48/365 - Kindle

In May, it will be two years since I bought my Kindle, and I've never looked back.  I love that thing, and there's no question I read more now because of it.  (And to think-- for a long time I was one of those who almost resented the idea of an e-reader!)

52 Weeks of Happy (7/52)

Four Things That Made Me Happy This Week:


1.  Reading.
I'm going at a snail's pace through my current book, since I generally only read while exercising, these days, and, um, I haven't been as consistent about that as I ought, but Tish is growing on me.  The book Donald and I are reading, Feet of Clay, has been amusing, too.  There's nothing like slipping into another world for half an hour or so-- especially when it's a well-ordered world with the kind of author you can trust to supply a satisfying conclusion with all the threads of the story tied into a nice, neat bow.  Yes, please, and thank you kindly!


2.  A new crochet project in new colors.
This one will be a variety of different 12" blocks.  There's no chance to get bored when you crochet each pattern only once!  It keeps you on your toes.  (I know; I mention crochet a lot in these "what made me happy" entries-- but it's one of the things that most consistently make me happy, lately...)


3.  Homemade sugar cookies. 
I don't make them very often-- once or twice a year, maybe-- and that's probably definitely a good thing, because they never last long.  I end up eating (much) more than my share of them.  So while it made me happy to have a batch of them to enjoy, this week, I'm also happy that-- as of this afternoon-- they're gone.  No more guilty craving for one more cookie.  ;o)


4.  Favorite TV shows.
(For instance, Community, which finally returned with new episodes a week or so ago.)   It sounds kind of shallow, somehow, which is silly.  Why is feeling happy about a TV show so different from feeling happy about books?  Turning on the TV and relaxing on the couch (with a crochet project in hand) at the end of the day is a real treat.  Nothin' wrong with a little escapism... (Or a whole heapin' lot of it, as the case may be, what with books and TV and so on and so forth.)


BONUS.  Not getting hit by a meteorite.
Can something that didn't happen count? (g)  Sure, why not?  I'm thankful and very happy that the world is still turning in its usual way, with no cataclysmic calamities to complain of.  Seriously, though, these "little things" have a wonderful way of making you stop and take stock of your life.  There are major problems in the world, but it could be so much worse. 


Hm.  I think at least certain elements of these "52 Weeks" entries are beginning to sound like a broken record.  (Crafts, food, weather, gardening, books.)  I guess the same small things make me happy on a regular basis... Or maybe I'm just not good at remembering the other things.  I'll keep up with 52 Weeks, though.  It can't hurt, and we're only seven weeks into the project.

Things I Like About the Kindle

There are a few obvious things that you know you'll like about an e-reader, before you even hold it in your hands. 

There's the amazing portability of enough reading material to keep you busy for years (unless you read a lot more and a lot faster than I do).  You can carry a whole little library around with you (in this device that weighs less than some paperbacks!).  

Then there's the to ability to load something new from Amazon in seconds, when connected to a WiFi network.  (There's also a certain degree of ability to access other parts of the Internet, though it's definitely not what the WiFi Kindle was designed for-- and it shows.)  So far, I much prefer to shop on my regular computer than on the Kindle itself, but it's nice to know that I can get new reading material while on the go (as long as I can find a hotspot).

I knew that I would love all the easy access to free books.   (Technically, most of them have been free for years on-line, but I don't like reading off a computer screen for hours at a time.  Reading from the Kindle screen is nothing like reading from the computer monitor.  It's easier on your eyes, more portable, and more intimate, somehow, if you that makes any sense. (g)) There are many wonderful works in the public domain, and occasionally you'll find a more recent title available for free (as a promotion).  Some people complain about the lack of a live table of contents in some of the free classics, but personally, I tend not to skip from chapter to chapter very much, anyway.  Either I read from start to finish or I go directly to a favorite part (which is fairly easily estimated and jumped to, if you've read it enough to have a favorite part).  Of course, you can often get a version with the live table of contents for just a dollar or two, if it's important to you.  Most of the time, I think I'll be happy saving that dollar or two for something else.

So, those are some of the things I knew I'd like, but while using it these past few days, I've also already found myself appreciating a few other features that I hadn't really thought as much about before purchasing it...

First, no-hands reading.

This may be less of an issue if you typically read hardcovers (particularly those that are well-loved/beaten into submission), but often I find that when reading a book, I must keep at least one hand on it at all times, to hold it open to the right page.  If I want to eat while I read or just not have to hold the book open constantly, I must find something heavy enough to weigh down both sides of the book.  It can be difficult to position the makeshift weights so that they don't either slide off or block the text.

With the Kindle, of course, this is not an issue.  It's so lightweight that holding it up for hours is less likely to become tiring, but if you like (and I find that I often do), you can just set it down in front of you (or prop it up on something, to get a comfortable angle).  There are no pages trying to snap back shut.  You still have to press the button to the page, but until they figure out a way to let you control the e-reader with your mind, I guess we're stuck with that.  ;o) 

Second, dictionary look-up.

