In Which We Discuss Pig-Heart Boy

Anyone remember that book? I vaguely recall it being made into a TV series at some point in my childhood.

Pig-Heart Boy told the story of a boy who'd been given a new kind of transplant - instead of taking a heart from a dead organ donor, his came from a pig. The book mostly focused on the controversy he faced.

I read a lot of Malorie Blackman as a child, but the last time I picked up one of her books was probably when I was about fifteen. I never did find out what happened in Noughts and Crosses. Someone remind me to find that series.

Anyway, it seems that Blackman was fifteen or twenty years ahead of her time. A new technique, developed by Richard Winston of Hammersmith Hospital in London and Carol Readhead of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena could allow the transplant of pig organs into human bodies.

More can be read here, or through the link in that post.

In Which We Discuss The Children's Section

Why do they hide all the good books here?

In my local library (Birmingham Central), the children's section is on an entirely different floor, with miniature chairs, decorations in pastel colours, and, once, palm trees made entirely of coloured balloons.

Now, the other day, I reserved a few books - namely, Bridge to Terabithia and Christopher Pike's Weekend. I noticed that, although I'd be picking them up from the main floor, the children's section had several copies of Pike's books. So, when I returned Bridge to Terabithia yesterday morning, I decided I'd return it to the children's section, then go ahead and explore their teenage shelves.

Honestly, it's amazing how nerve-wracking that was. I felt like an imposter. I'm twenty years old, and told that I look older. I felt like Gulliver walking into Lilliput.

Once I'd got over the initial embarassment, it wasn't so bad. The staff were friendly (it looks like they shift them between floors, so I'd seen a lot of them before), and none of the small children even looked at me. It also helped that an older man was in the queue in front of me.

I never made it to the teenage section, by the way. The Discworld Big Comic, Mort, grabbed me on the way past.

It's interesting how the books are segregated, by age. As I said, I found Mort in the children's section, and it was called a Big Comic. Neil Gaiman's Sandman series are upstairs, in the Graphic Novel section. Now, Gaiman is scarier than Pratchett, but they're not terribly different. And, in fairness, Death is one of the main characters in Mort.

A lot of children's books can be equally enjoyed by adults, too. While many are quite vapid, and assume that young = stupid, some are interesting. They're the kind of books you get more out of, every time you read them. Things like Peter Pan or The Little Prince, for instance. They're obviously children's books, but there's a lot in them for adults as well (honestly, if you've never read them, go take a look - you'll be pleasantly surprised).

The Discworld books and the Harry Potter series have both been given special 'mature' covers, so adults don't feel silly reading them. This is essentially the same as putting a different picture on the packaging for hair dye or moisturiser, so men don't feel silly using girly products.

In Which We Discuss Big Comics

Specifically, the Discworld 'big comic', Mort.

Originally a full novel, it has been condensed into what has been called a 'big comic', which I found in the children's section of my library.

It's disappointing, really. So many things have been cut out, in order to make it easier for children to read. I've read the book repeatedly by this point, but I'm honestly not sure if it would make as much sense if one hadn't before reading the comic.

In all honesty, I think the best use of the Mort 'big comic' would be for an older reader to use it to introduce a child to the Discworld novels. An older reader who was familiar with Mort, and therefore able to fill in the gaps in the plot.

In Which We Discuss Terabithia

Honestly, I prefer the film.

This may be because I saw the film first, and therefore got the full emotional impact of it. I suspect that that's a large part of it. But, I also think it's because I feel more attached to Leslie Burke as played by AnnaSophia Robb, rather than simply written. She seems more real, and more alive.

Ithink part of it is also that, in the book, Leslie is exactly what Jess needs at that point in his life. In the film, Leslie is more ambiguous, and can be whatever anyone requires her to be, if that makes sense. She's not just Jess', and that allows the viewer to feel more of a claim on the character, and feel more emotionally involved.

I also like the slight changes to the plot and the characters, many of which were necessary to bridge the gap between now and the time when the book was written.

I'm not sure how people who read the book before seeing the film would feel, but I felt that the film had more in it. I also like the way they spend longer on Jess' reaction, near the end, while in the book, that section felt rather rushed.

In fairness, I usually think books feel rushed; I read them so quickly that they seem to race past me. I read Bridge to Terabithia on the way to and from work - less than an hour.

You can read my comments on the film here.

In Which We Discuss Song Lyrics

Song lyrics are a kind of writing, different from that in books, or scripts. You're limited with the words you can choose - they have to scan, for a start. So, the best song lyrics are ones that manage to evoke strong images or feelings with only a few words, taking advantage of the music to carry the meaning instead of just relying on what is being said. Most songs today don't seem to even try to reach the pinnacle of song-writing - they just talk about how much they'd like to have sex with another person, and don't even bother with clever wordplay.


