Blog Promotion

I'd really like to recommend the following website:

http://bookbloggerdirectory.wordpress.com

As you may have noticed by the two random codes appearing on the blog, I have been trying to promote this blog by adding it to directories. The above one is specifically for book blogs, and so is a really good place to look for a blog that would interest you.

Feed Shark code

<a href="http://www.hypersmash.com">www.HyperSmash.com</a>

Technorati Code

HQVSJFEQSS68

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

I have always intended to read ‘Lord of the Rings’: it’s a well recommended classic, and I believed I would enjoy it. However, somehow I never seemed to get round to it… until now! It seems in the last few months I have been exposed to more Tolkien-related things than ever before, it’s partially due to the release of ‘The Hobbit’ film, but also several people I have met seemed to hold the book in some kind of holy esteem. With a clutch of book vouchers I entered W H Smiths and decided to act.

After several weeks I have finally conquered the first novel; can I have a gold star? I really feel I deserve one after the length of time it took me to read it! It wasn't even that I didn't enjoy it; I think it was just the kind of book that bumbles along and is deceptively longer than it seems.  My copy seemed to have a devious size font that was only a little smaller than usual, but seemed capable of cramming a whole lot more words on one page. Moreover, Tolkien’s style is in detail. He does not skim over things, the length of the journey is felt and reflected by the length of the novel. As I read, I thought that modern editors may have told Tolkien to scrap the descriptions of travelling and cut to the action. At the same time, Tolkien’s loving immersion into Middle Earth makes him eager to explain the history of the characters and their relations in depth. The amount of times I read “so-and-so son of so-and-so” was unbelievable and each time my head cried am I supposed to recognise any of these names from earlier? My nature is to really understand a book, I like to have everything plotted out in my mind as I read, so the information overload was sometimes a little too much for me. Moreover, I am not geographically minded, so every time someone went east of the mountains and ended up south of the woods I was hopelessly lost. And yes. That was even after consulting the maps.

Now that I have ended my excuses for taking so long to read it, I’d like to say how much I enjoyed it. My favourite chapter was at Lothlorien, because it seemed so beautiful and the description so rich and yet minimal enough to simply prompt my imagination into conjuring my own images. When I watched the film afterwards, I was amazed by the beauty of the Lothlorien portrayed, but it was on epic, filmic scales far from the simple, ancient society I imagined. To me, Rivendell is more architectural, whereas Lothlorien is a more natural place with more ancient traditions.

My preconceived ideas of The Lord of the Rings, was of gruesome bloody battles, displays of manliness, horrifying monsters and events on epic scales. The book had traits of all of these and yet was much more enjoyable than I expected, in that the story was not simply led by a desire for action, but also an in depth admiration of surroundings and people. However, the film had too much unwashed, long male hair for my liking, causing Legolas’ groomed locks to become increasingly refreshing!

I am looking forward to reading the next book, but am currently taking a strategic break with the rather contrasting ‘Bridget Jones’ Diary’!

Read -iscovering Jane Eyre

Is that title a really bad pun? Probably shouldn't even bother with that question...

Basically, at the moment I am studying Jane Eyre, therefore I am reading it for the second time. I read it once when I was a few years younger and I did enjoy it, simply as a love story, but now it has been raised to a higher status for me. There is so much symbolism, so many fires, and holding hands, and saying things without really saying them... I appreciate it so much more now. 

Also, I am really  beginning to identify with Jane. Her quiet, strong reserve is something that some characters in the book are perturbed by, yet I completely understand and often exhibit the same behaviour. Probably the chapter in which Jane is most like me, is when Miss Ingram and her posse stay at Thornfield and Jane sits watching them. She feels she has no right to be involved and in most ways does not feel the need to involve herself, yet I sense her discomfort at being on the edge of something. It would be wrong to say I feel like this all the time, but occasionally there are those moments where there seems to be a divide between me and the people around me. 

I think the understanding of Jane is something the reader can latch onto. In some books, Wuthering Heights is a prime example, the characters are beyond identification on a personal level. Instead of feeling with them, you are inclined to watch them. It is a different experience and one which some people may prefer, as you can distance yourself and look at the general issues and ideas without being forced into a particularly angle. However, I often prefer to connect with a character and experience a story with them. It gives a more biased view and generally leads to a more focused writing style, but this is my preference. 

What do you want from a book? Do you have to like the characters? Do you even have to understand them?

The Secret Countess

The stunning cover

STUPIDLY SIMPLISTIC SYNOPSIS: Countess works in big house. Earl falls in love with her. They get married against all odds.

Since the age of 12 'The Secret Countess' has remained my favourite book. It is a book I can devour in hours and that I have affectionately reread. However, some may say that it is flawed and no more than average. Although in some aspects I would be forced to agree, I continue to faithfully adore it!

It is set after WWI in a large country house in England. Perhaps the time is somewhat inaccurately described, but the rose-tinted world Ibbotson paints is so picturesque, that it needn't belong to the past, but instead to a fairytale. It seems as if Ibbotson desires a world of ideals and wishes her audience to believe in it too. And I do believe in fairytales, I do, I do! However, if you don't (and shame on you) if you like a tragic, gritty love story, then perhaps you will find fault with this. Perhaps you will crush the loving portrait of Russia and replace it with a bloodier, revolution torn country. Historically, you would be more accurate, but in the context of this novel it would be so wrong!

The plot itself is, on the whole, unimaginative: boy meets girl, they fall in love and then something devastatingly rips them apart... only for them to be reunited a few pages later. Despite this, the intricacies are what make Eva Ibbotson such a brilliant writer. The individual strands of story: the moonlight meeting by the lake; the encounter in the hairdressers; are so deliciously beautiful that one can forget the lack of realism. Although Anna is a countess, we are led to believe that her integration into the world of service is comparatively smooth; that despite probably never having dressed herself, she develops the ability of hard work and obedience in minutes. This is again something the cynics can tear apart, but for a romantic like me, it just adds to the perfection.

The final element of the novel is the characters. They form an ensemble like that of a theatre, or in a family. Each have a position and a regard or respect for the other. They may lack depth, in fact they do not portray many negative characteristics, but that does not seem to matter. They are there for affection, for quirky individual traits that Ibbotson includes so lavishly; be it a certain regard for one's muscular development, or a tendency to take out one's ear trumpet to signal the end of a conversation. The main issue arises from the two star crossed lovers: Rupert and Anna. This book is certainly no feminist feast. Anna is spirited and strong in a way that allows her to bow down to men. Rupert, on the other hand, is absolved of all blame for the way he treats his fiance. He is 'ensnared' by another woman who we are taught to despise for one sole trait: a fascination with eugenics. But does it matter? I, for one, want to believe love can be so simple and perfect. 

So there you have it, a less complimentary than intended summary of my favourite book. The real reason I love this book is it manages to be peaceful and lovely without being blatantly stupid. It is no Mills and Boon. Ibbotson revels in a well turned phrase and delicate plot developments, even if the overall effect and profoundness is less stunning. 

Shiny New Blog

I have decided to write this blog to review and discuss anything I read.
Hope you enjoy :)