Friday, November 25, 2011

Book Review: Wildthorn by Jane Eagland

Note: I'm going to do something totally different...rather then holding back my opinion until the end I am going to present it first then explain why I like/dislike it as well as the pros and cons of reading it.  Shall we get our examining gowns on and place the patient on the table?  This will be fun.

This story takes place at an Asylum, for the most part that is.  Seventeen-year-old Louisa Cosgrove longs to break free from her respectable life as a Victorian doctor's daughter and become a doctor herself (unheard of in those days).  But her dreams become a nightmare when she is sent to Wildthorn Hall; labeled a lunatic, deprived of her liberty and even her real name.  As she unravels those who've betrayed her and incarcerated her, she comes to know some of the patients and workers and even finds love.

You may not see from the picture but it states; 
Treachery locks her away.  Love is the key.  

My verdict:  The best book I've read this year.  I'm not being sarcastic.  I have been looking for a book with a developing character, someone who changes from the beginning of the book and becomes a new person.  Someone who does not give up her dreams and life for a boy or has love triangles.  Someone who breaks the rules of society and it's taboos.  And I've found it.  Louisa Cosgrove is my 2011 Best Character of a teen fiction book.  The plot is refreshing and full of action and suspense.  I devoured this book in only three (3) days!

So you know why I like it, now here is why I think you'll like it.  
Pros:  Hello, the plot is something new; a girl who is falsely accused of insanity is sent to an asylum, and she's clearly not crazy, and must escape.  It's even based on a few events in history of how patients in the asylums where treated.  It will amaze you at how much the doctors and workers got away with such cruel things.  It forces you to acknowledged that 'Gentlemen' are not that great.  I've heard people say that they wish men were more like that (gentlemen like) - usually the Victorian era - and be romantic again.  The truth is they were the way they were because men felt that women were inferior and stupid. 
 If you were told you couldn't follow your dreams, that you had to marry and bare children and look good in society, would you be happy?  Louisa Cosgrove is the embodiment of a modern woman in the Victorian era who says no to this question.  How she plans to escape, how she escapes and the friends she makes are the height of this story.  I also think it's important that we read something that ask us what we would do in the same situation.  Would we trust the people Louisa does or would we side with another?  
I find it difficult to persuade you to read this without giving away a few spoilers (no, not who-did-what but a few facts) so please bare with me.  Louisa starts off as this angst-y teen who wants to follow her dreams.  By the end she, her dreams, and the reasons for them, have been altered.  She, in her attitude, as been altered.  Her view of life is changed drastically and I find it wonderful that a character can look at life in an adult manner and learn from it.

Cons:  I wanted to add this to the pros but I feel that not everyone would read it if they knew this.  Louisa falls in love near (and I do mean near, like ten passages before) the end...but not with a boy.  Yup.  The best character I've read this year likes girls.  Though it is never stated that she is a lesbian it is ambiguous (Open to more than one interpretation) to it throughout the story.  So why, even though I love the character and the story is this in the con of the argument?  Because I don't know you, the reader of this blog, and if you'll be let down.  It would be rather unfair of me to tell you this is a love story (to me it is but there's more to it) only to have you hate it for it's different choice of love interest.  Personally, I liked it.  I loved that there is a new love interest, that there are stories like this that don't fully focus on the sexuality of it all.  But rather the story and sexuality happens to be in it.  There is one MAJOR con in this book;  the author does this present vs. past style of writing.  There are four parts to the book and only in the first part does this happen.  The story opens with Louisa in a carriage going to what she believes to be her new employers house.  Once it's revealed where she's really at the section ends.  Note: there are no chapters only sections of writing.  The story breaks into a bold text that tells us about her life as a child.  Then back to the present, then back to the past, then present and then past, etc.  Again, only in the first part.  After that you see why this was done.  It is a writing style and if done correctly, it can work, however, I found it annoying.  So, I cheated and read the bold text past before going back to the light text present (the past and present are separated by the text; past=bold, present= italic styled).

Overall:  So some of you may not like the whole girl likes girl issue (see my last blog post to understand why this story makes me happy) and the issue of going back and forth from past to present can be annoying.  Yet, with a fresh plot of treachery and adventure, a character who you can relate to and want to succeed  makes this book great.  It's an easy read, though the size may make you think otherwise, and something I will absolutely be rereading again in the future.  
So in the end this curious rabbit says READ THIS BOOK!!!

signed; The Carnivorous Rabbit 
p.s. I told you I'd have a positive review ;)

Friday, November 18, 2011

Once upon a movie...