A few songs are interesting. Take Big Girls Don't Cry - although those four words are continually repeated, closer listening reveals that big girls do cry, and that the narrators belief that they don't is false - and this comes across despite the story being told from his point of view.

However, my favourite Four Seasons song is actually Oh, What a Night. I'm not sure how many people notice this, but about a minute and a half in (1:47), after the line "I felt a rush like a rolling ball of thunder, spinning my head around and taking my body under, oh what a night!", the song has around fifteen seconds of instrumentals. And if you listen closely to these instrumentals, you can hear the "bom-chicka-wa-wa" of seventies porn. Fantastic. Why don't more people do things like that?

Duets are also sadly neglected. Many of them just consist of two people singing alternate verses. Things like Baby it's Cold Outside, or even A Place For Us, performed by Leigh Nash and Tyler James - I love the way their voices intertwine. Going back to Baby it's Cold Outside, well that's just a classic.

In Which We Discuss the Maiden, the Mother, and the Other One

In many, many different mythologies, there are three magical women - the Fates, the Norns, or Shakespeare's Wyrd Sisters, for instance. Generally, these three women are portrayed as a maiden, a mother, and a crone - the three main stages of a woman's life.

Of course, these days, as Terry Pratchett put it, a women can put off being at least one of those for quite a long time. So there are four stages. The maiden, something else, the mother, and the crone.

I'm twenty years old. I'm not a maiden, and nor am I mother. I'm not a crone. So, I'm currently the other one.

Incidentally, 'the maiden, the mother and the...other one' is also taken from Pratchett's writing, when Esme Weatherwax muses on the tradition. She doesn't like to think of crones, since that would be her role.

Anyway...

My first online name was Yunalookalike. I signed up to a games site, and although I didn't intend to stay, I wanted a 'game-y' name. My boyfriend at the time had exclaimed on how much Yuna from Final Fantasy X-2 resembled me, so I just quickly tapped in the name, and didn't think any more of it. 'Yunalookalike', or just 'Yunie' became my online identity for the next three years, as I aged from fifteen to eighteen.

Now, Yuna is obviously a maiden, and although I technically wasn't at that point, my mindset was far more innocent than it is now. The name, and the connotations it had, fitted that stage of my life. Soon after my eighteenth birthday, I started using the name Deis.

Deis is a character from the Breath of Fire games. She's an immortal sorceress Naga (half-snake, half-woman), and extremely sensual. At one point, in Breath of Fire IV, the party need to enter her mind, and find her waited on hand and foot by attractive young men. She's neither a maiden, nor a mother, nor a crone.

Now I'm a little older, I've started experimenting with the name Bartelmy.

Bartelmy of the Ban is a character in Sheri Tepper's True Game novels. She's a Dervish. In the world of the True Game, the Dervish are women who train themselves, and have tremendous willpower. The rites they put themselves through result in their being unable to bear children in the normal manner - instead they pay other women to act as surrogates. Unfortunately, the woman Bartelmy chose to bear her daughter refused to give the child up. Not out of love, but because she believed that the Dervishes could give her a new and beautiful young body. They couldn't, and Bartelmy's child was unaware of her for sixteen years. Bartelmy continued with her mission, while watching over her child from afar. She appears at key moments, when she is able to help. She is not a hands on parent, but she is a mother. An unconventional one, but still a mother.

In Which We Discuss Birmingham's New Library

When I say "my library", I generally refer to Birmingham Central Library, located above Paradise Forum in Birmingham City Centre. It's fairly large, with the children's library on the first floor, fiction and a few other sections on the second floor, and reference material (which can't be borrowed) on the fourth, fifth, and possibly, sixth floors (I mostly stick to fiction, and things I am allowed to take home - although I do wander upstairs, it's not often enough to remember exactly how many floors there are).



Although each individual section isn't as large as it could be, Basall Heath Library (which used to be my local) could easily fit in just half of the second floor - it's slightly smaller than Central's fiction section, poor little thing.

Central Library towers over Centenary Square (well, it's not really thin enough to tower, but it is nice and big), where the REP theatre is located. That's the new REP - the Old Rep is in Station Street, next to the Electric Cinema (the eldest cinema in the UK, incidentally). It's an old building. I'd noticed that the escalators kept breaking down, but I admit to being a little blind to the bits of concrete falling off the outside, and the net over it to keep it all in place. I'll try looking at the outside next time, but it's hard for a book junkie to concentrate on anything, that close to a library.

Anyway, plans are now afoot for a new library to be built, combining the REP theatre with Central Library. It will be bigger, and better, and have more space for books and resources (including kinds other than books,which weren't really considered when the library was originally built).

Birmingham Central Library - the entrance is on the right, but the bulk of the library is to the left.

The new combined Library/REP will cost £193 million, and building is scheduled to start in 2010, with completion planned for mid 2013. It will be located between Baskerville House and the REP, an area which is currently used as a carpark. The building of the library will increase employment (something that Birmingham needs, admittedly - handily, the location of both new and old libraries is very close to the jobcentre).

