I'm home at present, with some grotty virus, so before I watch another movie, and do some more knitting, I'll write a bit, including comments on the books from my last post. I'll polish those off first.
1. Four seasons: a year of Italian food. Well, I didn't do 10 recipes - I did three. Two will definitely get made again, the eggplant slices wrapped around mozzarella, although I will bake not fry the eggplant slices. Too oily. The other was a hazelnut praline semifreddo which was very yum, even without the hazelnut liqueur. I just need to get better at unmolding things. But it was certainly easy to identify recipes I wanted to make, and could see myself making. A cookbook to be owned, so that you can work through it at your own pace.
2 and 3. The wedding wallah and Moon over Soho were very enjoyable. Definitely recommend in the romance and detective genres and will hunt down the authors' other titles.
4, 5, and 6. Didn't get to. I borrow far more than I read, and always will. I think of it as a shopping spree where I can return things with no questions.
Ok, that's them out the way. Now on to the book I really want to write about. Big Brother, by Lionel Shriver.
Big Brother is narrated by Pandora, a 40ish married-with-stepkids businesswoman. The Big Brother is her older brother Edison, a self-aggrandizing but down on his luck jazz musician. At a particularly low point, she agrees to allow him to stay, over the objections of her husband Fletcher, who loathes the guy. She hasn't seen her brother in several years, and is devastated when at the airport she discovers he has gained weight. Like over 200 pounds.
The rest of the book is a meaty consideration of sibling issues, dieting issues, food issues, and I have to say that I read the book in about two days. I find her compulsive reading. But I found her writing about weight and dieting to be both jarring and fascinating. Her depiction of everyone's repulsed reaction to the new, fat Edison seems both sadly plausible and slightly hysterical, and this reaction occurs before anyone has any idea why Edison has become so fat. It turns out that Edison is a compulsive eater, gorging himself on enormous amounts of food. (The fact that Fletcher is a health puritan does make this conflict entertaining as well.) And Edison is described as disgusting. Not just his body, but the mess he leaves behind in the kitchen. The culmination of this 'fat Edison is disgusting' comes when Edison finally confesses that his career is completely washed up and he has nowhere to go once he leaves his sister's. Fletcher has given her an ultimatum at this point - if Edison stays on past his scheduled flight, their marriage is over.
Hearing a cry from the bathroom, Pandora enters to find:
"The toilet was brimming. Floating on a skim of waste water, turds were scattered all over the floor - under the sink, beside the shower, against the wall of the tub, and dammed at the door, so two balls escaped before I closed it behind me." (p. 153, and sorry if anyone was eating)
Is a bowel movement like this even possible? Anyway - this is a man at a low ebb, hitting rock bottom in classic alcoholic-before-rehab style.
On the other hand, because Shriver is an intelligent woman, she can reflect on our culture's bizarre and obsessive reaction to weight and size, for instance:
"Ever since Edison gave me cause to, I've made a study of this: the hierarchy of apprehensions when laying eyes on another person. Once a form emerges from the distance that is clearly a human and not a lamppost, we now log 1) gender, 2) size. This order of recognition may be universal in my part of the world, though I do not believe 'size' has always been number two. Yet these days I am apt to register that a figure is slight or fat even before I pick up a nanosecond later that they are white, Hispanic, or black." (p. 139-40)
In the second part of the novel, Pandora stages an intervention with Edison and offers to rent an apartment and live with him while he loses weight, as long he doesn't cheat at all. This part of the novel , for me, read as if it had been written by someone who had never dieted, and actually didn't know that much about the process. The third part of the novel (which I won't give away) gives an indication of why this is so, but it's still very discordant to anyone who knows anything about weight loss or dieting. Edison is able to go from binging on anything available including wheatgerm to a 500 cal a day liquid diet for 6 months, and only cheats once. And without having to be hospitalized? And the doctor they see at the beginning has no objection to a 500cal diet? I'm still not sure how much to see these, and other, aspects of part 2 as a failure on Shriver's part, or whether they were deliberate.
Equally bizarre is the fact that Pandora sees weight as the only thing that needs to be 'fixed' about Edison, or maybe she believes it's the thing that will solve all his other problems - his lying, his lack of responsibility, his lack of motivation, his addictive behaviour. If anyone is crying out for therapy, it's Edison. But again, there are perceptive descriptions of the feelings of superiority of the successful dieter, plus the recognition that achieving weight loss can be a hollow victory.
Perhaps it's a case of actions speaking louder than words - the author's disgust with obesity not being able to counteract the other intelligent points in the novel. Which the author (through her narrator) admits to as well:
"I scoffed at Fletcher's association of physique with vice and virtue, but I bought into the same equivalence myself." (p. 137)
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
Friday, October 3, 2014
Ghosts, animal madness, and Italian food and Indian marriage
The New Zealand Spring is behaving in its normal way - gorgeous weather in early September has given way to standard blustery and cold October, so going to the library seemed a logical activity for today.