  It started with Disney, when he took classic fairy tale stories and animated them for children.  He took out the horror and morbid morals buried in them and made them family oriented.  Now that we are older we are making our own idea's about these fairy tales and how they can be redone.  The age of vampires is done, does this mean that it all about princesses, prince charming and wicked witches?
  Beastly 2010
 Red Riding Hood 2011.


It started here, the tween years, that fairy tales became the in thing.  Let's take the two themes of these two movies and examine them.  Beastly, the first to open the door, gives us a new look at the tale as old as time Beauty and the Beast.  This is an over used plot that follows the same lines.  The only difference is that this is a modernize version.  But the main plot points will stay in.  In Beastly the Beast will become normal again and the Beauty will love him all the same.
The problem?  It's not original.  Sure, you modernize it, and make it more relate-able, but when you misuse Wicca and a true beauty it's sick.  The Wicca Religion/belief has one rule that is broken in the movie: Do what you will, so long as it harms none.   Now, if we remember correctly was the story of Beauty and the Beast for children or not?  So children were warned about witches, why?  Because of history and religion.  Fairy tales contain morals for a reason mainly due to a cultures beliefs and one of the biggie religions was Christianity.  In Christian (and Jewish) doctrines it is claimed that witches (or pagans) are not well liked.  So in stories witches are used either for good or bad, but mostly bad.
Overall, I know it's just a movie, fantasy and escapism.  But when you call a guy with tattoos and piercings a "Beast" well, now you're being stupid.  I don't find men with tattoos "ugly" or piercings "hideous", i think it's hot.  It's the stuck up pretty boys that i think are ugly.  Do you get the sarcasm?  The point is, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, to depict a person as being ugly in this way (the movies way) is contradicting the meaning of inner beauty.

As for Red Riding Hood, I personally do not like it for reasons that are not acceptable to explain on this blog.  A few issues i have with it are so: having a random love triangle has no premise to me.  If the outcast wood cutter was left out of the story it would have been fine, the story would flow all the well.  However, if he was only used to be a red haring, killed off and, thus proofing he isn't the werewolf, was misjudged this would have been better.  Before seeing the movie I was hoping (praying) that Amanda Seyfried was the werewolf - I would have loved to see this twist in the story's plot.  Sadly, this is not so.  
Again, it is a fantasy.  It's hard to judge fantasy because it isn't real (duh!) and maybe that's what bothers me.  I like fantasy but I also like the issues (realistic issues) that come up in the fantasy story.  Rather then having Mary Sue and Garry Stu stories, I'd like to see a fairy tale story with two women or two men.  Imagine Cinderella (the guiltiest of all overused story plots) going to the ball but instead of being with a prince she meets a girl who inspires her to give her step family the finger and leave.  Or the story of the 12 dancing PRINCES (not princesses).  Imagine, a prince has a friend who is helping him and his brothers go out dancing but they are loyal to one another, so when the king is all 'where are they going out to?' the friend helps keep the secret.



*~* Detour Rant *~* ## skip ahead if you want to know the point.

Of course, though, we can't have girl on girl (guy on guy) fairy tale stories, because it's not romance its erotica.  You can have an emotionally abusive guy fall in love *coughlustcough* with a one dimensional, personality lacking, ninny and call it romance or true love.  But God forbid there's a story about two same sex, intelligent, well developed characters fall in love.  NO!  it's not love it's all about sex and filth.  Frankly, it has nothing to do with sex or sexuality or what have you, it's a matter of story, plot and characters.  It seems Hollywood is dead and so people just keep remaking movies and using abused plot lines to make a movie.  What about creativity?  Why they just grab the hottest book of the New Yorker and make it a movie, it's about money!  Not story telling.  If people put half as much time in telling a great story as they do in making money, I assure you they would double their profit.

Fairy tales are overrated.  Cinderella isn't about a girl going to a party to have fun who happens to snag a prince.  It was about parents telling their children (daughters) that if they do their work and earn their play time they may marry a prince one day.  It was the hope that a daughter would be marry off to a good man one day and not the town drunk who knocks her up.  Beauty and the Beast is about telling your daughter that her father will sell her off to a older man but if she is good of heart and has patience she will learn to see her husbands inner beauty (kindness) and learn to love him.  
Frankly, fairy tales are no better than the vampire craze we went through.  First you think you're coming out of this vampire-hangover only to learn that Hollywood injected you with Fairy Tale Dust (FTD=the new LSD) and now you have to go through five years of fairy tale freak trips.


