A chilling tale of alien invasion that managed to freak me out, predict the future, and critique British colonialism. The critique is not subtle: the A chilling tale of alien invasion that managed to freak me out, predict the future, and critique British colonialism. The critique is not subtle: the author directly compares the Martian invasion to the British crime of exterminating the Tasmanians. “Genocide” is not used because the word didn’t exist back then, but the actions of the Martians managed to predict the actions of certain regimes in H. G. Wells’s future.
There are many amazing scenes in this novel, ones that chilled me to the bone reading this great book many years later. H. G. Wells is excellent at writing about war refugees, pictures of destruction, atrocities, men driven mad by war, and clinical descriptions of Martian anatomy and vehicles. The descriptions of the Martians, and the destruction they wreak, are my favorite parts of the novel. They are scary and interesting.
I read this novel about a month after I watched Spielberg’s War of the Worlds. As always, the book was better, and the correct time period does a great service to the story. However, Spielberg managed to mimic the story beats and the general tone of the novel well, which means what I didn’t like about the ending of the movie is also in the ending of the book.
Overall, I had a good time reading The War of the Worlds, the original alien invasion novel, which still holds up today despite the nameless characters. I hope the Martians haunt my nightmares....more
Nora and Torvald are in what turns out to be a loveless marriage. He keeps calling her a doll and a bird, and as it turns out, her home is a birdcage.Nora and Torvald are in what turns out to be a loveless marriage. He keeps calling her a doll and a bird, and as it turns out, her home is a birdcage. The themes in this play are very strong, but I can see how Victorians may have misinterpreted the play and wanted a different ending than the perfect original ending.
This play does an excellent job at exposing Victorian mores of marriage and presenting its flaws. Nora is prevented by Victorian society from handling money, even though she is engaging in business for love and to help other people. Her role in society prevents her from being herself.
Nora is an excellent character. Henrik Ibsen makes her very compelling, even though he writes her dialogue like how any Victorian man would write a woman’s lines: emotional, hysterical, with many exclamation points, even in her climactic monologue. The intelligent Nora is contrasted with the more level-headed yet broken Mrs. Linde, and is so well-written that it feels Henrik Ibsen actually understands women.
A Doll’s House changed the character of Scandinavian society forever. It dealt a blow against the more obvious aspects of patriarchy, and is a very well-written work regardless of its message. Reading this play it feels surprising that Victorian marriage was ever allowed to be like that....more
The Mayflower Compact was the first legislative document connected with a New World body, signed among the Mayflower Pilgrims to give them authority oThe Mayflower Compact was the first legislative document connected with a New World body, signed among the Mayflower Pilgrims to give them authority over their American colony. I read it in my American history class, and it was much shorter than I expected. The important parts about gathering a governing body and making rights were only a sentence long. Most of the document had to do with how God gave the Pilgrims the right to settle America.
This important historical document is a direct ancestor to the American Constitution, but it is a disappointment. It specifies “northern Virginia” meaning the New York/New Jersey area, and the Pilgrims landed in an even more northernly area than that, in what is now Massachusetts. It also talk too much of religion and the grace of God for my modern ears. The Mayflower Compact disappointed me, but I can still admire its historical importance....more
This story is interesting, but even though it is classic, with its core concept working its way into pop culture, people either read it for school or This story is interesting, but even though it is classic, with its core concept working its way into pop culture, people either read it for school or not at all. And that’s a shame because the tension is wild, the events are gripping, and the ending is infamously maddening. The outdated turn of phrase “semi-barbaric” aside, this story is a killer....more
This wasn’t good. It was boring and it dragged. There were some fine moments, but they came between many layers of padding and parts I just didn’t likThis wasn’t good. It was boring and it dragged. There were some fine moments, but they came between many layers of padding and parts I just didn’t like. If this was a short story, I probably would have liked it better, but it still would have been kind of racist and kind of boring.
Parts of this novel, mainly character descriptions, are Orientalist and insulting. In a better novel, I would have forgiven things like calling Andaman Islanders hideous or misspellings of names and terms as products of the time, but in a mediocre mystery it just adds more annoyance. How this book treats South Asia is still better than how the first one treated Mormons.