An article on Birmingham City Council's site mentions the following;

The development will include a new medium-sized auditorium, meeting and conference rooms, plus cafe and restaurant facilties that will be for the shared use of the library and the theatre. It will also include improvements to The REP's frontage and front-of-house facilties.The development will boost and consolidate the continued regeneration of the city centre's Westside and the improvement of Centenary Square.

What fun. The new library will also be more efficient in energy usage than the old one, and, hopefully, won't fall apart.

For more information, take a look here, here, and here.

In Which We Discuss Jodi Picoult, Comic Books, and People Who Live in Basements

Jodi Picoult is a very successful American author. Her bibliography is as follows;

Songs of the Humpbacked Whale - 1992
Harvesting the Heart - 1993
Picture Perfect - 1995
Mercy - 1996
The Pact - 1998
Keeping Faith - 1999
Plain Truth -1999
Salem Falls- 2001
Perfect Match - 2002
Second Glance - 2003
My Sister's Keeper - 2004
Vanishing Acts - 2005
The Tenth Circle - 2006
Change of Heart - 2007
Nineteen Minutes - 2008

I've read nine or so of those, mostly the more recent ones.

The first book of Picoult's that I read was My Sister's Keeper, about a girl who was born only because her sister needed stem cells. However, soon, Kate, the elder sister, needs more than stem cells, and Anna is in and out of hospital, despite not being sick herself. Finally, Anna decides to sue her parents for medical emancipation - the right to do what she likes with her own body.

The book is told from a variety of different viewpoints, including Anna, her parents, her brother, and her lawyer. The one point of view that is noticably missing is Kate's, and this lack is extremely effective. The story focuses around her, but her thoughts are not revealed. My Sister's Keeper was an excellent book, which encouraged me to pick up another of Picoult's novels - Plain Truth.

Plain Truth focused on an infanticide discovered on an Amish farm, and was interesting in that it provided a detailed view of the Amish lifestyle. Although no Amish people have read or commented on the book, lapsed Amish - those who were brought up that way, but do not live in Amish communities as adults - have said that this portrayel is accurate.

The Tenth Circle, the next novel of Picoult's that I read, was about rape. Possibly. It's a grey area. It also had a lot of information on the culture of Inuit peoples, and some of their ideas.

The next book I read, Salem Falls, had a sideline in Wiccans.

Now, although I loved each of these books - particularly Salem Falls, which focuses on a man falsely accused of rape - I began to notice something rather formulaic about them. There is a debatable issue at the heart of each novel, and, in each of them, some unique culture is showcased.

Now, Picoult is very good at researching her novels. As I said, her portrayel of the Amish was well received, as were many of the cultures shown in her other novels. But, on reading Nineteen Minutes, something went wrong.

The main character is, essentially a computer geek. He spends a lot of time online, and is someone whom I feel I could identify with - if he weren't a two-dimensial stereotype held together with cliches. He doesn't seem real. He's not accurate. She got it wrong.

Now, it's entirely possible that Picoult's other portrayels had exactly the same problems, and I merely wasn't aware of it. But, I have another theory. I suspect that Picoult doesn't bother to research things that she thinks that she already knows.

Picoult's had trouble with -

I'm not sure what to call them. I'd like to say 'geek community', but that's not right. It's hard to classify the kind of people I mean. The cult in cult classics, the ones who dress 'unusually', and tend to like fantasy, or sci-fi, or the unusual. The kind at home on the internet. The kind who read comic books and aren't ashamed of it (especially from authors like Alan Moore, and Neil Gaiman).

Anyway, however you define them, Picoult's had trouble with that group before.

The Tenth Circle involved a graphic novel, written by one of the characters, with pages of it interspersed with chapters of the book. On the strength of this, Picoult was offered the chance to write issues of the Wonder Woman comics.

This did not go well.

Picoult contradicted the history of the comics, made jokes which fell flat, and generally, wasn't all that great. Since, admittedly, I'm more of an X-Men (Quicksilver, mostly), than a Wonder Woman fan, this is better summed up by the following quote, taken from here.

"She wrote several horrible issues of Wonder Woman where Diana didn't know how to pump gas, use a credit card or order coffee despite having been in "Man's World" for years (and despite actually having worked at a fast food outlet at some stage), and she blames all of these on "really scary people who live in their parents' basement"? Perhaps its that sort of condescending attitude towards comic book readers that had them braying for her head in the first place."

The full quote from Picoult is as follows;

"You have to keep it in continuity or you will be attacked by the messageboards, which are made up of really scary people who live in their parents' basement."

Now, that quote is hearsay, but it would explain why she got the main character of Nineteen Minutes so wrong.

On another note, comic books have a history of not being taken seriously, as literature or art work. The work of people like Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman have helped to fix this somewhat, but comics still have a long way to go before being taken seriously (I've given up on the phrase 'graphic novel' entirely by this point; it doesn't help, and it's very unweildy).