When I was young and full of aspirations-- when time seemed to stretch ahead of me in years long and many ;o)-- I was more likely to stop and look up an unfamiliar word when I came across one in a book.  These days, of course, that happens somewhat less often (thank goodness), but when it does, but I find myself less and less likely to bother looking it up.  I rely on context clues.  Educated guesses.  Call it laziness, if you will (though that's awfully judgmental of you, don't you think?).  In any case, I rarely bother to stop reading and flip through a dictionary (or run to the computer).  That's where the Kindle comes in, with its fancy built-in dictionaries and look-up system. 

I have to say, I'm impressed.  I've tried out the Kindle's default dictionary a few times already and found it very useful.  You just move the cursor to the front of the word you want defined, and up pops the definition.  Hit another button if you want to read more about it in the dictionary, and go back to your book with another single tap, when you're done.  It's so quick and painless, I think I'll be looking up unfamiliar words more often than ever!

Third, status bar (and "status dots").

When reading a non-digital book, I like to be able to tell at a glance approximately how much I've read.  It's just a useful thing to know, and it can be motivation to keep reading or save the last few pages, depending on your mood.  I hadn't really thought about the fact that when reading a digital copy of a book, you might not be able to gauge the length of a book so easily.

Fortunately, whoever designed the Kindle did consider that.  There are no page numbers on a Kindle, but at the bottom of every "page" (screen?), there's a thin, unobtrusive progress bar indicating how far you've read in that particular book-- and the numerical percentage of the book you've read (40%, for instance).  Another neat little feature is a tiny inverted triangle that marks where you were when you started reading in this particular "sitting". 

Something I think I'm less likely to use, but which is also potentially nice to know about is a row of "status dots" below each title in the Kindle's "table of contents"/home screen.  Under each title, there are a row of dots.  You can tell two things from these dots.  First, the length of the row varies in relation to the length of the work.  (I'm not sure how it's calculated, but you can tell at a glance whether it's a short story or a lengthy novel.)  Second, the dots become emboldened to indicate how far you have read in the work (which is how it works as a status bar). 

In closing, I still like it. (g)

(Incidentally, I opted for the slightly cheaper "Kindle with special offers", and in my opinion, the ads and offers are completely unobtrusive.  They only show on the screen-saver and in a thin band at the bottom of the "home" screen-- never when you're actually in the middle of reading something.  I find them very easy to ignore-- if anything, kind of interesting to look at-- but then again, I'm not easily bothered by non-noisy and non-pop-up ads, in general.)

...Well, enough rambling about that for now, I guess.  :o)

One More Book...

This morning, I remembered that when I wrote my book blog post the other day, I didn't mention that I'd read the last in the Huger Games trilogy, before I finished the last Lucia book and picked up Never Let Me Go.  (So, if you haven't read The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, and Mockingjay, this probably won't be interesting for you... and there are spoilers, too.  Beware!)

(No, seriously.  There are **SPOILERS** down there.  Just walk away now and nobody has to get hurt.)


I had been looking forward to the conclusion of the series, because I enjoyed the first two books-- especially the first.  I didn't really know what to expect, but I didn't expect what it turned out to be.  It wasn't necessarily a bad book, but it just felt... weak, somehow, and weakening.   

Honestly, much of the book has already faded in my memory, but from what I recall, Mockingjay felt too, too dark.  Yeah, I know it's about war.  However, the first two books also dealt with dark subjects, but for whatever reason, they never felt utterly hopeless and despairing like this one did.  It was like this:  "DARK DARK DARKER *occasional spot in which Katniss is (annoyingly, inexplicably) Little Miss Perfect Heroine™*, and now back to your regularly scheduled DARK DARK DARKNESS." 

Side note:  Maybe I've forgotten something... but didn't it turn out that Katniss' attempt to get close enough to President Snow to kill him-- the decision to sneak into the heart of the city-- was... well, totally unnecessary?  Argh!  I mean, (again) yeah, sure, that's probably realistic.  But that makes it even more frustrating that so many characters ended up killed during that "special operation".  (And this is just one example of how irritating this book was to me.)

Even the conclusion, in which the romantic subplot is finally resolved, just doesn't feel like nearly enough.  Maybe it's realistic, but it's a very sad reality... and it didn't feel in keeping with the beginning of the series.  It was a let-down.  It just fizzled.  I felt that we readers (not to mention Katniss and Peeta) deserved something a little better than that. 

Anyway, I suppose it's a good enough book for what it is-- thought-provoking, moving, and so on.  It's just not one I'm clamoring to re-read. 

Musing on Books Recently Read

I know, I haven't posted in forever.  And now that I am going to post, it's just a little rambling about books.  I started it about a month ago, so about time I finished it, I guess!

It's very snippety, but here it is (such as it is-- the type of thing no-one will care about except possibly myself):

- - - - -

I'm on my last Lucia novel, slowly reading my way through it. (Present Day Me:  Actually, I've finished it, now.  ...Not that I have anything more to add because of that, really...) It's funny how much those characters have grown on me.  Some books you love instantly, but these took a little longer, I'll admit.  Now, that world of characters feels like a cozy retreat from the little troubles of everyday life. 