I had considered finding a book on salads to try and encourage me to eat more veges and less fruit (and sugar generally), but it not being salad weather I ended up getting Four seasons: A year of Italian food, by Manuela Darling-Gansser. It does have a lot of vege recipes, although being Italian reduces their chance of getting the Heart Society's healthy tick. Like a baked onion recipe for 6 calling for 175g of butter, and the (fried) eggplant slices wrapped around mozzarella cheese. Yum yum. Lots of recipes call for anchovies, which I'm prepared to try but may start with using my chili rule - halve the amount suggested. I'll challenge myself to cook at least 10 things from it before it goes back.
The wedding wallah is a novel set in modern India, and looks fun in a Jane Austen/Alexander McCall Smith kind of way. Romance and humour in an international setting.
Two London books - The Victorian city: everyday life in Dickens' London, by Judith Flanders was a bit of a no-brainer for me really. Social history - tick. Dickens/19th century - tick. The only question was actually did I want to read another book about London? What about Manchester, or Edinburgh, or New York? The author has written another book with a very intriguing title: The invention of murder.
Speaking of murder, Moon over Soho is a police procedural where the gimmick is that the murders are supernatural and the protagonist is an apprentice wizard. I bought another book in the series for David's birthday - Whispers underground. It was enjoyable although the style won out rather over the plot I thought. Anyway, Diana Gabaldon's describes the series as: 'What would happen if Harry Potter grew up and joined the Fuzz.'
Interestingly, Moon over Soho was shelved in Horror, which is not really where I would have put it, but I guess it fits with all the paranormal romance/hip dark horror of the Charlaine Harris and Kelly Armstrong school. In acknowledgement of Halloween at the end of the month, the Dark is a collection of contemporary ghost stories. I like ghost stories and they're a bit out of fashion these days, so fingers crossed. Searching for a good link, I see reviews are mixed. Hmm.
Lastly, Animal madness: How anxious dogs, compulsive parrots and elephants in recovery help us understand ourselves, by Laurel Braitman. Animal behaviour and welfare is another thing that interests me, so it came home too. Again checking reviews while link hunting, it's based on a very sad experience adopting an adult, quite disturbed, dog.
Saturday, September 6, 2014
Staycation reading
So, I've been on leave this week, at home, kicking back, so what have I been reading? Trashy chick-lit? Re-reading old faves like Georgette Heyer and Terry Pratchett? Some thrilling page-turner by Stephen King? Not quite...
I've just finished reading Laying down the sword: Why we can't ignore the Bible's violent verses, by Philip Jenkins. It's written partly as a response to the constant casting of Islam as a violent religion, and the Qu'ran as a violent text. As Jenkins points out, the Qu'ran contains nothing as atrocious as the genocide of the Canaanites by the Hebrews described in Deutoronomy and Joshua, a genocide that is a commandment from God.
From this, and other similarly revolting passages, Jenkins considers various issues, the key one being how Jews and Christians throughout history have interpreted, justified, or excused those passages. A common interpretation or reading has been symbolic - that Canaanites and other condemned groups represent the inner struggle against our own sinful natures (sic). A common justification has been probably along the lines of God's response to Job - roughly, it is not for humanity to question God. A common excuse is that things were generally far more barbaric in those days - this sort of warfare was not unusual. Jenkins lists many other examples - these passages have been troubling people for a very long time.
To respond to the examples I give, the first has probably the most going for it. The second is impossible, really. And the third is wrong - complete extermination of enemy groups including women, children, and livestock was not common practice.
The other issue Jenkins considers is fact that on a practical level, these verses have ceased to be a problem for the average believer because they have largely fallen out of use. The lectionary, the prescribed Bible readings for each Sunday throughout the year, pretty much ignores those books. Exodus is the most used, with the dramatic Moses narrative. Also, when we do read them, various common psychological defenses kick in to dampen down their true horror. And at least in the West, those verses have pretty much ceased to have any moral authority at all. They are not used to justify current wars or crusades.
Past wars and campaigns are a different matter of course. This book was painful to read, both because I had to really consider the horror of those genocidal passages in a way I hadn't before (see the para above), and also because I had to read about the ways they had been used throughout history, to modern times, when politically expedient. Particularly in colonial times, and their potential to be used again remains.
One of the biggest issues raised (for those who are religious) is what all this means for the idea of scriptural authority. One of the interesting points Jenkins makes is that it is often religious teachings that make these passages so horrific and pose us such problems. Christian examples are the parables of the Good Samaritan, and command to love your neighbour and turn the other cheek. Judaism and Islam have equivalent commands to mercy. Faced with how to reconcile these contradictory types of passages, most people recognise compassion as the higher call. For which thank God.