DCs effort, of bringing in successful novelists, may have seemed good on paper. Good writers = good comics, right?

Well, not entirely.

Comics are not novels. Some writers - like Neil Gaiman (I like him) - do both very well. But they are different things.

Many comics - including Wonder Woman - have a very well-established history, that's been dealt with numerous times. Look at X-Men for instance - how many times has the Rogue's Origins - Wolverine's Origins - Dark Pheonix cycle been rehashed?

My point is that, although it is usually rewritten multiple times, this huge history is there, and it helps if the author is familiar with it. Fans usually prefer it when the people involved love whatever it is at least as much as they do. I remember how disappointed I was in a Tara Strong interview which made it clear how clueless she was about the Final Fantasy series, including the games she worked on. Picoult's lack of familiarity, and her lack of experience with comic books are, I think, what contributed to the failure.

Anyway, going back to a previous point; Picoult writes better when she starts from scratch, and has no preconceptions about the group she's describing. When she does have preconceptions, about the computer geek in Nineteen Minutes, or the gay guy in Change of Heart, she can stray into offensive territory. Stick to what you don't 'know', Picoult.

Incidentally, Change of Heart, the last Picoult novel I read, is very similar to Stephen King's Green Mile. Very similar. It's like she read Green Mile, and thought "what if...?", much as I wanted to do to Genesis Alpha.

That may not be a bad thing, I just wish it weren't so transparent.

In Which We Discuss MMORPGs

Something multiplayer online role-playing games.

I've read two books which focus on the subject, not counting the .Hack mangas. The first one, Love Online, is quite sweet, if very obviously written for teenagers. It's a loosely rewritten version of Twelfth Night (the Shakespeare play), only the confusion and disguises take place in the online world. It's actually really good, and very romantic.

The second, I read a few weeks ago. It's called Genesis Alpha, and is about a boy who was born only because his brother needed his stem cells. When his brother is accused of murder, the media (and the victim's sister) say that if he wasn't born, his brother would have died, and wouldn't have killed anyone.

About a fifth of the way through, and the victim's sister says that the proof is in the online world, Genesis Alpha. I'm intrigued, despite myself.

In style, the book seems very juvenile. You know, like a lot of books for 'young adults' where serious topics are dealt with, but in an exciting, safe way, not a difficult uncomfortable way? Those kinds of books always seem a little flimsy, a little lacking in depth. Unlike, say, Jodi Picoult's My Sister's Keeper which also focuses on some of the same issues in children being born in order to donate cells to their siblings. However, My Sister's Keeper seems like a much more realistic world, rather than just a simple story.

Anyway, the twist in Genesis Alpha, while good, was tragically underdeveloped. Right up until the end, I expected another twist - a better twist.

Well, it never happened. This book had so much potential, which was reigned in, possibly because it was thought too complicated for its predicted audience. Sad, really.

I'm tempted to rewrite the book the way I see it in my head, but that's called plagiarism, and is frowned on in most societies.:(

In Which We Discuss Kevin

...because We Need To Talk About Kevin.

I've recently read that book (by Lionel Shriver). About twenty pages in, one thing had already struck me.

See, the book's supposed to be about the mother of a mass murderer (the columbine kind) writing letters to her estranged husband about their son - basically, exploring how he came to turn out that way. The thing is, she doesn't write like most people. The language is too flowery. And since it's meant to be in first person, that takes away from some of the realism.

Still, it's a very interesting topic for a book. So far, though, I really prefer Jodi Picoult's Nineteen Minutes.

After the floweriness of the first couple of pages, the book does get better. Personally, I wanted to know more about what happened afterwards, than about his birth. Although his mother's feelings about how he came to be are relevant, they're just not what I wanted to hear about.

About halfway through, you get a sense of Eva (the mother) being biased, and unreliable, which was quite effective. Normally, even in first person, I tend to take characters at their word. I also liked the little twists which were hinted at, and then gradually revealed - but a lot of the time, I was waiting for the reveal, rather than enjoying the journey. So, an interesting book. Perhaps not one that I'll read again.

In Which We Discuss Books That Seeped into Real Life

I read a lot. Continually, almost. And sometimes, when I physically put the book down, it's not quite gone.

Take Around the World in Eighty Days. I put that down, when I was halfway through, to go and get something to eat. And I found myself rushing around, feeling like I was in a tremendous hurry. It took me awhile to realise that it wasn't me on a time limit.

Then there was what happened today. Right now I'm reading The Boleyn Inheritance, the sequel to The Other Boleyn Girl, both of which are set in Tudor England. Well, at work, I had to go down to the stockroom, to pick up more cups, and I found a packet that were already opened. And I picked those up to use because, and I quote my exact thoughts "they're impure once they're opened, the dirty little whores. No one else will want them."

See, in Tudor England, being a virgin before marriage was a big deal.