I found (and watched) a small snippet of the old (1980s? 1990s?) BBC adaptation of the novels and was not exactly enthralled.  Maybe the series is better in other parts, but even the affected accents were a bit of a put-off.  Yes, of course I knew the characters are British, but when I read they don't sound quite that "snobby British" in my head. (Great, now I've offended the one British person who'll happen to find this on a Google search. Sorry!  I'm sure you don't sound snobbish. (g))

- - - - -

Donald and I read Ronia, the Robber's Daughter a while ago.  It was... ok.  It's one of those books that I think I would've liked more had I read it as a child, but as an adult reading it for the first time... it was a little too simple for my taste.  (And why bother creating fantastical creatures in a book if you're barely even going to use them?)  I couldn't help feeling exasperated with some of the characters, since it was so clear that most of their problems could have been solved by just talking.  That's probably more irritating to me now than it would've been when I was eight or nine, though, and goodness knows, plenty of adult books and real-life situations are just as frustrating for the same reason.  (Note of dubious interest:  Apparently the book was adapted to film at some point.  I think Donald said he went to see it on a school trip-- what we would've called a "field trip".)

- - - - -

The "Jeeves & Wooster" P.G. Wodehouse (I almost typed "Wodestock"! which would be a great name for a Wodehouse convention, if such a thing existed... and maybe it does...) book we're currently reading (er, make that were currently reading)--Much Obliged, Jeeves-- is much what you'd expect, if you're at all familiar with Wodehouse and/or the Jeeves books.  So far, what has most impressed itself upon us is the increased frequency with which Wooster (our narrator) mentions his old school-days prize for Scripture Knowledge.  (g)  Poor guy, he must need an ego-boost.

- - - - -

What we're actually reading now is something by Jerome K. Jerome, author of Three Men in a Boat (which I highly recommend to people who like to laugh)-- a collection of essays titled Idle Thoughts of an Idle Fellow.  It's not completely even in quality.  The first essay, for instance, "On Being Idle", I seem to recall as thoroughly hilarious and insightful.  Then later on there was a bit that was just too, too flowery... and somewhat unflattering to women, I must say... and that a certain professor I once had would definitely have labeled as "trite".  Unfortunately, that style has popped up a couple of times, so far, but there's still plenty to enjoy.  It's surprising (thought it really shouldn't be) how little human nature and thought has changed since this piece was written in the late 1800s.  

(Why does that still feel surprising?  However, maybe it's not so much the fact that it's still true after so much time that's a surprise.  It's just that odd sensation of, "now, how did he know that about me?!"-- which can happen with books from any era... and which can be either unsettling or comforting, depending on how you choose to look at it.)

- - - - -

My last read was Never Let Me Go, by Kazuo Ishiguro.  This is my first experience with this author, though we already have two more of his novels (thanks to one of the big library book sales).  I probably wouldn't have started with this one if it weren't for the movie adaptation that's coming out (already come out?).  I saw it mentioned on TV and thought I'd better read it before spoilers began proliferating.

On that note, I should mention that there will be spoilers for the novel, from here on out.  So if you don't want it ***SPOILED*** by ***SPOILERS FOR NEVER LET ME GO***... I repeat BIG BAD SPOILERS DEAD AHEAD... then you might want to avoid the rest of this entry.

...There.  If I wasn't all alone before, I am now.  ;o)

Points of interest:

- Some of the story was given away in the blurbs on the cover-- and (as I mentioned before) now there's "entertainment news" chatter about the film adaptation to avoid, as well.  I wonder how the experience would've been different without any of those spoilers... As it was, since I already knew the children were clones, there weren't any shocking revelations I can recall.  I'm not sure if there were even meant to be any, though...  I like it when authors give me the chance to figure at least parts of the story out on my own, but in this case, I wish I'd been stunned at the end.  I kept hoping I'd be wrong about the novel's conclusion.  Unfortunately, not this time.

- Again we have the old "why didn't they just TALK??" issue (repeatedly). I mean, I guess it's a reflection of what frequently happens in real life, but it still irritates me beyond all get-out.  Maybe more than it does in real life... Also irritating:  Why did Cathy let Ruth walk all over her, so much of the time?  I'm annoyed with Ruth for being such a bossy you-know-what, but then I can't help but feel angry with Cath for not standing up for herself.  And then there's Tommy, who is also annoying because he's so needy-- too weak to express his feelings for Cath-- and just plain kind-of-stupid.  (Sorry, dude, but you're not the brightest bulb.)  Yes, yes, I still feel desperately sorry for the characters, but I still manage to find them annoying.  It's this special talent I have.  Maybe I'm trying to distance myself from the emotional drain of reading the novel by being miffed at every single character in it... Or maybe I'm just mean.  Draw your own conclusions, but please keep them to yourself. ;o)

- It seems that everyone asks this question-- except those who appear to be mortally offended by it, for some reason:  Why didn't they run away??  I guess the answer is that it simply doesn't occur to them, as they've been raised to blindly accept their allotted role as organ donors.  Then there's the practical thought that even if they had, there wasn't anywhere for them to have gone.  They had little-to-no real-world skills-- no money-- few possessions--  no family or friends to turn to for help (outside of the system of donors, carers, and clinics/"centres").  There was nowhere for them to run, I suppose, but the absolute hopelessness of the situation-- sensing from the beginning that they wouldn't escape, but still reading on and hoping that maybe they'd at least try, even if it meant only a week or two of comparative freedom... It was a painful, "heavy-heart" read.