I was pleased to see Jenkins use my favourite passage in the New Testament, Matthew 15: 21-28, in which Jesus initially rejects the request of a Canaanite woman to heal her daughter, but changes his mind when she challenges him. I love the idea of Jesus being open to experience and learning from the people he meets, but I did shock some people once when I expounded this idea - the idea that Jesus could be wrong was clearly disturbing and they preferred the idea that Jesus was 'just testing her'. Jenkins agrees with my interpretation, and emphasises that she is described as a Canaanite, indicating a reconciliation between the two groups.
I highly recommend this book, and I hope to do a sermon on these ideas if I get a chance. It is written from a religious viewpoint, Christian in this instance, but if you aren't religious yourself, I still recommend it. Atheist writers such as Mark Twain and Richard Dawkins underline the violent side of religion, so this gives a very thoughtful perspective on how believers deal with these texts, and it has to be said that a lot of the ways people have done so are pretty feeble (another painful part for me to read). I also found the discussion about the influence of secular and non-Muslim terrorist tactics on modern Islamic terrorists, and the whole relationship between Islam, the Qu'ran, and violence very informative.
I've just finished reading Laying down the sword: Why we can't ignore the Bible's violent verses, by Philip Jenkins. It's written partly as a response to the constant casting of Islam as a violent religion, and the Qu'ran as a violent text. As Jenkins points out, the Qu'ran contains nothing as atrocious as the genocide of the Canaanites by the Hebrews described in Deutoronomy and Joshua, a genocide that is a commandment from God.
From this, and other similarly revolting passages, Jenkins considers various issues, the key one being how Jews and Christians throughout history have interpreted, justified, or excused those passages. A common interpretation or reading has been symbolic - that Canaanites and other condemned groups represent the inner struggle against our own sinful natures (sic). A common justification has been probably along the lines of God's response to Job - roughly, it is not for humanity to question God. A common excuse is that things were generally far more barbaric in those days - this sort of warfare was not unusual. Jenkins lists many other examples - these passages have been troubling people for a very long time.
To respond to the examples I give, the first has probably the most going for it. The second is impossible, really. And the third is wrong - complete extermination of enemy groups including women, children, and livestock was not common practice.
The other issue Jenkins considers is fact that on a practical level, these verses have ceased to be a problem for the average believer because they have largely fallen out of use. The lectionary, the prescribed Bible readings for each Sunday throughout the year, pretty much ignores those books. Exodus is the most used, with the dramatic Moses narrative. Also, when we do read them, various common psychological defenses kick in to dampen down their true horror. And at least in the West, those verses have pretty much ceased to have any moral authority at all. They are not used to justify current wars or crusades.
Past wars and campaigns are a different matter of course. This book was painful to read, both because I had to really consider the horror of those genocidal passages in a way I hadn't before (see the para above), and also because I had to read about the ways they had been used throughout history, to modern times, when politically expedient. Particularly in colonial times, and their potential to be used again remains.
One of the biggest issues raised (for those who are religious) is what all this means for the idea of scriptural authority. One of the interesting points Jenkins makes is that it is often religious teachings that make these passages so horrific and pose us such problems. Christian examples are the parables of the Good Samaritan, and command to love your neighbour and turn the other cheek. Judaism and Islam have equivalent commands to mercy. Faced with how to reconcile these contradictory types of passages, most people recognise compassion as the higher call. For which thank God.
I was pleased to see Jenkins use my favourite passage in the New Testament, Matthew 15: 21-28, in which Jesus initially rejects the request of a Canaanite woman to heal her daughter, but changes his mind when she challenges him. I love the idea of Jesus being open to experience and learning from the people he meets, but I did shock some people once when I expounded this idea - the idea that Jesus could be wrong was clearly disturbing and they preferred the idea that Jesus was 'just testing her'. Jenkins agrees with my interpretation, and emphasises that she is described as a Canaanite, indicating a reconciliation between the two groups.
I highly recommend this book, and I hope to do a sermon on these ideas if I get a chance. It is written from a religious viewpoint, Christian in this instance, but if you aren't religious yourself, I still recommend it. Atheist writers such as Mark Twain and Richard Dawkins underline the violent side of religion, so this gives a very thoughtful perspective on how believers deal with these texts, and it has to be said that a lot of the ways people have done so are pretty feeble (another painful part for me to read). I also found the discussion about the influence of secular and non-Muslim terrorist tactics on modern Islamic terrorists, and the whole relationship between Islam, the Qu'ran, and violence very informative.
Monday, September 1, 2014
That Book
How do I talk about Dirty Politics? I really wanted to read it, so much so that we downloaded the Kindle app and downloaded the electronic version. David and I read it concurrently on the iPad - I'd read it at night and first thing in the morning, he'd read it after I went to sleep and during the day.