I do enjoy the idea of Watson falling in love, but Miss Marston could have been written better and the execution of the romance made me cringe a lot. Another character moment that exists is Sherlock Holmes’s cocaine habit. It may be the reason this book is two stars instead of one. The cocaine habit is both hilarious and fitting, and it helps that I was anticipating it. I’ll probably only remember this book for the cocaine....more
I read this at school and it was fine. It was written well, but it didn’t have much to say or entertain besides “this man daydreams”. I had just gotteI read this at school and it was fine. It was written well, but it didn’t have much to say or entertain besides “this man daydreams”. I had just gotten out of that phase where I daydreamed, and I was upset that a full-grown adult had the habit I had just kicked. Sure, his circumstances are boring, but disassociation didn’t make an interesting plot for me. This story wasn’t bad per se, just disappointing to me....more
This mystery is excellent for the first half. As the first Sherlock Holmes novel, it sets out to introduce the reader to Sherlock Holmes and his methoThis mystery is excellent for the first half. As the first Sherlock Holmes novel, it sets out to introduce the reader to Sherlock Holmes and his method of deduction, and does it admirably. Dr. Watson proceeds from skeptic to admirer in due time, and so would the reader who was first introduced to Holmes. This first half is easily a five-star read. The only flaw in this first half is the negatively stereotypical description of one of Sherlock’s clients, a “Jew-pedlar,” which would foreshadow a negatively stereotypical description of another religion.
The second half of the story is a lesser story than the first, more of a three-star read. It purports to tell the motive of the murderer, and it turns into a melodrama that makes the American West oddly exotic. It was pretty entertaining, but much less so than the actual mystery part of it. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle should have stuck to Sherlock Holmes and England for his first effort. The worst part of this backstory, however, is the portrayal of Mormons.
The Mormons are portrayed in this story as a mad religious cult that has a secret police worse than the Spanish Inquisition and a group of bandits that kidnap women to be in polygamous harems. This sensationalism reeks of prejudice and lack of knowledge, and I can certainly understand if an LDS member reading this would throw the novel in the trash. This sort of sensationalist description in such a famous novel makes you wonder what new religions, just as new as the Mormons were in the 1880s, are being wrongly stereotyped in popular media today.
Nevertheless, this mystery is great. The second half only brings the story down a little bit, not enough to ruin my enjoyment at all. The stereotypical portrayal of Mormons is standard for the times, and there are way worse stereotypes of Judaism in other stories I read from that era. This was a very good debut for Sherlock Holmes, one that makes me want even better less prejudiced adventures for Sherlock Holmes....more
This was the first Sherlock Holmes story I read, and I read it for school. I didn’t understand it fully at the time, and even rereading it now, I stilThis was the first Sherlock Holmes story I read, and I read it for school. I didn’t understand it fully at the time, and even rereading it now, I still don’t quite understand it. However, I still love this Sherlock Holmes yarn. It is wacky, bizarre, and concerning in the best possible way, and it shows Sherlock Holmes’s deductive skills very well, not making his conclusions too obvious or too much of a leap. I can definitely see why Sir Arthur Conan Doyle thought this was one of his favorite Sherlock Holmes stories....more
An excellent baseball poem that captures the emotions of people watching a tense moment in a baseball game quite well. Even though this poem is from tAn excellent baseball poem that captures the emotions of people watching a tense moment in a baseball game quite well. Even though this poem is from the nineteenth century, anticipation and disappointment are very common in watching sports even now. However, when I read this as a young student, a lot of the old-fashioned customs and words were lost on me. Even now, baseball has changed so much that I suspect I would find some of this poem alien....more
This isn’t a “boy and his dog” story, but a “boy and his pig” story, but the pig still dies. It’s heartbreaking, but you know it was coming, because aThis isn’t a “boy and his dog” story, but a “boy and his pig” story, but the pig still dies. It’s heartbreaking, but you know it was coming, because a pig’s a farm animal, and farm animals inevitably have to be slaughtered for food. It’s one of the harsh truths of life.