The story certainly makes you grateful for the opportunity and freedom you've had in your own life (and also makes you question how you've used those opportunities and just how free anyone ever really is... and then there's that whole, "oh yeah, we're all going to die, someday" thing!), but I can't see myself re-reading this one.  Once was enough. 


After that heart-wringer, I'm ready for something familiar and comforting... Either Jane Eyre or some L.M.M., maybe...

Two Pet Peeves

Pet Peeve #1:  
The term "pet peeve".  I have disliked it since the first time I recall hearing it.  I'm not sure why (or why I still use it on occasions such as these...).  The same goes for "fav" or "fave" instead of "favorite" (though in the time of Twitter, one may be excused for using the abbreviation under duress-- stupid 140 character limit!).



Pet Peeve #2:
Introductions (or cover/jacket-flap blurbs) that give away the story (in a book, but spoilery blurbs on DVDs are just as annoying).  Personally, I've rarely read an introduction that didn't give away something-- and frequently, everything-- so why do publishers insist on putting them at the front of the book?!  These days, I know enough to carefully skip introductions, so I'm safe-- but it's still irritating.  Maybe they think that so few people actually read introductions that it won't be a problem, but in that case, why bother with them at all?  It feels more like they assume that you've read the book before-- a dangerous and baseless assumption.  Either that or they delight in ruining things for other readers.

It's a temptation:  "Hey, you!  Yeah, you with the book!  I know you're a reader.  (You've got a book in your hands right now, haven't you?)  I know you're the type who'll read anything-- cereal boxes, toothpaste labels, even the occasional piece of junk mail.  Why not try a nice, juicy introduction, eh?  {sly smile}  What's that?  Spoilers?  No, no, nothing like that here.  What, you think we'd be rude enough to put spoilers in an intro?  What kind of sense would that make?  No, I assure you, you're safe reading this one.  In fact, if you don't read it, you'll be missing out on all sorts of relevant information about the author's history-- things that would make reading the novel so much richer an experience.  Here.  Why not just try the first paragraph?  If that one turns out ok, you can read further..."

Little of This, Little of That

Saturday, we had my parents and Kimberly over for our annual "Midsommar" lunch and some games. It was lots of fun, and I couldn't believe how quickly the afternoon passed!

Here's a photo of one of the things we served-- Donald's Amercian-style (because the store didn't have ground pork that day) Swedish meatballs:


For dessert, Donald made our traditional midsommar "Swedish-style" cake (with fillings, whipped cream, and fruit):


He did a great job! :o)

- - - - - - -

After a long couple of weeks of dry, unseasonably hot weather, we're ready for some relief! The temperature is supposed to be slowly working its way down to the low 90s-- still not cool, but much better than 100 or higher.

Yesterday, we got some rain, which helped for a while-- until the sun came back out and turned the world into a sauna.

Well, unfortunately, stifling summertime heat and humidity is part of the price we pay for our mild winters. But no-one said we have to be happy about it. ;o)

- - - - - - -

I'm continuing along through The Hidden Hand (even if it is nowhere near the level of Jane Eyre in quality). I'm not continuing especially quickly, because I've never been a speed-reader, but I'm still making process.

Here are my observations since last time:

• The mother/son relationship (between Marah and Traverse) has (mercifully) left the creepiness behind.
  
• Cap is such a brat in the scene where she insists upon going to the fair. I think we're supposed to like and root for her even during that scene, but I just don't.
  
• The description of Black Donald's long, "jet black" hair reminded me of Disney's version of Captain Hook. (g) (And yes, there is a character called "Black Donald", and if Donald were dark-haired, I might swipe that nickname for my own use. ;o) As things are, however, it just wouldn't make much sense. Sandy Donald or Strawberry Blond Donald doesn't have the same ring...)
• The bit about Clara using her own hair to embroider Traverse's names into his clothes? Gross. I know the Victorians (and maybe people from earlier periods, too) had a penchant for collecting the hair of loved ones (particularly those deceased) and working the locks into jewelry (brooches and rings, especially) and other elaborate displays, but this seems even creepier than that. . . Grossness aside, would human hair be strong and durable enough to use as embroidery floss? I guess it lasts a pretty long time on our heads, but it seems too fragile to sew with. . . (shudder)
• Direct quotation from one character: "No girl can marry before she is twenty without serious risk of life, and almost certain loss of health and beauty; that so many do so is one reason why there are such numbers of sickly and faded young wives." I guess there's some sense in it, applying it to the days when marriage usually meant immediate and oft-repeated child-bearing-- and if a girl wasn't prepared for the stresses of being a wife and mother, then yes, it might age her before her time-- but it seems a little too much of a generalization, and it felt awkwardly out of place. (And what of Marah Rocke? She was 17 or so when she had Traverse, and yet we've been told multiple times that-- though she's reached advanced years-- her mid-thirties *choke*-- she's still quite pretty and girlish.) I get the feeling that this was one of E.D.E.N. Southworth's pet notions, and this was her way of "putting it out there".
  