This is probably going to be quite an emotional post, because I'm not sure I can be that objective. Part of that is because reading material written by Cameron Slater, in any context, is a serious blow to my faith in humanity. I believe in civility and the right of everyone to be treated with respect. I dislike foul language, racism, and misogyny. I dislike intolerant rants. I had read a post on Whale Oil before - can't remember why - but realised quickly that this was not a blog I wanted to follow. Leaving aside Hager's book and clinging to Voltaire's statement 'I disagree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it', I will concede that my feeling that anyone who associates with Slater anyway should be ashamed of themselves is unfair. But my gut reaction is that if his blog reflects his true feelings, he is a horrible human being. If it doesn't, then he is still a horrible human being, because the world does not need that kind of venom.
What about taking into consideration the content of the book? Well, let's see. Being a gun for hire, taking money from people intent on protecting their profits, and damn the fact that you make money off things that kill people, like tobacco and alcohol. The hounding of a young woman to tell details of her affair (with Len Brown), and leaving her to the wolves once she does. The attacking of people supposedly on their own side - i.e. National Party members not sufficiently rabid.
And of course, the collusion between senior cabinet ministers and Whale Oil, which was clearly used as the attack dog of the party. I find it amazing that Judith Collins has been cut loose by emails which only report on her actions and attitudes, rather than the emails written by her that show gross misconduct. Of course to do that would give Hager's book too much credibility. And John Key? I definitely think there is a case to answer. As leader he has to choose between looking complicit or incompetent. If he didn't know what was going on, why the hell didn't he?
I have to confess to an extremely uncharitable pleasure in watching those involved squirm. Which only proves the point that dirty politics taint everyone involved. I have some sympathy with those voters repulsed by the whole lot of them, and politics in general. Who wants to get involved?
Well I'm sorry, but you still have to. If you pull out, no matter how noble your motives, think about who you're leaving the field to. If the debate over That Book turns your stomach, concentrate on your local candidates. Or focus on the parties' policies. Choose a issue, or issues, close to your heart - climate change, child poverty, science funding, arts funding - read the different parties' policies on that issue and vote according to which policy you prefer. Stay engaged at some level.
I'm quite involved in this campaign, in fact on Thursday for 2 hours I will be phoning complete strangers and asking them if they are enrolled to vote. But this isn't so much a result of Dirty Politics, but a documentary film I saw a couple of months ago - Pray the Devil Back to Hell, the story of the Liberian women who stood up and said 'enough' to Charles Taylor, and the warlords he was fighting. At one point during stalled peace talks, they stormed the discussion hall and refused to let delegates out. Told by one security guard that they were disturbing the peace, one leader threatened to strip (apparently in West Africa it is a curse to see your mother naked). Once Taylor was ousted, and elections scheduled, they worked hard to educate people about the elections and the candidates. They were instrumental in the election of the first African female president, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.
Those women were so staunch. They made me proud to be a woman. They also made me decide that if they could risk death to stand up for what they wanted and believed in, I could do a bit of phoning, door knocking, and pamphlet delivering to stand up for what I believe in. And unlike the women of Liberia, I'm lucky enough to be a position to vote on issues that are more nuanced than 'Please stop killing and raping people'.
This is probably going to be quite an emotional post, because I'm not sure I can be that objective. Part of that is because reading material written by Cameron Slater, in any context, is a serious blow to my faith in humanity. I believe in civility and the right of everyone to be treated with respect. I dislike foul language, racism, and misogyny. I dislike intolerant rants. I had read a post on Whale Oil before - can't remember why - but realised quickly that this was not a blog I wanted to follow. Leaving aside Hager's book and clinging to Voltaire's statement 'I disagree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it', I will concede that my feeling that anyone who associates with Slater anyway should be ashamed of themselves is unfair. But my gut reaction is that if his blog reflects his true feelings, he is a horrible human being. If it doesn't, then he is still a horrible human being, because the world does not need that kind of venom.
What about taking into consideration the content of the book? Well, let's see. Being a gun for hire, taking money from people intent on protecting their profits, and damn the fact that you make money off things that kill people, like tobacco and alcohol. The hounding of a young woman to tell details of her affair (with Len Brown), and leaving her to the wolves once she does. The attacking of people supposedly on their own side - i.e. National Party members not sufficiently rabid.
And of course, the collusion between senior cabinet ministers and Whale Oil, which was clearly used as the attack dog of the party. I find it amazing that Judith Collins has been cut loose by emails which only report on her actions and attitudes, rather than the emails written by her that show gross misconduct. Of course to do that would give Hager's book too much credibility. And John Key? I definitely think there is a case to answer. As leader he has to choose between looking complicit or incompetent. If he didn't know what was going on, why the hell didn't he?