This book is all about the harsh truths of life. The characters are poor hardworking farmers who are religious, can’t read, and hold traditional gender roles. They are very flawed, but they’re good people and they love each other. Even if the religious intolerance (but weirdly not the sexist views) can be hard to read at times. This book is actually pretty funny, in the sardonic dark humor way.
My teacher recommended me this book, and I’m glad she did. This story about a boy, his pig, and life in rural America was hard-hitting and I’m glad I read it. There are things in there that are very mature, and some life lessons that I as a city slicker needed to learn....more
Part two of Little Women started strong, perhaps even stronger than the first part. The March sisters have matured, and are leading grown-up lives witPart two of Little Women started strong, perhaps even stronger than the first part. The March sisters have matured, and are leading grown-up lives with grown-up questions. Meg is a mother, Jo deals with romance and selling out, Amy deals with not being as good with art as she would like, and Beth dies. I find these grown-up issues more interesting than the March sisters’ more childish ones in the first part.
Louisa May Alcott’s writing has also matured. I like a lot of her humor and turn of phrases better in this volume than the first. However, with Alcott’s literary aspirations comes didactic morals, author rants, and misplaced observations on human nature which come across as xenophobic and old-fashioned.
The romance overpowers this story, which would be okay if I liked the romance more. I admire Alcott’s refusal to do what the shippers want and marry Jo to Laurie, except her ultimate match is worse than Laurie. Bhaer is a dull German professor twice Jo’s age, who has a problematic student-teacher dynamic with her. As for Laurie, he only marries Amy as a replacement for Jo.
What I liked, such as the realistic portrayal of grief, Jo briefly selling out with her writing, and some of the morals, and what I disliked, such as the romance, Jo’s eventual non-writing fate, and the rest of the morals, balance out. I like this second part of Little Women about as much as the first part, but for different reasons. “Good Wives” is pretty good, but with some questionable creative decisions....more
The first part of Little Women is the most well-known part. I can certainly understand why, given how wonderful some of the characters are, and how itThe first part of Little Women is the most well-known part. I can certainly understand why, given how wonderful some of the characters are, and how it handles both simple everyday pleasures and weighty topics like illness. However, I didn’t like it that well, probably because I was expecting something much better.
The book begins with the March sisters, who should be between childhood and adulthood, but Victorian society sees them only as children, trying to bear poverty and hardship because their father is fighting in the Civil War. They are poor even though they have a servant. The parts of the first few chapters that don’t deal with Jo and Laurie are dull as dishwater. Some plot enters into the story way too late, most likely a problem with the serialized format. Some nineteenth century novels are negatively affected by the serialized format, and this is one of them.
I do like the characters, who in this portion of the novel achieve good character development. I like Laurie, Marmee, and three of the March Sisters. My favorite is undoubtedly the spirited Jo, the tomboy writer. Meg is vain, but her obsession with luxury is justified, and she is the most like the modern teenager. I even like Amy, who starts out as a selfish brat and turns into a devoted artistic soul.
However, I don’t like two characters in particular. The character of Hannah, the March family’s Irish servant, displays the classism and anti-Irish prejudices of the age. Her only purpose is to serve the March family, she speaks in eye dialect which doesn’t even sound Irish, and she could be completely removed from the story without any plot changes. I also don’t like Beth very much, because her character just begs sympathy. She is more like a two-dimensional book character than any of her siblings, and that character is a Victorian cliche “poor little thing” type.
I know why this is a classic. I admire this book for its handling of the characters, but it also has very many flaws. I read an abridged version when I was a kid, and perhaps I should have read the full version when I was closer to the ages of the main characters. When I was a little woman myself, I was more tolerant of sentimentality, slice-of-life, and quickly changing narrative moods. ...more
This poem is hilarious. The glorious nonsense is accentuated by the gibberish Old English-esque words. The poem is still understandable, not because wThis poem is hilarious. The glorious nonsense is accentuated by the gibberish Old English-esque words. The poem is still understandable, not because words like chortle and frabjous have migrated to the actual English language, but because the words Lewis Carroll invented evoke a specific mood via the sounds they used. And the story conveyed by this poem, about a guy who slays a monster, is a classic plot and always good. The real joy in this poem is the language, still....more
Loading...