• The amazing coincidental connections continue to crop up, and the author is presently in the process of "killing off" a character purely for the advancement of plot. (Isn't that mean of her? But authors are ruthless in these matters.)
  
• The people in the vicinity of Hurricane Hall and TipTop must be particularly stupid that they can't see through Black Donald's ridiculous disguises. I guess this is when I'm supposed to pull out my rather worn Willing Suspension of Disbelief. I'm trying, but I've had to use it so much lately that it's getting threadbare.
• Possibly the most irritating thing about this book-- the most "Oh, this is so not Jane Eyre-quality material!" aspect of it-- is the way that Southworth sometimes goes into too much detail about things that turn out not to really matter. It's not as bad as it could be, but it's bad enough to be occasionally irksome. I do have sympathy, though. I think I tend to leave too much in, myself, when I'm telling stories-- and maybe she was being paid by the word, since this was originally serialized. So, yes, I have sympathy, but it's an irritated sympathy. (g)
  

Overall impression (so far):
The book is very silly in spots, and I have trouble telling how much of that silliness is intentional, but I guess it's at least entertaining enough that I'm continuing to read it. (I still can't figure out what the teacher was thinking when she based her recommendation on Jane Eyre, though! Well, apart from one unusual plot element that they share...)

- - - - - - -

Happy Birthday to Carrie (and Trixie, too)! :o)

Two Guilty Pleasures

First, Harper's Island.

I may not seem like the type to enjoy horror/thriller-type entertainment, but every now and then, I am. (Particularly if it's mild enough to be shown on network TV. I know I can handle it if it's not deemed too gory for the ol' tube. ;o)) This series has turned out to be more entertaining than the first couple of episodes led me to expect. Unlike apparently every other person who watches the show, I don't really have a pet theory about the identity of the killer. I think several people are equally likely to turn out guilty-- even one of the supposedly deceased characters. The writers have done a good job of making just about everyone seem suspicious. (g)

It's nice to know that there are only a set number of episodes and that the program was designed with a particular ending in mind. With "regular", on-going series, it usually feels like things are just drifting-- not good for mysteries.

I only wish I could go ahead and finish the series all at once! I want to know how it ends!

- - - - - - -

The second (less guilty) guilty pleasure is The Hidden Hand, a novel by E.D.E.N. Southworth.

This novel was recommended in passing by one of my high school teachers. I think she made the suggestion based on seeing that I was reading Jane Eyre-- as in "If you like Jane Eyre, you ought to read The Hidden Hand." She gave me the author's unusual name, and it remained on my "to read" list for years. I never happened across it, but whenever I'd transfer my list of title and authors to a fresh sheet of paper, eliminating some of them as either lost causes or no longer appealing, I'd keep The Hidden Hand. If it could possibly be compared to Jane Eyre, then it deserved to stay.

Well, I've finally found it and started reading. (You can, too, if you click the link above. It's available for free online. I bought a printed copy, because I'm just not that crazy about reading from the monitor, but you can't beat free.)

I'm almost 100 pages into the story, with over 350 left to go. Here are some things I've noted so far:

• Marah and Traverse-- What an odd mother-son relationship! I realize we have to make some allowances, considering that this was written and edited in the mid to late 1800s, but it's almost creepy at times.
• There are some instances of possibly offensive language and racial stereotypes. (Again, take the era it was written into consideration.)
• Capitola is a bit of a Mary Sue, so far. (And I suspect that she may only increase in Mary Sue-ishness, as the story progresses.) And of course, if Capitola is a Mary Sue, then I have to label Herbert and Traverse (especially the latter) as a pair of Gary Stus.
  
• I had to laugh when it turned out that Capitola has not only an unusual identifying birthmark (on the palm of her hand, which struck me as an odd spot for a birthmark), but also a tattoo of her name and birth date! How very... convenient.
  
• A trapdoor in Capitola's bedroom? Leading to a bottomless pit? Really?
  
• Would people actually have reacted so strongly to a 14-year-old (I think) girl dressing in boy's clothes? Would it really have been looked upon as an almost criminal offense?
• "Miss Condiment"-- What a name! Reminds me a little of Dickens, only less subtle in its oddity.
• The relationships among the characters are about as tangled as in a soap opera! There are too many coincidences to count, and I'm not even a third of the way in!
• No-one's hair is merely "black". It's (almost) always "jet black" or "coal black".
• Within the space of two sentences, someone uses the phrase "HORROR OF HORRORS!" (yes, in all caps) and says she "swooned away".
  

So far, I can't see much Jane Eyre in this book, but I suppose it's still interesting, in its own way. I don't see myself re-reading this one time after time, though.