I have to confess to an extremely uncharitable pleasure in watching those involved squirm. Which only proves the point that dirty politics taint everyone involved. I have some sympathy with those voters repulsed by the whole lot of them, and politics in general. Who wants to get involved?
Well I'm sorry, but you still have to. If you pull out, no matter how noble your motives, think about who you're leaving the field to. If the debate over That Book turns your stomach, concentrate on your local candidates. Or focus on the parties' policies. Choose a issue, or issues, close to your heart - climate change, child poverty, science funding, arts funding - read the different parties' policies on that issue and vote according to which policy you prefer. Stay engaged at some level.
I'm quite involved in this campaign, in fact on Thursday for 2 hours I will be phoning complete strangers and asking them if they are enrolled to vote. But this isn't so much a result of Dirty Politics, but a documentary film I saw a couple of months ago - Pray the Devil Back to Hell, the story of the Liberian women who stood up and said 'enough' to Charles Taylor, and the warlords he was fighting. At one point during stalled peace talks, they stormed the discussion hall and refused to let delegates out. Told by one security guard that they were disturbing the peace, one leader threatened to strip (apparently in West Africa it is a curse to see your mother naked). Once Taylor was ousted, and elections scheduled, they worked hard to educate people about the elections and the candidates. They were instrumental in the election of the first African female president, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.
Those women were so staunch. They made me proud to be a woman. They also made me decide that if they could risk death to stand up for what they wanted and believed in, I could do a bit of phoning, door knocking, and pamphlet delivering to stand up for what I believe in. And unlike the women of Liberia, I'm lucky enough to be a position to vote on issues that are more nuanced than 'Please stop killing and raping people'.
Friday, August 29, 2014
Spring Staycation 2014
 |
| The river entrance at the end of Raukawa Rd. |
this coming week on annual leave.
I created a bit of a bucket list for the week. Two of the things on it were exercise and taking more photos, and already I've done some of both. Lovely day today and I woke early, so by just after 8.30 I got on my bike and then decided to head out to Ashhurst and see if I could
find where the bike path by the river starts on the Ashhurst road, seeing as it hasn't reached Palmie yet. Mission accomplished, with a break at the Wetlands Cafe in the Ashhurst Domain.
 |
| The track - Ashhurst is 3.2 km from here. |
 |
| View of the river and ranges. |
 |
| End of the track at the Ashhurst bridge. |
 |
| Wetlands Cafe, Ashhurst Domain. Feijoa frappe, National Geographics. |
Sunday, August 17, 2014
This weekend
Having stumbled across Cozy little book journal's subblog (is that a word?) My Shakespeare Year, I spent much of yesterday afternoon and evening reading it. Her aim was to read all Shakespeare's plays in a year (nine months actually). By the way, I love these crazy goals. Reading the whole Encyclopedia Britannica, obeying all Biblical commands for a year, cooking your way through Julia Child, going a year without buying anything new...the Extreme New Year's Resolution genre. The closest I ever came was the year I decided I was only going to read fiction by women. Non-fiction wasn't subject to the same restriction. And I believe I did, although I may have given myself a dispensation if Terry Pratchett published something new.
Sadly, Mary Beatnik ran out of steam midway through the year, but I still salute her. She read 22 of them, including several of the very obscure ones. And I enjoyed her blog, with it's Wordles and Lego and sock monkey Scenes from Shakespeare, and have put a hold on a book she reviewed: Shakespeare saved my life: 10 years in Solitary with the Bard, by Laura Bates.
I'm also reading Bossypants by Tina Fey, which is rather scattershot, but very funny (duh). We've also downloaded the Kindle app, so we can get Dirty Politics as an e-book. It's cheaper than the print, which most people think is the way it should be. Not me - I'm a librarian. I know that the argument that it costs so much less to produce is absolute horsefeathers. An academic (I'll call him Todd) recommended we buy a particular book last week, and when I checked it and compared the print price and the electronic price, I choked and ordered the print. The email exchange then went:
Me: Ordered a print copy. The electronic price was horrifying for a book published in 1998.
Todd: I know! The same price as the paperback!!
Me: Ha! That's for individuals. For a library, for multiple users, it was more than 4 times the print price! [360 USD, if you're interested.]
Todd: WHAT???!!!*(&(_($%^%$^!!!*
*Todd's actual response has been amplified for dramatic effect.
Sadly, Mary Beatnik ran out of steam midway through the year, but I still salute her. She read 22 of them, including several of the very obscure ones. And I enjoyed her blog, with it's Wordles and Lego and sock monkey Scenes from Shakespeare, and have put a hold on a book she reviewed: Shakespeare saved my life: 10 years in Solitary with the Bard, by Laura Bates.