...yeah.

In Which We Discuss Madonna

She passed her prime twenty years ago and is still accelerating.

In Which We Discuss Books That Made Me Cry

I read two books today. I didn't mean to, but I finished one in my lunch break, and then I started one on the way home, and the bus broke down, so I finished it.

The first book was Amy Tan's The Joy Luck Club. It's essentially about mothers and daughters - the things they have in common, and the things they don't.

The story begins with Jing-mei Woo stepping into her mother's shoes after her death - and realizing that she can't. The Joy Luck Club is something her mother invented, while in China during world war one, and something she continued with in America around the time of the second world war. The current members are three other women, who have also come to America from China. Each has a daughter. Each of them has wanted to spare her daughter the torments and sorrows that she went through. Because of this, the daughters never really get to know their mothers - as Jing-Mei, (or June, as she is known), realises when she meets the sisters she never knew she had, and needs to tell them about their mother.

Most of the book is made up of stories from the mothers and daughters. The stories from the mother's various childhoods don't seem to gel with the mothers seen by the daughters; it can be difficult to realise that this staid matron was also the girl you just read about. That's not a bad thing; it's realistic, for a daughter not to realise that her mother was once a person in her own right.

The second book was Mitch Albom's for one more day. I've read one of Mitch Albom's books before - the five people you meet in heaven.

That made me cry too.:(

for one more day is about a man who gets to spend one last day with his mother, who had passed away years before. He gets to say everything he wished he could have before. The little twist at the end was the real tear-jerker, though. I never saw it coming, and it would have been a good book without it, but that twist made it a brilliant book.

I'm trying to work out if Mitch Albom is corny or not. I'm leaning towards no, but I suspect I might be too young to tell the difference.

In Which We Discuss Books That Scared Me

As I get older, I'm starting to understand the point of age ratings on movies and games. I used to think that when reading something bothered me, that it was intrinsically worrying - not that maybe I was too young to handle it. Now, looking back, I think I was.

I'm thinking mostly of Virginia Andrews' novels. Many of her plots focused on rape/incest - not really the kind of thing a ten-year-old should read. They really disturbed me when I first read them, but going back to them now, they don't bother me so much. I appear to have become hardened in my old age.

Rape/incest is an extreme example, but even lighter things used to bother me, when I was young. Books like Judy Bloome's Forever, which describes a first relationship. And then she cheats on him, and they break up. I didn't like it. First loves were supposed to last.

In Which We Discuss Beguilement

There's a kind of magic-user in the Witcher novels. Sorceresses.

All sorceresses are beautiful. Fact. It goes with the territory. But, no attractive young girl is ever trained as a sorceress. It's a discipline reserved for those daughters who cannot be used for allegiances, the ones no one will want to marry. This apparent contradiction is easily resolved - the girls become beautiful as they become better sorceresses, and use magic to improve their appearance.

There's one character in the Witcher who is utterly beautiful, when Geralt, the titular character knows her. But he realises what she once was - a hunchback.

That entirely changed my view of her, and it's interesting to think of why. It doesn't change who she is. It doesn't make her any less beautiful now. But still, it changed the character for me.

Now, within the world of the True Game series by Sheri Tepper, there are a variety of Talents. These talents take various forms, such as mind-reading, healing, necromancy, and beguilement, among others. These Talents are genetic, among Gamesmen caste.

Anyway, those with beguilement - also known as 'follow-me', since that's what it convinces others to do - tend to come into the Talent early. The Talent can also convince others that the user is utterly stunning - it's essentially a mix of leadership, seduction and charisma. Since they get it early, they tend to rely on it, and nothing else. So those with beguilement are selfish, and, if not actually stupid, at least somewhat unresourceful.

Anyway, there are two characters in particular that I'm thinking of. Prince Mandor ('prince/princess/queen/king/ruler' is an honorific given to those who only have the talent of beguilement) and Witch/Priestess Dazzle (Witches/Priestess have the talents of beguilement, power-storage and firestarting, all in slightly lesser amounts than those who have just one of those).

Both Mandor and Dazzle were generally seen as utterly stunning. But both were hideous.

Oh, they were naturally beautiful, once. But Dazzle, well she, her mother, and her half-brother and half-sister were caught in the middle of something when she was young. Her half-sister was a healer, and begged for power to save Dazzle's mother. But Dazzle refused, hiding in the corner and weaving beguilement around herself, convincing herself that she was safe. Even when part of the roof fell and sliced off half her face, she still convinced herself she was safe and unhurt. Her half-sister (Silkhands) begged her for some of the power she'd stored (remember, priestess/witches can store power - normally it can be drawn from heat, but all the nearby heat had been taken for the fight which had caused the damage). Dazzle refused, convinced that Silkhands wanted the power for her mother, rather than to heal Dazzle's own face. She didn't even realise how repulsive she was, because she never stopped beguiling. And nor did anyone else (except for Silkhands, and a few other main characters).