The Youngest Miss Ward

Note: This entry is nothing but rambles about the book mentioned in the title. Please don't feel obliged to read it. (g)

I actually read a "new to me" book, the last week of July. (Generally, I tend to reach for familiar friends when I read, these days.) I picked up my copy of The Youngest Miss Ward, by Joan Aiken, at the big library book sale, months ago-- and I think I'll be donating it back to next year's sale-- or Good Will, maybe. I don't think I'll ever be tempted to re-read it. (Besides, about half-way into the book, the pages started smelling of cigarettes, which wasn't exactly pleasant. Now I'll forever associate the story with stale cigarette smell! (g))

The story is described as "a Jane Austen Entertainment" because it's loosely tied to the characters of Mansfield Park. (Technically, I guess you'd call it a prequel, though the two novels don't focus on the same group of characters. It's more like a few characters from the original have guest roles in this new novel.) It didn't feel like Austen to me, and I think it would better have been written to stand on its own. I certainly wouldn't recommend reading it with the expectation of something along the lines of Austen.

I found the story readable enough, though the plot felt a bit haphazard-- just a series of odd misfortunes peopled by too many unpleasant, bossy characters for my tastes-- one dark situation after another. (I will admit, though, that the story wasn't as depressing as it could have been, given the laundry list of "bad stuff" it describes.)

A blurb on the cover touts the title character, Harriet "Hatty" (ugh, hate that name!) Ward, as having "a will of her own". Eh, well, maybe-- but she doesn't seem to exert her will often enough! Maybe young women of that period couldn't exert their wills-- but in that case, why even mention her "will" on the cover?

I'm rambling. My point is that while I like heroines to be "nice", it irritates me when they (usually) refuse to stand up for themselves. Being nice doesn't mean you have to let people walk all over you! Maybe it's because I'm just not that nice, myself. ;o) In any case, it annoyed me.

In spite of all that, I didn't dislike the character, so I was disappointed by the ending, which I thought was an unnecessary let-down. I wouldn't say that it was an unhappy ending-- but it was somewhat odd. Just another instance of an author trying to make you root for one ending, only to snatch the rug out from under your feet and present you with a different one. I think it's a pretty under-handed trick to play on a reader who's invested hundreds of pages in a story. (shrug)

In fact, I think it's time to post a. . .
::SPOILER ALERT::
::SPOILER ALERT::
::SPOILER ALERT::

(insert red flashing lights and wailing siren here) ;o)

Ok, so it's the story of a girl's coming of age-- not strictly a "love story"-- but romance is definitely a driving force. The reader hopes (if not expects) that the girl will achieve success/happiness in several areas of her life, and part of that is for her to be married, engaged, or "attached" by the end of the book.

The author gives us a variety of possible matches, but soon it's obvious that we're supposed to be focusing on this one person. Ok, I say to myself. I'll play along. I'll root for this couple to find their way toward happiness. It'll take a little imagination, because honestly, I don't sense much chemistry there-- but I'm willing to give it a try. ;o)

After a certain number of pages, I just want the couple to finally be on the same continent again! (g) (Can I just tell you how hard it is for me to think well of a man who completely needlessly leaves the girl he supposedly loves to go on a long, dangerous adventure? Wow, what a guy! ;o) He doesn't know that she knows he loves her-- or that she's returned the favor-- but still. . . ) So I keep doing my best, just waiting to see if he'll ever make it back to her. . .

And he does (just a few pages before the end of the book)! But he brings a wife back with him (an "Indian" girl he saved from starvation)! One he probably doesn't even really love-love. (Yeah, it's like "like-like", but for grown-ups. (g)) All because the idiot heard a second-hand (third-hand?) lie that the original girl was to be married. (Why not at least write to make sure before tying the knot with this new girl?) The man is obviously shocked to find the original girl still unmarried, but that's not much comfort, is it?

The original girl, angel that she is, doesn't even make a fuss. (Does she even cry? I can't recall.) Making a fuss or crying wouldn't do any good, I know, but at least it would be an understandable, human reaction. Instead, she's all too happy to agree-- that same evening-- to marry and settle down with a different guy-- one whom we've hardly been encouraged to think of in a romantic light. (A pear-shaped head with eyes that shift back and forth with amusement would be difficult to write about romantically, I'll admit. Maybe Aiken simply wasn't feeling up to the challenge.)

Couldn't she (Aiken) at least have given them. . . I don't know, a month or two to form a new attachment? Please give the poor woman a little time to recover! Must Hatty really say "oh well!" and go merrily on her way so soon after this horrible shock? No real, feeling woman could do that-- unless we're to believe that she wasn't really/still in love with Guy #1. (I guess there were instances of people talking about Guy #1 is a "saint"-- unrealistic, impractical, expecting more of people than they can give-- but nothing to make the reader would think Hatty doesn't still wish to marry him.)

Why do authors think it's acceptable to lead a reader on for chapters, only to pull the old switcheroo? Especially such a wholly unconvincing switch! I wouldn't have been quite as upset, I think, if she'd ended up with Ned-- though I suppose he'd been on the fringes of the story for too long to bring him back for a convenient stand-in husband. ;o) Besides, she was so tied to the hideous thatched cottage that it would've been awkward to tear her away. . .