I'm also reading Bossypants by Tina Fey, which is rather scattershot, but very funny (duh). We've also downloaded the Kindle app, so we can get Dirty Politics as an e-book. It's cheaper than the print, which most people think is the way it should be. Not me - I'm a librarian. I know that the argument that it costs so much less to produce is absolute horsefeathers. An academic (I'll call him Todd) recommended we buy a particular book last week, and when I checked it and compared the print price and the electronic price, I choked and ordered the print. The email exchange then went:
Me: Ordered a print copy. The electronic price was horrifying for a book published in 1998.
Todd: I know! The same price as the paperback!!
Me: Ha! That's for individuals. For a library, for multiple users, it was more than 4 times the print price! [360 USD, if you're interested.]
Todd: WHAT???!!!*(&(_($%^%$^!!!*
*Todd's actual response has been amplified for dramatic effect.
Thursday, August 14, 2014
A moment of happiness
Have you ever had the experience of seeing a book somewhere, and then looking for years for it without success? And then finding it? It's a moment of almost pure happiness and anticipation.
The first time this happened to me was a book about cult books (books that attracted a cult following like The hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy) that appeared on National Library's new books shelf and then seemingly vanished without a trace. I must have searched their catalogue for every combination of words meaning 'cult' and 'novel' possible. I might even have gone through all books with 'cult' in the record at one point.
I can't remember how I found it, or even the explanation of why the best efforts of a professional searcher had failed to locate it. But I did find it - by accident of course, years later. Happiness! I'm not sure the book itself quite lived up to years worth of curiosity, but still.
I've just had that experience again. At my high school library, there was a collected works of Shakespeare that had an insert of photos for each play. Even plays that get produced once in a blue moon, like Cymbelineand Pericles. Photos from British productions with actors like Alec Guinness, John Gielgud, Claire Bloom, Sir Laurence Olivier, and Vivien Leigh. The latter two starred in Shakespeare's celebrated gorefest Titus Andronicus. I read quite a few of Shakespeare's plays with the encouragement of those photos.
Of course, I left school without noting down the publisher, and ever since then I'll occasionally flick through old Collected Shakespeares in second hand shops on the off chance.
In other book news, I've finished reading Angle of repose, by Wallace Stegner, a great novel about the American West, marriage, success and many other things. I'd never heard of Stegner before reading Crossing to safety as a book club book. (Yes, of course I belong to a book club.) He writes wonderful descriptions of landscape (New England in Crossing to Safety) and environment, and both books contain fascinating portraits of marriages. Both, now I come to think of it, of women in love with their husbands, but ambitious for them in a way their husbands' are not.
Monday, July 21, 2014
P.G Wodehouse fan rave
I'm having a P.G. Wodehouse (is it pronounced Woodhouse or Woadhouse?) thing at the moment. This has been driven by:
- finding the whole set of Wodehouse Playhouse with the divine John Alderton and the stunning Pauline Collins on it. I love them. Love them. If you like the frocks on Downton Abbey and Miss Fisher Investigates but also like extreme silliness, I recommend them to you as well. If you can find them. see below for a sample. Failing that, read his novels.
- I read Sebastian Faulks' homage, Jeeves and the Wedding Bells, which struck just the right note I felt. Given Wodehouse is dead (sob! Ok he lasted til about 93, but still!), there's licence for him to do some tying up, which he does. And it's funny and respectful, and it made me get out 3 of the novels from the library
- Of them I have finished Joy in the morning, which is one of the best Jeeves and Wooster novels
- I have a feeling I may be hunting down the Fry and Laurie Jeeves and Wooster series next.
I am taking a break before I read more Wodehouse though - I'm reading The Man without a face, by Masha Gessen. It's a biography of Vladimir Putin, which is topical of course. But even 50 pages in, the depiction of the grimness and corruption of post-Soviet life will make Wodehouse's light-hearted froth as welcome as a warm fire on a wet day.
Friday, July 11, 2014
Quitting dieting
I got an enormous amount out of the city library today - 11 items, but this post is just about two of them.
They are Health at every size, by Linda Bacon, and The emotional eater's repair manual, by Julie Simon. These are related to the decision I made a few weeks ago that I was going to give up trying to lose weight. Which is, to be honest, a decision that is proving problematic. I have no idea if I've gained or lost weight, I have no idea if my balance of 'healthy' days to 'over-eating' days is worse or better than it was - because I'm no longer weighing myself or monitoring what I eat.
I feel anxious tho' - I feel like I'm on a staircase with no railing. The theory of quitting dieting as laid out in Health at every size is that once all foods are 'allowed', that eventually you start eating what your body needs and finds equilibrium. I'm not sure I trust that theory yet! Part of it is that when I made my decision, I happily read the fun, early bits of Health at every size about dieting being a crock, but skipped the bits about actually developing a healthy relationship with food (hey, it was due back at the library). Hence I've got it out again, along with Simon's book to try and engage with that a bit. Possibly I should actually consider buying my own copy...