*~* Continued point to the blog *~*


Whether or not this is a new age or if these is truly the days of Hell we need to take note of some future works that will be coming to theaters and DVD soon.
  Sleeping Beauty 2011
   Snow White and the Huntsmen 2012

I will confess that Sleeping Beauty interest me.  Mainly because it is not set in a fantasy world or has fantasy elements.  It is modern and realistic yet fulfills that fairy-tale-dust addiction that America is hungry for.  Although it has yet to be seen in America I'm sure it will be received well do to the title alone.

As for Snow White and the Huntsmen (why not just call it Snow White?  Oh, that's right, it's a romance between S.W. and the Huntsmen, how silly of me to forget) I again state that due to bias feelings I can not express my true feelings about it.
From the trailer I first expected it to be centered on the wicked Queen.  Imagine a movie (The Wicked Queen - good title right?) where the main character is a manipulative intelligent woman who wants to reach immortality.  Sounds great but then they introduce S.W. and from there it goes down hill.  Not just down but drops suddenly into the crust of Earth.

Final thoughts:

Only time can tell if the tween years of America will result in unfulfilled marriages, unreachable expectations and "true love" or not.  I, meanwhile, will stick to the Grimm's version of these fairy tales and continue to look for that perfectly flawed, well rounded character in that all original plot.
And here I thought Hollywood was dead.


Signed, The Carnivorous Rabbit (one day I'll have a positive review)

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

The thing about Nicki Minaj ...

 
Nicki Minaj, born Onika Tanya Manaj, is a rising star in the music world with her hit songs like "Super Bass", "Moment for Life" and "Fly". What do I have to say about her music?  Well, let's examine it.


"Excuse me, You're a hell of a guy
you know I really got a thing for American guys
I mean, sigh, sickenin' eyes I can tell that you're in touch with your feminine side
Yes I did, yes I did, somebody please tell him who the F I is
I am Nicki Minaj, I mack them dudes up, back coupes up, and chuck the deuce up"


The first time I heard "Super Bass" I grew very annoyed by her constantly telling us that she was Nicki Minaj.  What is she singing about?  It's as if she's flirting with a guy then randomly punches him in the junk box screaming her battle cry ("Nicckkkiiii Maaannnaaj!").  I don't like the way she raps - her voice to be honest - and I don't hear anything in it that makes me want to continue listening.  My biggest complaint is the grammar/spelling/dialect that is used.  But, as a reviewer, I continued.  


When I listened to "Moment for Life"  I did not like the beat HOWEVER I liked the imagery she used and the chorus of the song.  I see this more as a poetic piece rather than a song.

Opening:  "I fly with the stars in the skies,

I am no longer trying to survive,
I believe that life is a prize,
But to live doesn’t mean you’re alive"

Chorus:  "I wish that I could have this moment for life, for life, for life
Cuz in this moment I just feel so alive, alive, alive"

The song "Fly"  may be the only song I find some interest in.  I will tell you straight up that I do not care for Rihanna; the only song by her I like is Umbrella, and nothing more.  So why is this song even remotely good?  I like the softness of Rihanna's voice in the chorus line and Nicki's rapper style that tells a story.  The beat isn't like nails on a board, I really like it - I would go so far as to have it as a ringtone for when my boyfriend calls.  I can't stress enough that the beat is good.  The lyrics are if-y but overall I enjoy this song.

Opening for Rihanna - Chorus
I came to win, to fight, to conquer, to thrive
I came to win, to survive, to prosper, to rise
To fly, to fly

Opening for Nicki Minaj
I wish today it will rain all day
Maybe that will kinda make the pain go away
Trying to forgive you for abandoning me
Praying but I think I’m still an angel away
Angel away, yeah strange in a way
Maybe that is why I chase strangers away


My verdict.

Do I like Nicki Minaj?  No, not really, but that doesn't mean I dislike her music.  Minaj seems to be copying Lady Gaga (who some believe is copying Madonna) and has brought nothing new to the music genre.  She hasn't presented a new beat or a way of singing that makes her any different than those on American Idol.  If you like Nicki Minaj that's fine, if you dislike her, that's fine too.  The only reason that I dislike her is simply because there is nothing in her music that pulls me (physically, emotionally or spiritually).  Whose music does?  I'll tell you that in another blog.

Sincerely, The Carnivorous Rabbit.