Anyway. . .
I know that it's formulaic and conventional and inartistic to let a story play out the way 9 out of 10 readers want it to play out, but writing's still "business" for most authors, and you know what they say about the customer always being right. . . ;o)

Personally, I felt cheated. I had to make an effort to want those two characters together in the first place. There wasn't quite enough substance there, and I was hoping that when they were finally reunited there would be something more than a hint of mutual fondness. Instead, this. Yeah, it's great that Hatty manages to find happiness, anyway, with a different person. That's probably how life most often works out. But I still felt cheated. (g)

Booking Through Thursday: Trends

This week's prompt from Booking Through Thursday:

Have your book-tastes changed over the years? More fiction? Less? Books that are darker and more serious? Lighter and more frivolous? Challenging? Easy? How-to books over novels? Mysteries over Romance?

Yes-- and no.

Explanation of "yes":
I definitely read more "new-to-me" how-to books than new-to-me fiction, these days. When I do read fiction, I'm less likely to pick up a heavy "classic" than I was in high school. This may be partly because the new-to-me classics I have ready at hand just don't interest me that much, right now. Excuse for book shopping? ;o)

Explanation of "no":
When I read fiction-- not that often, lately-- I tend to turn to the same books over and over and over again. It's the same collection of books I've been reading since middle and high school! So I guess my tastes haven't changed much since then. . .

Booking Through Thursday: Manual Labor Redux

Oops. Got delayed by bad weather (and then forgetfulness). . .

This week's Booking Through Thursday expands on last week's question:

Scenario: You’ve just bought some complicated gadget home . . . do you read the accompanying documentation? Or not?
Do you ever read manuals?
How-to books?
Self-help guides?
Anything at all?

Manuals--
A complicated gadget, eh? I probably won't read the manual-- if I think I can "find my own way" without damaging the new toy. Sometimes I refer to the manual after several fruitless tries to get it to do whatever it is it's supposed to do. ;o) Sooner or later, I skim it to see if there are any cool functions I haven't already found on my own. And I definitely keep the manual (along with the receipt) in case I run into problems down the road.

I've read through at least certain sections of the various manuals that came with the car, and I learned a few useful things. (I was curious about all the different settings for the A/C and vent, how the passenger side airbag sensor thingy worked, etc.)

For "some assembly required" type things, yes, I read (and follow) the directions. I'd rather take a minute to read the instructions than ruin something by rushing through it.

Note to authors/editors: Manuals should be written in very short paragraphs or bulleted lists. There should be plenty of photos or illustrations. Seriously, you're lucky if I read it, even then. (g)

How-to books--
Yes, these I read. On a fairly frequent basis, actually. I read how-to books on crafts and gardening, especially. Now, I may not read them cover-to-cover, page-by-page. Most I dip into now and then or treat as references, but there are a few that I'll actually sit down and read. You know, like a real book. ;o)

Lately, we've been skimming through a variety of "do it yourself" style books on the subject of patios and other similar structures. I'm not sure how much Donald's been reading of them. I mostly look at the photos and read just the parts that seem relevant at the moment-- parts about placement and related considerations (shade, privacy, wind, and so on).

I guess cookbooks count as "how-to", as well. These I mostly skim until I find the recipe I want, but then I pay very close attention. Growing up, I had a couple of cooking/baking disasters where I used water instead of milk and put in the wrong measurements of things. I learned my lesson the hard way, but at least I never burned down the house. (g)

Note to authors/editors: How-to books need photos and/or illustrations. Without them, I'm just not interested. Oh, and when you refer to photos in the instructions, please be sure they are correctly labeled. Place the relevant text as near as possible to the photo. (Thank you! ;o))

I do a lot of my "how-to" reading online, these days. Yes, there's unreliable info out there, but if you're careful, you can fairly easily determine what's good and what's not.

Self-help guides--
I don't think I've read any self-help books. . . None come to mind, at least. Oh, well, maybe one. It was one of those "different genders come from different planets" relationship books. Somewhat interesting, somewhat "oh, give me a break!" It's certainly not a genre I frequently read. When I need help, I prefer to suffer in silence. Or suffer loudly, if anyone's around to listen. (g) (Just kidding! Kind of. . .)

Anything at all--
Food labels (especially one or two of the "nutritional facts" that I'm always keeping an eye on), subtitles (in foreign films-- or if Donald or I can't understand a heavy accent-- Sometimes we have to have them, but then I end up reading the dialog instead of watching the movie or program, because text draws my eye), medicine labels (dosing instructions), catalogs (sometimes, mostly I skim them), the occasional magazine (preferably those with no health articles, because I hate those things with a very passionate passion, to the point that I'd rather not even look at the magazine at all), my own notes (of which there are way too many floating around the house = I need to sort through them, consolidate the "good" ones into a few categorized stacks, and toss the rest), blogs, "twitters", comments on "my stuff" (my blogs, my photos at flickr, etc.), and so on.

Vintage fashion and children's books--

I was wandering around Flickr looking for quilt-related inspiration photos (which I hoard away for future reference), when I came across someone's collection of vintage sewing patterns.

Take a look at these patterns using towels. Here are a few photos from the set to tempt you:

The flowery one? Straight out of Mrs. Roper's closet. (Extra points if you know who in the world "Mrs. Roper" is. ;o)) And the yellow one looks like someone just sewed fancy fringe along the short ends of the towel, then cut a hole in the middle for the head to go through. Très chic!