I don't actually feel my relationship with food is all that unhealthy. I loathe all fad diets - moderation in all things is my food mantra. However I do have times when I just eat, well past the point of satisfaction, with little discrimination. Usually because I'm bored, or really want to do something else, and often, I've realised as a big Fuck off to my normal controlled, well-behaved self! So my eating is at least mildly disordered - along with, I imagine, almost every other woman in the developed world.
I also actually like my body. I think it looks nice. I dress it well. I don't flinch at shopping for togs. My layer of subcutaneous fat keeps me looking younger than I am. But for the last two years, I've been wanting to get to the weight of 69.5 kilos. This is the magic number at which my BMI would be under 25. At that number I would OFFICIALLY no longer be overweight. (I wonder if the Ministry of Health would have sent me flowers?) And over the last two years, I've upped the monitoring of my exercising and what I eat. To little effect - I'm pretty much still the same weight.
Why have I given up dieting? (Why not?) Two big reasons. I got mad again**. Mad at the culture that bangs on and on about weight, the culture that makes women* feel that losing weight is one of the most amazing thing they can achieve in their lives, the judgement about being overweight, the corresponding bitchiness to and jealousy of thin women - just all of it. The other reason is I started wondering what would happen if all the mental energy absorbed by weight watching and worrying was freed up for other things. Very possibly all that will happen, knowing me, is that I'll read more! But who knows? That's the thing with opening up space - you don't know what will fill it.
* and men, but I do feel the impact is particularly noxious for women given the other societal obsession with women and beauty.
** If you would like to feel mad too, with a nice mix of inspired, you could have a listen to Cat Pause (sorry Cat, don't know how to get an accent over the e).
They are Health at every size, by Linda Bacon, and The emotional eater's repair manual, by Julie Simon. These are related to the decision I made a few weeks ago that I was going to give up trying to lose weight. Which is, to be honest, a decision that is proving problematic. I have no idea if I've gained or lost weight, I have no idea if my balance of 'healthy' days to 'over-eating' days is worse or better than it was - because I'm no longer weighing myself or monitoring what I eat.
I feel anxious tho' - I feel like I'm on a staircase with no railing. The theory of quitting dieting as laid out in Health at every size is that once all foods are 'allowed', that eventually you start eating what your body needs and finds equilibrium. I'm not sure I trust that theory yet! Part of it is that when I made my decision, I happily read the fun, early bits of Health at every size about dieting being a crock, but skipped the bits about actually developing a healthy relationship with food (hey, it was due back at the library). Hence I've got it out again, along with Simon's book to try and engage with that a bit. Possibly I should actually consider buying my own copy...
I don't actually feel my relationship with food is all that unhealthy. I loathe all fad diets - moderation in all things is my food mantra. However I do have times when I just eat, well past the point of satisfaction, with little discrimination. Usually because I'm bored, or really want to do something else, and often, I've realised as a big Fuck off to my normal controlled, well-behaved self! So my eating is at least mildly disordered - along with, I imagine, almost every other woman in the developed world.
I also actually like my body. I think it looks nice. I dress it well. I don't flinch at shopping for togs. My layer of subcutaneous fat keeps me looking younger than I am. But for the last two years, I've been wanting to get to the weight of 69.5 kilos. This is the magic number at which my BMI would be under 25. At that number I would OFFICIALLY no longer be overweight. (I wonder if the Ministry of Health would have sent me flowers?) And over the last two years, I've upped the monitoring of my exercising and what I eat. To little effect - I'm pretty much still the same weight.
Why have I given up dieting? (Why not?) Two big reasons. I got mad again**. Mad at the culture that bangs on and on about weight, the culture that makes women* feel that losing weight is one of the most amazing thing they can achieve in their lives, the judgement about being overweight, the corresponding bitchiness to and jealousy of thin women - just all of it. The other reason is I started wondering what would happen if all the mental energy absorbed by weight watching and worrying was freed up for other things. Very possibly all that will happen, knowing me, is that I'll read more! But who knows? That's the thing with opening up space - you don't know what will fill it.
* and men, but I do feel the impact is particularly noxious for women given the other societal obsession with women and beauty.
** If you would like to feel mad too, with a nice mix of inspired, you could have a listen to Cat Pause (sorry Cat, don't know how to get an accent over the e).
Sunday, April 6, 2014
The dreaded list of books
There's something fascinating and repulsive about books with names like 693 books you must read to be considered even marginally cultured. There's the geekish thrill of realising that you are 18.6% of the way through the list, weighed against the resentment about being told what to read. And of course there's the danger of building enormous To Read lists, which if taken seriously can suck all the joy out of reading.
