Book # 62 His Dark Materials Book 1: The Golden Compass

Progress Book 18.33 of 100-

The Golden Compass is the story of Lyra and her destiny to save her world from destruction. It’s a world similar to ours, but also really different. It reminded me of the television program Sliders and all the parallel universes that exist. Lyra is raised by the scholars of Oxford College. Once a year her Uncle Asriel visits, but otherwise the scholars are her family In this world each human has a spirit called a dameon that is connected to them always. For children their dameon can take any animal form. Once they hit puberty their dameon will stop changing and remain one character until they both die. A human cannot live without their dameon and a dameon cannot live without their human. In this world there are witches who also have dameon’s but they can be separated and live apart from their dameons. Lyra cannot be more than a few feet from her dameon nicknamed Pan without experiencing horrible pain. There is also a race of warrior bears that can speak, but do not have dameons.

Lyra is leading a happy childhood, running around Oxford with her best friend Roger, until everything changes. Her Uncle Asriel has begun researching a new thing called dust and had discovered another world through the Northern Lights. At the same time, orphaned children start disappearing around London. When Roger is taken, Lyra goes on a mission to safe him. Along the way we discover she is the young girl destined to save their world. With the help of the gyptians, Lorek the bear, a witch named Serafina, and a hot air balloon flier named Lee, Lyra sets out to the cold wilderness of the arctic to rescue Roger.

I really enjoyed reading this novel. They style of writing was really easy to follow and I like that there were witches and bears. It was a fun little fantasy world that Pullman created. Lyra also had a natural tendency to find herself in the company of nice people that want to help and end up being crucial in her quest.

I’ll give this part an A- 92%

The Prisoner of Heaven by Carlos Ruiz Zafón

It seems that Lucinda doesn't want me to get too far ahead of her on this project because for any gift giving occasion she gives me a book that isn't on our list. At least she chooses books that I want to read. For my birthday she gave me The Prisoner of Heaven by Carlos Ruiz Zafón. It is his third book in a series that includes The Shadow of the Wind and The Angel's Game. Somehow this book acts as a direct sequel to The Shadow of the Wind and as a prequel to The Angel's Game which itself was a prequel to The Shadow of the Wind. I've read both of those books and would very highly recommend The Shadow of the Wind to just about anyone... that book is easily in my top 50 and was one of the best books I had read for quite some time when I read it a couple of years ago.

That book is about a young guy, Daniel Sempere, that lives in Spain after World War II and discovers a book that he completely loves, when he tries to learn more about the author he unravels this mystery about the author who has pretty much disappeared along with his works. That book had everything. It had thrills, romance, comedy, some scary parts, a great mystery, and it was about how readers interact with books that they love.

The follow up, The Angel's Game, was about an author, David Martin , in Spain during the 1920's that is in love with a woman (who turns out to be Daniel's mother) and who makes a deal with a mysterious character (that most likely is the devil) so that he can become successful. That book wasn't quite as good, but still was very enjoyable and was a bit darker in tone than the first book.

Now The Prisoner of Heaven links both of these two previous stories together a bit more closely. It involves Daniel learning a story about David that casts doubt on whether or not anything in The Angel's Game is actually true and hints at a conspiracy against Daniel by an old enemy of David's.

I enjoyed the book, but unlike the other two books, this one doesn't really tell a complete story and is nowhere near as complex. It actually feels like half a book and leaves the reader hanging at the end. There isn't a cliffhanger or anything, but most of the plot threads that are begun are not closed at all. The only thing really accomplished is that the two previous books are more closely tied together to each other and the reader doesn't know what's true or not from the previous book. The Shadow of the Wind is an A+, The Angels Game is a B+, and The Prisoner of Heaven is a B-. Hopefully a fourth book will follow soon that will tie up some of the loose ends.

Fun Book- #2 One Thread Pulled The Dance With Mr. Darcy by Diana J. Oaks

Before starting this project, I had my own little project- to read as many Pride and Prejudice variations as I could.  These include novels that start the moment Jane Austen’s novel ended, ones that are told from Mr. Darcy’s view point, and in this case, ones that change a part of the original novel and go from there with a different story.  This was a Christmas present from Daniel and helped me get through Little Women faster so I could get started on this one. 

I really enjoyed this novel, and only got a little disappointed towards the end when I realized it was only a Part 1 and Part 2 isn’t out yet, so I’ll have to wait to finish the story.  In this novel, Lizzy doesn’t hear Mr. Darcy slight her at the assembly dance.  Instead they get to know each other and Mr. Darcy quickly falls in love with Lizzy.  While a few scenes were on the edge of cheesiness- I still loved reading the book. As I told Daniel, the variations that tend to show Mr. Darcy’s struggles with his feelings and pride are always the best.

