A Wrinkle in Time

Even when I was young, I loved to read. I'd lie in bed all day and night reading, Back when I was 9 or 10, a student teacher had noticed my loved for fantasy books and recommended A Wrinkle in Time to me. I didn't notice the themes that I do now, knowing only that it was a good read. Rereading it again hasn't diminished it, but I do see things differently then when I was younger. The scene in which a boy is being tortured whenever he bounced his ball out of rhythm is particularly disturbing now, when I glossed over it on my first read all those years ago. Even the eerieness of an entire town acting in unison on Camazotz seems more provoking now then it did back then. And as with anything related to when you were a kid, the book itself just seems smaller now, but that's just because it is in comparison to the books that I read nowadays.

I guess the book spoke more to me cause at times I felt like Meg, though not for the same reasons. I always felt like the outcast during my Elementary and Junior High days because in each grade, I'd be at a different school. At most I'd stay for a grade and a half before I'd be moving again. I've only ever stayed in one school for High School, and for now University. But back then, I felt different from everyone else. I didn't get to reinvent myself each time though. As a b00k I recently read stated, "It's like the people who believe they'll be happy if they go and live somewhere else, but who learn it doesn't work that way. Wherever you go, you take yourself with you." Excuse the informal citation, but page 104 of Neil Gaiman's The Graveyard Book.

The concept of the tesseract was one that I found amazing, and the passage in which Meg is taught what it is I could still remember all these years later, before I reread the book. The wrinkling of the hem on Mr. Whatsit's dress to allow the ant to cross from one point to another helped me to better understand where all the other science fiction books and shows were getting at when they talked about wormholes or the like. Something else particularly cool about the tesseract is the 3D model (or rather a 3D model of a 4D object on a 2D plane). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxl6TOLxvuI

Anyways I'm glad that I got to read Wrinkle for a class, and it reminded me that not all good books are meant solely for adults.And because of this, I recently picked up The Graveyard Book, and was reminded that children's literature can hold as much meaning as literature aimed at adults, and be just as entertaining.

Freaks and Never Let Me Go

When we watched Browning's Freaks last Tuesday in class, I had to pull up a transcript on my laptop to follow what Hans and Freida were saying in the movie. Overall, it was a pretty good movie, and surprisingly when I brought it up in conversation to my Uncle-in-law he had seen it too. I'm not too sure how iconic the film is for its time, but it was an odd coincidence that my Uncle who was visiting my family knew about it.

Anyway, regarding the film. The article we read before the film gave me enough context that the movie didn't seem to bring up anything new, I could easily see the empirical evidence supporting the article's thesis in the scenes. I'm not sure if I'd draw the same conclusions due to reading the article beforehand and colouring my view of the movie, but I'd like to think I'd be able to draw similar theories. Freaks was a fairly provoking movie though, showcasing how the characters are human in their interactions with one another. Backstabbing, lynching, and betrayal aren't really freakish acts, they're something all too human.

-----------

I actually started a bit early on Never Let Me Go, reading it after I finished Geek Love because when I opened the book to skim through, it was easier for me to get into than Nights at the Circus. Well actually I re-read A Wrinkle in Time even before Geek Love, but that's beside the point.

While I enjoyed Never, I felt the urge to bang my head against the wall at how docile Ruth, Tommy, and Kathy all are about the donations. While I know it's that they were raised with the knowledge that they're just spare body parts, it just a bit too much to believe that no one anywhere would raise a commotion over not wanting to complete their donations. Or even the fact that they can't have kids.

Since I work part-time in early childcare, one of the most common imaginative games that young children play, is that of nursing dolls. You'd think that at least a few of them would be more upset with the fact that they can't have kids. Then again, since we're only ever given the narrative through Kathy's perspective it's possible that they do in Ishiguro's dystopian world. Or maybe it's my own bias, since personally I can't really imagine not having kids.

The closest thing to rebellion anyone does, is asking for deferrals. The only realistic thing I thought is that of course it'd be a myth. It's our nature to want more time. If a couple was actually granted those extra few years, they'd want to keep extending it for as long as they are happy together.

Overall though, I really enjoyed the book. As I said before, I have a bias towards stories that focus heavily on the childhood of the characters, and a large portion of the story was on their days at Halisham as children. I like to connect the kid to the adult, and how they became the person they are, something that was done quite in the story. Morally though, I'd be opposed to the idea of cloning something sentient, it'd cause too much moral confusion.

What I found interesting though, is that in the story, people were okay with cloning but they're less happy about engineering natural births to give the fetus enhanced genes. Creating 'artificial' life is okay, but modifiying natural birth is abhorrent? I'm not sure how the latter is worse than the former.