Mandor knew immediately what had happened to him, although, again, he was able to hide it from others. He suffered a similar accident, with similar effects. In his case, there was no healer nearby, and knowing that he'd lost his beauty - whether the world could see it or not - just about killed him. Especially when one who'd once admired him was able to see through the beguilement, and know what he really looked like.

Later in the True Game books, some Shapeshifting characters (shapeshifting is a talent too) discuss how the shape one is in affects the personality. It's true. How people look, and how this is accepted by society does change them. Even if you can't see it. Even if it's in the past.

Or perhaps I am rather shallow. In fairness, both Mandor and Dazzle were very unpleasant people.

In Which We Discuss Harry Potter

I should probably say, right now, that I think the books are dumb.

I liked them when I was about eleven, I admit. But then I grew out of it. I became sick of the series long before it was over, which is a little sad, come to think of it. Still, I don't like those books.

I admit that part of it is because of the sheer amount of icky fan drool over every single copy. Much like FFVII, in fact. It's not a bad game, but the amount of people blathering on about how fantastic it is makes me want to be contrary.

And, of course...all of these people, who, to be honest, I don't think an awful lot of, are in love with this thing. Therefore, there must be something wrong with it.

I will admit that I am an inherently suspicious person.

There's also the gaping plot hole in the second/third book (there's no way to cure Lupin of being a werewolf, when Lockheart describes a spell that can do it in one of his books? I know that Lockheart didn't actually do those things, but he also admits that someone did. And even though the spell is described as difficult, since it's possible, Dumbledore would have found a way to cast it. He wouldn't do anything else). And the fact that JK Rowling cannot tell the difference between a witch and a wizard (it is NOT a gender issue - they use different kinds of magic).

The books just irritate me.

In Which We Discuss Charity Shops

I like them.

When I was little, my grandmother would take me with her when she went shopping, and charity shops always have lots and lots of cheap books. I remember when they were 5-10p each. Those days are over, but charity shops are still good for a bargain. I found one the other day that only charges 20p for a paperback, and got a fiver's worth. Was a nightmare getting those home.

The other handy thing about charity shops is that you're never quite sure what you're going to get. It lets you look at books you've never heard of it and might not have thought of. It's how I discovered authors like Jenny Colgan, Lisa Jewell and Sheri Tepper, for a start.

Plus, you know, you're helping people. Not a major concern (I'm altruistic when it suits me, not for the sake of it), but still nice.

In Which We Discuss Carrier Bags

WHSmith (British stationary/book store) have started charging a penny for their carrier bags. It's a minuscule amount, but it does make you think when they have to ask you every single time. It didn't actually stop me getting one - the stuff I was getting wouldn't fit into my backpack - but it seemed effective. Plus, Woolworths charges 3p a bag, so I just shoved their stuff into the WHSmith's bag instead. See? It worked. I used less bags.

Waterstones (dedicated bookseller) have yet to start charging for bags, and they have the very best kind. Reinforced handles, which is necessary. Books are extremely heavy for their size.

In Which We Discuss Library Kiosks

My local library is switching over to self-service this week. I'm not entirely sure I approve.

Of course, you should probably know that my first reaction to new things is suspicion and utter hatred, until it begins to grow on me. Then I may accept it and begin to like it. Right now, I do not like the thought of these kiosks.

Basically, instead of taking new books back to friendly librarian, then following my usual routine of walking around the library/going to the other desk to pick up one of my reservations, and then going back around in a nice loop, to the other side of the desk to take those out...well, I'm not sure exactly how it will be instead. But I like that routine.

The kiosks are meant to allow me to return books and drop them into the bin next to them, instead of giving them to a real person. I like real people. Plus, I like seeing a real person actually take the books and put them to one side to be reshelved, rather than trust that I've pressed all the buttons properly, and that it'll be picked up out of that lonely looking little bin. Poor little book, dropping into the great unknown like that. Might get hurt.

Secondly, I think it's going to be a pain to not have a desk to rest on when I'm returning a number of books or taking them out. And I'm having trouble remembering my library pin (I'd set it to the same as my bank pin, but that would be incredibly stupid). And I'm worried about the librarian's jobs. I know they'll still be there, but will they need as many of them?

In Which We Discuss The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

I just got done reading the two volumes the other day. For those who haven't heard of it, the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is set in late 19th/early 20th century Britain. It presumes that the heroes of certain novels actually existed, and that the books were slightly exaggerated accounts of their adventures. So, we're dealing with the 'man behind the myth' as it were.

The leader of the group is Mina Murray, formerly Harker, as in the wife (divorcee) of Jonathan Harker, from Dracula. Incidentally, there was a film based on the comics (I've been trying to say 'graphic novel', but cba to keep that up. Japanese people aren't ashamed of saying 'manga' for all forms of it). I haven't seen it, but I hear that Mina was sidelined, which sucks.