I’ll give this book an A 95%

Also a side note about my grading.  I’m not saying that this novel is better than the classic Little Women, I’m just saying my enjoyment reading the book was better.  The grades I assign are biased and completely dependent on my enjoyment.    

 

Book #46 Little Women by Louisa May Alcott

Progress Book #18 of 100 

Most people know the story of Little Women- at least most girls do.  I’ve see a few movie versions and felt like reading the book would be a nice easy fast read to enjoy over the Christmas holiday- it was.  This was the first time I had read the book, but not the first novel by Alcott that I had read.  A few years ago I discovered a made-for-tv movie call The Inheritance.  It’s a fun movie that I really enjoyed.  Upon further research I found out it was based on a story written by Alcott  when she was much younger.  It was only recently discovered (I think after 2000) and published.  I found it at the library and read it a few years ago.  It was cute, but written when she was younger, so I expected to get a little more from Little Women.

The novel is pretty close to the movies, especially the most recent one with Winona Ryder as Jo March.  The only complaint I have about this book- is the high morals that are persistently mentioned every other sentence.  I get that they were good, but to make every lesson, every paragraph about being good and charitable got to be overkill by the end of the novel.

On a side note, I never really made this one of my favorite movies because I always felt bad for Laurie.  I was hoping to get more explanation from the book on the love story.  The sequence of events happens differently in the novel compared to the book.  Jo goes off to her writing career while Laurie is away at college, so she meets the Professor before the big proposal.  Also I was more sympathetic towards the novel Amy instead of the Kristen Dunst Amy, so I accepted the story and final outcome better in the novel that the movie.  Overall Little Women was a cute novel about sisters and family.

I’ll give this book a B+ 87%

Book # 67 Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray

Progress Book # 17 of 100

The full title of this book is Vanity Fair a Novel without a hero. With a title like that I wasn’t sure what to expect. I have seen at least two movie adaptations of the novel and remember not really liking the story. This isn’t even one of the books that I was waiting to read. In fact, I only picked this book to read since Daniel was reading Les Miserables, a really long book- so I thought I should read a long one too. I have to say, in the end, I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed the book. While there were a few parts that just wouldn’t end and went into way too much detail that was not really crucial to the plot, it was a good novel that I enjoyed reading.

The story centers around the lives of two main characters-Becky Sharp and Amelia Sedley. They are opposites in both personalities and social status. Becky aspires to be a part of the wealthy and will charm and entertain her place into society. She reminded me of Scarlett O’ Hara loved by all the men and able to talk her way through anything. Amelia is the prim and proper girl, born into wealth, who does everything in the way it should be done. Throughout the novel the reader likes them, hates them, and then understands them all at different points. Thackeray was really able to get the reader to change their attitude towards each character.  At first you don’t like Becky, then you see her point of view and like her, then you see how she takes advantage of others and doesn’t love her boy and you don’t like her.  It’s always back and forth.  Even Amelia got to be really annoying with her constant devotion towards her husband who society would call a “rake.” Thackeray was successful in drawing me into the story and keeping me entertained for over 700 pages.  The novel follows the two women from the moment they leave their boarding school together, through war with Napoleon and into their 30s. From it we get a glimpse of 19th century upper class English Society. 

There were a few times where Thackeray compared a type of person by actually mentioning a name and using them as an example.  I’m wondering if he was writing about real people of the time- like a People Magazine type of thing.  Maybe these people were a part of big scandals or would have been recognized by readers at the time he wrote this.  Even if they weren’t, I like to think that they were probably modeled after people of the “ton.”  It made it really fun to read.

I give this book an A- 92%

Should you read the book or see the movie? Part 1

While reading many of these books I often find myself comparing a novel to the eventual movie that was made from it. Sometimes the book is way better... sometimes both are worth checking out... sometimes neither. I figure I'll have the occasional blog entry where I decide which is better in my opinion.

The Stand by Stephen King (1978) vs. The Stand (the 1994 miniseries)
This comparison is easy. It is amazing how faithful the miniseries is to the plot of the novel... yet it nowhere near as enjoyable or scary. In fact I didn't even finish watching the miniseries yet... and I started a few months ago. The difference can be summed up by examining one specific memorable scene... At one point in the novel a prisoner is stuck in a prison cell while everyone else in the prison has died of the disease. In the novel we get all of the stuck prisoner's thoughts about slowly starving to death in his dark prison cell... he even remembers how as a child he accidentally left his pet rabbit to starve in a cage. He contemplates eating the dead prisoner in the cell next to him. The reader is left to imagine how dark and scary the prison has become without power and really feels the desperation of the prisoner. In the movie the prison is well lit... the prisoner doesn't look like he's missed any meals, we don't learn about the rabbits, we haven't heard all the other prisoners slowly dying, in fact he's in his cell for about thirty seconds before someone lets him out. Decision : Read the book