However, on Friday afternoon I went out with David while he visited one of his customers. While he imparted his wisdom I chatted with the customer's partner. My eye had been drawn to the four piles of library books beside the couch - one of which, intriguingly, had Religion for atheists, by Alain de Botton, and The case for God, by Karen Armstrong. I mentioned the piles and so started an enjoyable conversation about libraries and then books. Eventually she produced a 2014 'Book a day' calendar, and a copy of 501 must read books, and a pen and paper.
Drawn in, I listed about 10 books before David finished up the consultation. Instead of letting the list moulder, I've put holds on various of them, have already some out from the Palmie library, and will get the others from Massey tomorrow. One, annoyingly, is not held by any of the 13 libraries I have free access to - I may have to interloan it. Or buy it of course, but I've done a bit of that lately and after seeing what this year's insurance payments have done to our revolving credit, I'm feeling frugal.
The books are:
1. What we talk about when we talk about Anne Frank, Nathan Englander. Anne Frank is one of my heroes.
2. Lifeboat, Charlotte Rogan.
3. Home, Toni Morrison. I'm reading this at the moment - the first book by Toni Morrison I've read.
4. Defending Jacob, William Landay
5. The Red House, Mark Haddon.
6. No cheating, no dying: I had a good marriage - then I tried to make it better, Elizabeth Weil.
7. Murder in the first-class carriage, Kate Colquhoun. I was quite surprised that the city library didn't have this. Murder, Victoriana, trains? What more does it need, gardening tips?
8. The story of Charlotte's Web, Michael Sims.
9. Stalingrad, Antony Beevor. The 501 books...book actually specified his book about the fall of Berlin, but I've read a bit about Berlin in 1945 so decided that this would still count.
10. A distant mirror, Barbara Tuchman. This has been on my mental to read list since my late teens anyway.
11. The diary of Alice James.
12. The 7 storey mountain, Thomas Merton.
13. The Master and Margarita, Mikhail Bulgarov.
The last five look a bit dauntingly high-brow, but 11 and 13 will take about a week to arrive, so I'll have had a chance to knock some of 3, 2, 5 and 6 off my list by then.
I also got out from the library an issue of the Utne Reader, which I highly recommend to anyone interested in the United States and a good antidote to the high-gloss images we normally see, and an issue of the Literary Review. Clearly, I still haven't got the desire to add to my list out of my system!
However, on Friday afternoon I went out with David while he visited one of his customers. While he imparted his wisdom I chatted with the customer's partner. My eye had been drawn to the four piles of library books beside the couch - one of which, intriguingly, had Religion for atheists, by Alain de Botton, and The case for God, by Karen Armstrong. I mentioned the piles and so started an enjoyable conversation about libraries and then books. Eventually she produced a 2014 'Book a day' calendar, and a copy of 501 must read books, and a pen and paper.
Drawn in, I listed about 10 books before David finished up the consultation. Instead of letting the list moulder, I've put holds on various of them, have already some out from the Palmie library, and will get the others from Massey tomorrow. One, annoyingly, is not held by any of the 13 libraries I have free access to - I may have to interloan it. Or buy it of course, but I've done a bit of that lately and after seeing what this year's insurance payments have done to our revolving credit, I'm feeling frugal.
The books are:
1. What we talk about when we talk about Anne Frank, Nathan Englander. Anne Frank is one of my heroes.
2. Lifeboat, Charlotte Rogan.
3. Home, Toni Morrison. I'm reading this at the moment - the first book by Toni Morrison I've read.
4. Defending Jacob, William Landay
5. The Red House, Mark Haddon.
6. No cheating, no dying: I had a good marriage - then I tried to make it better, Elizabeth Weil.
7. Murder in the first-class carriage, Kate Colquhoun. I was quite surprised that the city library didn't have this. Murder, Victoriana, trains? What more does it need, gardening tips?
8. The story of Charlotte's Web, Michael Sims.
9. Stalingrad, Antony Beevor. The 501 books...book actually specified his book about the fall of Berlin, but I've read a bit about Berlin in 1945 so decided that this would still count.
10. A distant mirror, Barbara Tuchman. This has been on my mental to read list since my late teens anyway.
11. The diary of Alice James.
12. The 7 storey mountain, Thomas Merton.
13. The Master and Margarita, Mikhail Bulgarov.
The last five look a bit dauntingly high-brow, but 11 and 13 will take about a week to arrive, so I'll have had a chance to knock some of 3, 2, 5 and 6 off my list by then.
I also got out from the library an issue of the Utne Reader, which I highly recommend to anyone interested in the United States and a good antidote to the high-gloss images we normally see, and an issue of the Literary Review. Clearly, I still haven't got the desire to add to my list out of my system!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)