In the film, or so I hear, Allan Quartermain is the leader of the group. He appears in the books by H. Rider Haggard (grandfather of modern adventure stories). I've read a few of the Quartermain books, but I much prefer the She series (Ayesha - She Who Must Be Obeyed), also by H. Rider Haggard. They have the same kind of appeal for me as Vernes Journey to the Centre of the Earth did. It's a pity we don't have much wilderness or unexplored areas left.:(

Incidentally, Journey to the Centre of the Earth is a great film and a better book. The good thing about the recent film adaptation is that they set it as kind of a sequel. So the events of the book actually happened, and the protagonists of the film are just following in their footsteps. Which happily dealt with any tooth-grinding I might have had over changes, and made a pretty cool film. Not as good as the book, but all 3D and shiny anyway. With extra Brendan Fraser.

There's also Griffin, the Invisible Man, as written by H.G. Wells, who also wrote The Time Machine and The War of the Worlds (which shows up later in The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen), among other things. He has a particularly horrible ending, which I do not care to go into. Although the effect with his blood is fairly awesome.

There's also Hyde, as in Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (the latter shows up a lot more). It's very odd to think that, in the original book, it was a huge twist that Jekyll and Hyde were the same person. Fame's kind of spoilt that.

There's also a few other characters, but I liked those best.

Oh, and there's a bit at the end where they're attacked by what appears to be Rupert Bear and Tony the Tiger.

I swear to god, I am not making this up.

In Which We Discuss Ideas and Their Inconvenience

I've had so many ideas of what to write about, but I always get them on the bus on the way to work (is where I do all my thinking). Because it's packed, I can't write them down, and then, when I get home, I'm exhausted and can't write.:(

In Which We Discuss The Witcher

I first heard about the videogame The Witcher when I was randomly clicking on links on TV Tropes -

- you know, I just went to take a look at that site again, to double check which article I first found mention of the Witcher on, and it sucked me right in again. It's the Wikipedia effect, as illustrated by XKCD:



- anyway, yes, I heard about The Witcher on TV Tropes. It was mentioned because the results of the many moral choices you make in the game aren't immediately apparent. For instance, choosing to spare someone in the first act may change what happens in, for example, the fourth act. I thought that was fascinating, so I read some more about the game, then went and got the library to order the book (written by Andrzej Sapkowski) for me.

I started reading the book last night, and I can really see why it was made into a game. It's got a very strong mythological feel, and a lot of the events The Witcher comes up against are loosely based on fairy tales, but more horrible (reminding me of Tanith Lee in places). It also reminded me a little of Three Hearts and Three Lions, by Poul Anderson. It's a really fascinating fantasy novel, and I wants the sequels. Now please.

In Which We Discuss Star Girl

...or, the cost of selling out.

Stargirl is a book by Jerry Spinelli. It was published in 2000.

It's written from the point of view of Leo Borlock, a senior at Mica High in Arizona. One day a weird girl starts at his school. She's been home-schooled for years. She dresses oddly. She plays the ukulele and sings to people on their birthdays. Every day, in every lesson, she fastens a lace frill around her desk, and drops a single daisy into a vase. And her name is Stargirl.

She's weird, and strange, and completely unique. And so is the book. That's why I love it. It's so unusual and mysterious, and it's a really beautiful, tragic love story. I really, really love that book, and I think it's mostly because of the main character. There's so much mystery surrounding her that she really does seem like some strange and ancient being, not just a normal girl. That's why she's special. That's why the book's special.

But then, in 2008, Spinelli wrote a sequel. Called Love Stargirl, it was written from Stargirl's point of view. And suddenly, she wasn't at all special. She wasn't magical or mysterious. She was just a normal teenage girl. Quirky, but not at all special.

He ruined it.

There's a Stargirl diary now, with Stargirl quotes at random points. Like something you'd find attached to one of Jacqueline Wilson's novels (I've nothing against Jacqueline Wilson - I love her work - but she's an entirely different kind of writer). He just completely ruined the whole thing that was Stargirl. And the sequel contradicted the beautiful ending of the original.

Stargirl was a wonderful book, all by itself. It didn't need a sequel; it was complete and perfect. But then he had to go and ruin it. Presumably, for the money.

*sniffle*

In Which We Discuss My Library Books

My library books. Currently, as always, I've got eight out; Ulster's White Negroes, The Irish Civil War, The Little Friend, My Heart is My Own (A Biography of Mary, Queen of Scots), Merlin: The Prophet and His History, Skeleton Crew, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (vol ii), and Last Wish.

In Which We Discuss History

Again, speaking of adaptations, I've been reading Philippa Gregory's work a lot, recently. She wrote The Other Boleyn Girl, and it is a great way to get people interested in English history and the Tudors. The film was a pretty good adaptation, but the other books are interesting too - like The Constant Princess, which is about Katherine of Aragon and her original marriage to Arthur Tudor.

