "to-read" list because of the penguin book truck stopping in bakersfield for a retracing of the route from "the grapes of wrath", i decided to reread "of mice of men".  okay more like actually read, i may not have read all of it in high school.  also figured it would be a nice note to end banned books week on.

i was surprised that "of mice and men" was so well written.  since steinbeck's characters are okies, i always imagine him as one.  silly, i know especially since i just learned via wikipedia that he went to stanford.  also, i am not saying okies aren't educated or intelligent people, but a stereotypical okie is a hick and i always imaged steinbeck as coming from that culture.

one thing that struck me on this rereading, was the foreshadowing of lenny's fate by old candy's dog.  as soon as the reader meets lenny, one knows he is marked for doom, kind of like piggy from "lord of the flies."  you just know they are going to die in the end.  this doom then becomes cemented with story of old candy's dog.  old candy has a dog that according to the others is worthless and a nuisance, but old candy loves him and his companionship. however, the other men decide that the dog must go and another man goes out and shoots him.

the shooting of old candy's dog frames george shooting lenny in the end.  taken out of context, it sounds horrible, man shoots best friend, however, it was not that simple.  george had to be the one that shot lenny because he loved him the most.  it was a mercy kill and could only be one if performed by george.  if curly shot him, it would not have been the same, as demonstrated with old candy's dog  it was a bittersweet ending for lenny, but better he died at the hands of a friend than an enemy. it was a difficult act but was assuaged by george's telling of their dream farm, at least lenny passed on with peaceful thoughts and images in his mind.

i don't recall the moral that we learned from "of mice of men" while in high school.  as i mentioned before all i remember was lenny and his rabbits and his inability to pet things gently.

i watch and love a youtube called "thug notes" in which a thug breaks down beloved classics into thug terms.  (if you haven't seen or heard of it, go watch an episode) and they have a great analysis of the novel.  "of mice of men" is a demonstration of how there really is no "american dream" and though motivational, it ultimately sets individuals up for failure.   for as thug notes explained that in a culture of exploitation, in which individuals lose their basic rights, dreams are unachievable.  

furthermore, these dreams result in  abuse and discrimination among the lower classes due to disenfranchisement.  in a college course, i remember discussing this in terms of the dust bowl. disenfranchized farmers, who had lost their farms to the banks, as a means to exert their power, became racist and sexist towards blacks and women.  this is demonstrated with curley's wife.  though it appears at first that curley's wife is a bit of a floozy but after hearing her backstory it is demonstrated that she is part of this cycle of abuse.  (for you "how i met your mother" fans, kind of like the cycle of yelling).  curley, who had a napolean complex in addition to being powerless by the farming system, exerts his power and his abusive towards his wife.  curley's wife, who is jaded by dreams of being pictures and thinks she deserved better in life, takes the abusive from curley but then exerts her power over crooks.   crooks though intelligent and a hardworker suffers because during that time, blacks were the lowest rung in society.  it's sad because here is a group of people that should have worked together to better their life situation but instead abused each other in order to feel powerful.  (sorry i might sound like a communist but i didn't say ban together to overthrow the government but ban together to ensure their basic rights.)

i must add that i also agree with the judeochristian undetones "of mice and men" that thug notes discussed.  though i disagree with their analysis about it being a theme of man's reason (geroge) conquering (shooting) animal instinct (lenny). i saw the shooting more as an demonstration of innocence and selfless needing to be destroyed in order to succed in a capitalistic economy.  greed is the driving force of capitalism (see: monopoly), and lenny did not have this, so he would have never achieved his dream.  furthermore, lenny was the ideal worker, he worked hard and didn't question anything, just did his work, and yet he was still crushed by the world, demonstrating that the labor force though key to the economy will ultimately be destroyed.  (wow, okay, i might be a communists).

but politics aside, at its very core, "of mice and men" is beautiful tale of friendship.  though at times george was a bit harsh with lenny, in the end, he loved him and vice versa.  it was beautiful to see to which lengths a friend will go to protect their friend.  

this book really has so many layers and it is quite short, which is prove how great of a writer steinbeck is.  this book is also a banned book.  based on my googling, it was banned for his profanity, use of the n-word, lack of traditional values, and i am going to assume the whorehouses.  but lets be honest, it is probably due to is critique of the american dream and capitalism, and of course probably having communist undertones. 

the tree of life.

i waited a year for this movie.  there were that many requests for this film that i did not get it for an entire year.  sadly i must say that the wait was not worth it.

i planned on seeing "the tree of life" in theaters.  brad pitt and sean penn!  this movie had to be amazing. my cousin erin and i even went to the theater to see it.  however, we were late and missed the first 10 minutes and decided to see "midnight in paris" instead.  the employee at the movie theater, a girl i know, even warned us that people had asked for their money back and it was actually a good thing we didn't see "tree of life."

i should have listened to that warning.  but i must add that when i heard jimmy kimmel (i think) make a joke about dinosaurs being responsible for the brother's death.  i had to see it.

this movie was bad.  not that it was bad but it was too artistic-y.  i mean i didn't need to see the beginning of time.  and the whole close ups and shots from different angles to make it feel like you were in the movie, just made me nauseated.  if i saw it in theaters i probably would have been sick.  that jerky first hand perspective was spooky in "the blair witch project" not so much here.  and that whole time sequence from the beginning of time was  bit pretensions.  it was beautiful but came across as some sad christian bragging, like look at all that my god has made.  i don't know it was weird.

the movie in itself was horrible.  it was a son justifying his hatred of his father, but i couldn't sympathize with the son.  so your father didn't like the way you picked weeds and mowed the lawn, seriously get over it.  i mean brad pitt seemed like the product of the era, that is how men were.   i mean its horrible to feel unloved by a parent but move on instead of telling on it.  i had an absent father but i didn't go around moping about, nor did i allow it to effect my self-confidence and self-worth.  it was difficult to sympathize with the son because he was for lack of a better world, a crybaby.  life is tough some time deal with it.  yes that flare up from brad pitt was bad but once again wasn't it all because of lawn work?  really???

also i couldn't handle all of the christian propaganda at the end.  seriously i hope that heaven isn't a beach because if i die and god allows me into heaven and it turns out to be the heaven from "tree of life", i will ask to be sent to hell.   and seagulls in heaven???? i hope not.  that would definitely be hell.

"the tree of life" was beautiful but lacked any real substance.  i would have appreciated it more if it was an art installation, dialogue less and project on different walls of a room.  but as a movie, it was horrible.