Then we have several stylish options for the young lady in need of a terrycloth poncho (or jacket):

And finally-- these look more like dresses to me, but they're labeled robes. In any case, I actually kind of like these-- especially the turquoise one. I can't imagine wearing clothes made of towels, though. . .

There's lots of vintage/retro stuff on Flickr. There are more patterns, magazine ads, cookbooks, etc. than I care to sift through, honestly, but it's a fun way to spend a spare hour.

Art Enthusiast's photostream is full of things that catch my eye. There's a collection of advertising and ephemera and children's illustration (from books, magazines, paper dolls, vinyl, etc.!) and signs-- and more! Among the Little Golden Book collection, there are a few I recognize-- such as Things in My House and Mary Poppins-- ooh, and Old Mother Hubbard. There are even a couple scans from A Day on the Farm, which I remember very well. When Mom would read this one to us, we'd get her to substitute our names and the names of family members/pets for the names of the characters.

Here's just a sample of Art Enthusiast's ads to entice you (g):


Tiny Muffin's collection of vintage illustrations is fun, too! Some very cute images.
For example:


Here are few links to some scans (sometimes just the cover and a few pages, sometimes more) of a few vintage children's books:

• I Can Fly (and more)
• Just a page from Miss Lollipop's Lion (one that Mom liked, I remember)
• Here's Once Upon a Wintertime. I don't think we had this book, but I remember seeing the animated cartoon version.
  
• Anyone else here read those Choose Your Own Adventure books? I used to check them out from the school library, mostly, but I also owned one about unicorns-- Magic of the Unicorn? Ah, yes, here it is! Isn't it amazing what you can find in under a minute, these days?!
  

While looking for Choose Your Own Adventure books, I stumbled upon this-- Lost in Austen-- some sort of CYOA book for Austen fans. Could be fun, for the non-purist. Maybe the library has it. . . It seems a bit too iffy to spend money on, I think.

Well, that's enough time wasted for one day, I guess. . .

Booking Through Thursday

Haven't done a meme in a while, so . . . various prompts selected from many you'll find at Booking Through Thursday:

Would you say that you read about the same amount now as when you were younger? More? Less? Why?

I was all set to say "less". I do have my nose stuck in a book much less often than when I was school age. Why? I don't know. Partly because I do other things in my spare time. (Clay is a big consumer of my free time.) Partly it's because I just get out of the habit. When I'm reading something new-- if I'm enjoying it-- I want to read, read, read it until it's done. That gets tiring after a while, and it's difficult to get things accomplished if I'm constantly tempted to read, so it's probably good that I don't read as many "new to me" books as I used to. ;o) I still re-read favorites, but often it's only a bit at a time, so it's somewhat less disruptive to the other areas of my life.

However-- after initially thinking "less", I realized that on the other hand, I read much more nonfiction now than as a youth. I read blogs, news stories, informative articles, and so on. That's quite a bit of text, so it's entirely possible than I actually read more now, over all. If that "counts".

Do you read horror? Stories of things that go bump in the night and keep you from sleeping?

I sometimes do, but it's not usually the "blood and guts" type of horror. That just doesn't appeal to me, either in film or in writing. I'm more interested in "classic horror" (Dracula, Frankenstein) and "spooky stories". I like suspense and creepy-crawliness. Or at least, I think I do. When I'm in the thick of it, to the point that my usually friendly surroundings begin to feel sinister, I second-guess myself. ;o) Nothing I've read in a long time has kept me from sleeping, but I can certainly give myself nightmares.

Do you have any family-oriented memories with books and reading?

Definitely my best memory of the combination of family and reading is the bed-time story. Being read to-- and later reading aloud myself-- was a wonderful, soothing ritual. Unless I'm completely exhausted, I still like to read at least a few paragraphs before turning in for the night. Without question, that's a habit I'd want to start with children of my own. I firmly believe that it helps children develop a love of reading. Besides, it's just so much fun. Let's face it-- many children's books are at least as good as "grown-up" books.

Do you have multiple copies of any of your books? If so, why? Absent-mindedness? You love them that much? First Editions for the shelf, but paperbacks to read? If not, why not? Not enough space? Not enough money? Too sensible to do something so foolish?

When Donald and I combined books, it was inevitable that we'd have some duplicates. However, because Donald was at one time an active book collector (and still has the disease, though I'm trying to get it under control before we run out of space ;o)), we have more than two copies of some books-- particularly the Swedish translations of L.M. Montgomery's novels. I appreciate a nice-looking book, but I think I care less for "book as object" than I do for "book as message/idea/story". I'm perfectly happy reading my battered paperback. Generally, I'll leave the nice hardback on the shelf. Wouldn't want to mess it up by actually reading it, and it's the same story, no matter what package it's in. (g) . . .Have I answered this one before? It feels familiar. Oh well. (g)

Edited to Add:
When a story is all text, no photos, I don't care much about the book's physical form. I'm just after the story-- the pictures and voices it creates in my head. When it's a picture book, on the other hand, I'm just as much interested in the photos as I am in the words-- maybe more interested, depending on the book. I'm can also be somewhat sentimental about books that I've had for a long time, especially if it was my first contact with a well-loved story.