(no subject)

[shadowkat]

1. Well, tumblr is entertaining in that it has lots of pretty pictures and ahem, some incredibly not so pretty pictures. Not sure what to do with it though. Can you write on it?
Or is it mainly for collaborations and posting of pictures?

2. Good Reads is weird. Hard to really talk to people on that site. The discussion threads don't permit you to directly reply to one post, instead you find yourself relegated to the end. And it requires work to read the whole thread. Not productive at all and reminds me a lot of sites like Buffy-forums and whedoneseque. I miss voy forums - where you replied directly to the post you read or Live Journal, which has a similar construction. Much easier to follow in my opinion. OTOH...there's a hilarious thread on Good Reads right now:

Harry Potter and Katniss Everdeen vs. Bella (TWilight) and Percy Jackson in the smack down to end all smack down's.

One poster was offended that Percy got stuck with Bella of all people. Bella is not well loved by anyone outside of the Twilight fandom. Can't think why. It's not like she's wimpy or anything. (I need a sarcasm icon or emoticon.)

Let me think...who do you think would win this battle? Guess it depends on whether Bella is a vampire yet?

3. Finished Sylvia Day's "I Married a Stranger" and realized Day is definitely a Joss Whedon fan. She literally names the son of her protagonists...."Lord Whedon"...which made me giggle for five minutes on the train. Sorry. A six year old..."Lord Whedon??" in Edwardian England. Bwhahhahah! I don't recommend the novel, well not unless you are in the mood for a lot of repetitive sex scenes. And I do mean a lot. Day likes to write sex scenes. The novel is innovative in regards to its characters ages and experience levels, I will give it that. The heroine is 26 and four years later 30. Which is relatively ancient in Regency Romance novels. Seriously, if you are older than 21 or 22, you are considered on the shelf. Apparently people didn't make it past 45 back then? Quite disturbing. And the hero is 22 and 26 in the book. She's experienced and jaded and has had multiple lovers. He aims to make her fall desperately in love with him - basically by shagging her senseless. You'd think after having multiple lovers...it wouldn't work, but it does. Much sexual hijinks ensue.

And now that I'm finally burned out on the trashy romance/erotica genre, I've started Thomas Hardy's Far From the Madding Crowd. Which I've never read. My aim is to read the book, then rent the movie, assuming it is available. Next, Tess of the D'Ubervilles and then the Roman Polanski film. Then possibly Elizabeth Gatskill's North and South...we'll see what my mood is. I also want to read Under the Skin by Michael Faber - which has been collecting dust on my book shelf for some time. At any rate can already tell the difference in the writing. It is playing out like a film in my head.
Detailed and textured. I can taste it. Maybe I'll try Eugendis Marriage Plot again after I read Hardy. Might be in the mood for it now. It's all about the mood.

Comments

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Like, was dumping Harry in an abusive home for most of his childhood really the best option? I could maybe give Dumbledore & McGonagall a pass for this at first, because maybe they didn't realize how bad it was? (Although they were monitoring him fairly closely, so this is a weak excuse at best.) But once he got to school and they actually knew how awful it was, he still had to keep going back?

This is actually explained fairly well - at the time, they were Harry's only living family and the only way to protect Harry from Voldemart, who Dumbledore knew was still alive. By placing him with the Dorsey's - they hid Harry from the Deatheaters and Voldemart. He was safe at school and safe with the Dorsey's. No where else. (Which we sort of see evidence of when he visits the game in the fourth or fifth book.)

They didn't put him with Ron's family - because it wasn't safe (which is true - considering how quickly the Deatheaters would have come after him there.)

They also at that time didn't know who betrayed Harry and his parents whereabouts to Voldemart or if the traitor was still at large.

From their point of view, the Dorsey's were the lesser of two evils.
They may not have been right about that - but hindsight is 20/20. Neither were perfect. Which is why the book is interesting and good, because the characters are flawed and make mistakes. Perfect characters make really boring books, and sort of pointless ones.;-)

That said, Rowlings through Harry and Voldemart is in a way critiquing a major social issue - how orphans are handled in the system. Foster care is dicey and state orphanages are worse...kids often get lost. She's also showing how two people similarly raised by brutal families can come out differently.

Rowlings chose to put Harry with the Dorsey's to make him literally Voldemart's shadow. Both have the same powers, the same opportunities, and face in some respects the same adversity - nasty upbringings by nasty Muggles. But Harry experienced unconditional love while Voldemart never did. That's another theme in the book.

[flameraven.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm not totally on board with all these theories either, but they have made me think. And a lot of things happen because that's the way they need to be for the story to work/themes to be explored, but I do always question whether events might have worked out differently or what other choices could have been made. It's just how my brain works-- no matter what the situation, I'm always evaluating it from multiple angles and trying to puzzle out alternate solutions to the problems that show up.

I still enjoy the series, like I said, but I'm more critical of a reader now than when I first read them, and it's much easier for me to see the flaws in the characters. Which makes it a little harder to get lost in the escapism.

It's kind of like music-- sometimes you listen to songs and they sound really catchy, and then maybe years later you actually pay attention to the lyrics and it's like "Wait! This song is actually kind of creepy/upsetting/weird!"

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

True. I do much the same thing.

Although...after reading the list of most disturbing books on Good Reads and some of the reviews of them, the issues with Harry Potter seem rather tame.

Go look at this and get back to me.

http://www.goodreads.com/list/show/2455.The_Most_Disturbing_Book_Ever_Written?format=html&page=1

Actually, it's not the list that is disturbing to read, so much as some of the reviews of the books on that list...making me wonder about people.