That's all for now~

Freaks

I'm not too sure what to write about Freaks at the moment since my only exposure has been through the article, detailed as it was at summarizing the story and injecting as much relevent personality in the characters brought up within the article. From the cast list given at my good friend Wikipedia however, there's more on the characters that I'd like to learn.

My thoughts on the article at first is that it seemed fairly well written, given I could follow it without prior knowledge about Browning's story. It was easy to follow the reasoning provided in the examples.

One thing I found interesting about the article was how he critiqued the film on subverting the subversion, on how the freaks of the circus go from a victim to the punisher. While it's true that Cleo merely recieved what she deserved, it gives the appearence that the stereotype of them being dangerous is true.

It kind of reminds me of the fan reaction to the 2010 film, Kick-Ass. The original source, the comic, was a huge subversion of the superhero genre. The movie stayed faithful up to a point, when it changed the entire message of the story to one more uplifting. Despite advertising itself initally as not your typical superhero flick, halfway through the story it became one. Despite Freaks advocating how circus freaks can be just like anyone else, the ending enforces how they are different from others and to mess with one of them would bring retribution from everyone.

Then again, I guess gang mentality isn't really inhuman either.

Nights at the Circus

Angela Carter's Nights at the Circus was a strange read for me. I'm aware that the novel is supposed to be read as magic realism and carnivalesque, but it isn't as easy to slip into as Geek Love was for me. As packed as Geek Love is with meaning and theory, Nights feels denser and less earthy and accessible. Olympia's reminiscence inner dialogue and reminiscence provided a human connection for me to understand, which I found lacking in most of Nights.

As someone else had said in class, I didn't finish the book by Tuesday so this is why the blog post is late. Once I got more into Book II I found the read much easier, but still haven't managed to finish Book II yet. the narration is still jarring for me, but I enjoy it the most when it slips into the past narratives, much like I did in our previous book. The storyteller vantage point is one I enjoy the most, such as Fevvers and Mignon's respective pasts, but the scenes such as Buffo going insane during his Last Supper routine was difficult for me to get through.

More on the book however, I enjoyed the philosophy that Buffo and the other clowns impart the first time we are shown Clown Alley. It's disconserting to see clowning as another form of prostitution, but it makes sense. It seems degrading, not seen as real work, and hiding behind a facade of idiocy. Parallel to that, whoring seems degrading, not seen as real work, and hides behind a facade of coquettishness.

The expansion into the uniqueness of a clown's identity reminded me also of a few passages from Wrinke in Time. The pride taken in being similar but not the mirror images of each other's unique clown faces echoed the sentiment that Meg expressed to IT, that like and equal are not the same. Like the analogy of life as a sonnet in Wrinkle, the clowns indiviudality could also be likened to a sonnet. There are strict rules, such as the outlandish clothing and the white face, but within that there is freedom in choosing their own face. Whether they want stars or squares, bright green or yellow, the clownss similarities also mark their individuality.

That's all I have for now. Hopefully I can plow through the last bit of Nights at the Circus before tomorrow to have full access for the Essay portion of the midterm.

Geek Love

Geek Love isn't normally a book I'd pick up and read. The synopsis of a carnival family breeding it's own freak show is disconcerting. Even more so the further I read, for example when Olympia laughs at the idea of wanting to be born normal to Norval. There seems to be a large emphasis on being different in our culture, being the top of the class or the most physically fit. The Binewski family exemplfies it, all the children are unique and different and the only common factor being is that they have nothing in common (aside from their blood relation to one another of course).

The characters were engaging, even through the limited perspective of Norval's notes and Oly's narration. Arty, despite his ambitions, seems to seek only confirmation form others. He's denied confirmation from Elly, and like any young boy what he can't have he destroys. I had a hunch, that's probably unsubstantiated, that Arty was also in love with Elly or rather with the twins as a whole. But since he couldn't have one due to her hostility he lobotomized her. Arty being the control freak that he is can't even let Olympia out of his grasp. Oly was overjoyed when Arty flew off the handle and hit her after learning of her pregnancy, thinking he's been betrayed again after Elly and Iphy's indiscretion, but it's more likely that Arty felt he had loss control of her and lashed out in response.

I'm ambivalent to the ending of Geek Love though, not seeing why killing Ms. Lick is the only way to stop Miranda from going through with the procedure. Oly decided immedietly to kill Ms. Lick, you'd think after watching Arty maniuplations that Oly would've found an easier way to convince Miranda to not go through with it, or even to dissaude Ms. Lick. Then again my dissatisfaction may just be my personal preference for the growing-up section of the story over the preseent day section, since I was more interested in the backstories than the current events in the story.

There's a lot more I can blog about on Geek Love, and I probably will, but for now I'm off.