Incidentally, we have never had a King Arthur, except for the famous one. There seems to be a curse. Prince Charles has Arthur as one of his middle names, and tbh, I'm hoping he doesn't come to throne. Mostly, it's political reasons, partly it's because I really like the idea that Arthur is special.:(

In Which We Discuss Adaptations

There's a film that's meant to be released this Christmas - The Time Traveller's Wife. S'got Eric Bana in it.

I absolutely love that book. It's such a beautiful love story. It's long and complex too, and I've got no idea how they're going to cut it down to film length without destroying it. I don't think it's possible. I'm terrified. I think they're going to destroy one of my favourite books.

In Which We Discuss Porn

Speaking of Alice in Wonderland, I read Alan Moore's Lost Girls recently. That's a graphic novel (and really, we need a better word for that, it's so unwieldy). Alan Moore wrote Swamp Thing and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, but Lost Girls is slightly different.

It focuses on a time, just before the first World War, in an Austrian hotel. There, Dorothy Gale (of The Wizard of Oz), Wendy Potter (formerly Darling, of Peter Pan) and Alice Fairchild (of Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass) meet, and compare stories. Each of the three books mentioned is re-imagined as a discovery of budding sexuality. So yes, it's essentially Western hentai.

Incidentally, am I the only person who, when discussing graphic novels, has the urge to call them mangas? I know that's incorrect, but it's so much easier to say.

What's fascinating about it is how beautiful it is. It could be called art. Alan Moore's actually on record as saying that, if they'd send it was art, people would say "no, that's just porn". Whereas, if they call it porn, people say "no, it's art".

It's extremely beautiful, well done, imaginative pornography, with a lot of literary references (like a lot of Moore's work). Oddly, I didn't find much of it erotic. It's a bit like the way nudity isn't really considered a sexual thing in Sweden. For a lot of the book, sex was desexualised because there was so damn much of it. It was more interesting to see how Moore had reinterpreted the events of the books to be about sex. I especially liked the way he changed the meanings of the things the flowers said in Through the Looking Glass without changing a single word ("at least she's the right colour").

You get a lot more out of it if you've read the books, and it doesn't destroy them. I absolutely love Peter Pan, and I'm able to think of them separately. It doesn't bother me like a bad film adaptation would, probably because it's not an adaptation - more fanfiction.

In Which We Discuss Racism

I've read Black Like Me recently, which is a bit odd, since I read it within a few days of getting it (unusual for me, at least). It's a tiny little thing, only about one hundred and sixty pages. It's the diary kept by John Howard Griffin during what one might called a political experiment in the American deep South in the late fifties. Griffin was a white man who decided to, essentially, dye his skin black in order to see how racism changed his life. He didn't change anything else about himself, just his skintone. He vowed to always be honest about what he was doing, should anyone ask, and he didn't change his name or any of his history.

Bearing in mind that this happened in 1959, perhaps the racism he encounters isn't so shocking. It's a pretty interesting read though, encompassing the ideas people had at the time - ie, black people are poor because that's all they're good for. Griffin pointed out that, if someone spends all their time working for barely enough money to eat, then they're going to want some cheap and cheerful entertainment. If, all the time, you're fighting for the next meal, you're not going to be too concerned with the finer things in life. It takes too much work just running to stay in the same place (Alice in Wonderland ref).

One thing that struck me about the social situation he described, though, was the strong sense of community. Black people didn't hate each other; when he was black, Griffin was instantly adopted, and offered advice, help, and shelter, something he couldn't get from the white people who now wouldn't offer him the time of day. And, of course, vice versa, white people bonded together against black people.

It's a pity that's not something we've kept. I'm not black, so this may sound racist, but it seems like lots of gang warfare is between black people, against each other. Which is kind of a step backwards. Of course, round here, it's mostly Asians, which is also ironic. After Partition (when India split into India and Pakistan), a lot of Indian and Pakistani people emigrated, mostly to the UK and Europe. They tended to help people once they got here, adopt them as family and give them a hand. Second and third generation aren't so aware of that, and lots of them have started with the whole gang warefare schtick.

I'm not one for judging people on their skin tone, but I think when you could look at someone, and see instantly that they were like you, that they'd suffered the same prejudices, and that they'd appreciate any help you offered - well, I don't think that was all bad. We just need to focus it on something else, some other feature, but I've no idea what that could be.

I wonder if Barack Obama's read it?

I'm mixed race, for those who don't know - half Indian, half English, Irish and Welsh. When I meet new people, usually at least one of them will stare at me for a while before going "...so, what race are you?"

It's not something I can hide. I can't pretend to be English, even though I was born here and raised by my English mother, because someone always asks what my blood is. I can't be fully Indian, since I've got no idea what my family are talking about most of the time, especially since my aunts, father and grandparents are bilingual. Racially, I feel alone, which is why, I think, that sense of community affected me.