The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkein (1937) vs. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012 film)
This one is a bit of an incomplete comparison since the movie really only covers the first third of the book, but by the time the film series is complete it would probably take less time to read the book than watch the movies. The movie is really good... but not great. The movie adds more back story than is really necessary and literally takes one sentence from the novel about stone giants and turns it into a five minute action sequence. Decision : Read the book

The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco (1980) vs. The Name of the Rose (1986 film)
The novel really focuses on the smallest details about theological debates, library cataloging and differences in types of monk orders. These things don't translate into film very well. Sean Connery is well cast but the film falls far short. Decision: Read the book

Frankenstein by Mary Shelley (1818) vs. Frankenstein (1931 film) vs. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994 film)
I was surprised at how different the 1931 classic film is from the original novel. The characterization of the monster is completely changed between the two.  Still, the movie is a classic as is the novel. The 1994 film however is a different story. It is more faithful to the novel but adds unnecessary scenes and is just poorly directed. Plus Kenneth Branagh is way too old to play Frankenstein. The novel is mostly about psychological horror, but this film just tries to hard to add more frights. For example, at the end the monster kills Frankenstein's wife. In the novel, Frankenstein discovers his wife's body with a strangled neck. In the 1994 film, Frankenstein (and the audience) see the monster ripping out her heart and then throwing her body into a flame where she then burns up. Decision : Read the book AND see the 1931 film - both are very different from each other

The Wind in the Willows by Kenneth Grahame (1908) vs. The Wind in the Willows (1949 cartoon)
The book and the cartoon are pretty different... The book focuses a lot more on Mole and Rat, while the cartoon is dominated by Mr. Toad. Really the Toad sequences in the book are just comic relief for the more thoughtful parts featuring the other characters. Decision:  Read the book and see the movie.


Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier (1938) vs. Rebecca (1940 film)
It would be hard to go against anything directed by Alfred Hitchcock. The film is a faithful and entertaining adaptation. Decision: Either one... both are good.

Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy (1877) vs. Anna Karenina (2012 film)
The book had a good plot... but it is so long and has way too many discussions about farming and the social structure of 19th century Russia. Overall the novel is good, but it isn't for everyone. The newest film adaptation takes all of the good parts and leaves out the parts about agriculture. Decision: See the movie

Winnie-the-Pooh by A.A. Milne (1926) vs. The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh (1977 film)
The book is good but I couldn't help but think of the cartoon while watching it... especially all of the characters' voices. Decision: See the movie

The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis (1950) vs. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (2005 film)
It isn't that the movie is bad... it just isn't the same as reading the book. CGI overload. Decision; Read the book.

Les Misérables (1852)by Victor Hugo vs. Les Misérables (2012 musical film)
The novel has more detail then any movie could ever hope to hold. That being said, the musical does a good job of streamlining the story and keeping all of the emotion. The books is worth the effort if you have the time and the movie is one of the better musicals to come out for quite some time. Decision: Read the book and see the movie.

Book # 27 - The Chronicles of Narnia (Part 3 of 7) - The Horse and His Boy by C. S. Lewis

I've always loved The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, but I had never read the book that chronologically follows it in the series, The Horse and His Boy.  I didn't even know what it was about. Basically it is about a boy, Shasta, that lives in the country Calormen, which borders Archenland, which itself borders Narnia. One day he finds out that the mean fisherman that has raised him is not actually his father and that he plans to sell him into slavery. While planning his escape he meets the horse of the man who is about to buy him. The horse, Bree, is actually from Narnia and has been keeping it a secret that he can talk (because animals only talk in Narnia). The two plan an escape together and end up having an adventure in which they meet the Peter, Edmund, Lucy and Susan from the previous book, end up saving all of Narnia and Archenland, and at the end *spoiler - but totally foreshadowed very early on* Shasta finds out that he is actually the missing son of the King of Archenland.

Overall I enjoyed the book... but not quite as much as the first two. It isn't a classic in the same way as The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, but is interesting in that it shows what lies beyond Narnia's borders. I'm curious if I look up an analysis of this book if it would show that C.S. Lewis was trying to say something about the relationship between the Muslim world and Western society. The people of Calormen are described to have darker skin, live in a desert, hate the freedom that the people of Narnia have (who coincidentally all have white skin and live in a beautiful forest) and they don't have Aslan on their side...but instead worship a different god. Also, the narration of this book doesn't have quite the same playful tone as the previous two had, but seems a bit more serious and darker. Maybe this books is just setting up some theological issues for future books. Anyway, I'll give this one an A-.