It seems to me, that if we had someone, say Spiderman, Batman, Wolverine…who started going through the same thing, they would have legitimate pain. Their need to always be on top of things, their need to stay strong is admirable, and when they crumble under the agony of emotional pain… well it is understood as the regular pain of being a misunderstood superhero.

But this girl?

She’s whiny.

Memo to self. Start rewatching Buffy!

Cloud of Witness - Dorothy L. Sayers

‘O, Who hath done this deed?’ – Othello
Lord Peter Wimsey stretched himself luxuriously between the sheets provided by the Hôtel Meurice.

After solving the mystery of Whose Body Lord Peter Wimsey holidays in the wilds of Corsica, but, tiring of the rustic and wanting a bit of luxury he heads to Paris where he gets the shocking news that his brother, the Duke of Denver, has been arrested for murder. And the victim was Denis Cathcart, his sister’s fiancée. Wimsey heads for home straight away, and together with Inspector Parker he begins to investigate what actually happened.

The title of this book

alludes to Hebrews 12:1: “we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses.” In solving the mystery, Lord Peter’s problem is the opposite of the usual case: rather than having too few clues to go on, there are too many, and Peter pursues several avenues that turn out to be false before hitting on what really happened.

For me, however, the plot takes second place. I enjoyed the plot and figuring out what had happened, but I loved the characters, and the way the story was told.

And the conversation between the characters is just perfect. Read what Sir Impey has to say about “the truth”, is this not the perfect example of a lawyer :)

“Damn it all, we want to get at the truth!”
“Do you?” said Sir Impey drily. “I don’t. I don’t care twopence about the truth. I want a case. It doesn’t matter to me who killed Cathcart, provided I can prove it wasn’t Denver. It’s really enough if I can throw reasonable doubt on its being Denver…”

While I merely enjoyed the first in this series, I really loved this book, although I felt that Lord Wimsey himself wasn’t quite such a complex character. The effects of the war on him came across as less pronounced, but, that is understandable. After all, if you’d read the first book then you would be well aware of his PTSD and of the origin of the relationship between himself and Bunter.

In many ways this reminded me of Georgette Heyer’s romances; both authors have a wonderful turn of phrase and can portray a certain character in just a few short sentences. We also get to see how important class and standing are. And of course, honour and a man’s word.

“I’m presumed innocent, aren’t I, till they prove me guilty? I call it a disgrace. Here’s a murder committed, and they aren’t taking the slightest trouble to find the real criminal. I give ‘em my word of honour, to say nothin’ of an oath, that I didn’t kill Cathcat – though, mind you, the swine deserved it – but they pay no attention. Meanwhile, the real man’s escapin’ at his confounded leisure. If only I were free, I’d make a fuss about it.”

I really should have ordered book 3 before I read this one shouldn’t I?

Other reviews: A book a day till I can stay ; A girl walks into a bookstore ;

Shaun Ellis

It was early morning. I had crept out of my bed, as I o ften did as a child, and gone out into the nearby barn where the farm dogs slept, to curl up with them – something to which my kindly grandparents turned a tolerant blind eye.

I first heard of Shaun Ellis when I watched the Natural Geographic documentary on him and his theories about how playing recordings of wolf packs can stop wolf attacks on farm animals. It worked in Poland, but Ellis has no science-biology background so his theories aren’t really accepted. Wolves have always been among my favourite animals, so I guess I was always going to be interested, like the way I’ll always watch those animal rescue shows, even when I know they’re bound to be all overly dramatic and manipulative.

I have to say that I really found this a fascinating read. I didn’t think I would, I thought it would be another average animal book, but it was more a look at SEllis himself. The story of childhood was such a great example of how children perceive the world around them, and how they can misunderstand what was going on. He says several times that he didn’t really realise that his mother was living with him; he associates his childhood with his grandparents, especially his grandfather who taught him so much about the countryside, and animals in general. His mother spent so much time working and earning money to suppose her family that her child thought she had abandoned him. He only really figured out what actually happened much later in life.

But as fascinating as that is, most of the book is about Ellis’ life with wolves and how he began to interpret their actions, as well as the way his theories were taken by the biologists who studied wolves.

If you are interested at all in wolves and their behaviour, and indeed in dogs then this is a book you should take a look at. For example Ellis believes that the current thinking about always taking the “alpha-dog” role doesn’t always work out as intended. He believes there are different ranks of wolves, and that these ranks also translate across to the dog world. He sees the alpha dog as being the thinking dog, not the one that comes forward to mete out discipline or launch an attack. That is the beta wolf’s job, he (usually this is a male wolf) is the muscle or the enforcer. There is also what Ellis calls the tester, the wolf that continually checks for weaknesses in pack members, always pushing others to their limits and discovering how they react. The nanny looks after the puppies when the alphas are off hunting. There are mid to low ranking animals who obey orders and do the grunt work. And then there is what is usually known as the omega animal. To Ellis this wolf is the peacemaker. When other pack-members are aggressive and tense this is the animal who puts himself in the middle of the argument and, by taking the brunt of the punishment, brings peace between the fighters.

And then there are his theories regarding food and behaviour, and how the alpha female will chose what animal to hunt based on what behaviour or temperament she is looking for in the pack.

But there is also a lot of controversy over Ellis out there. With plenty of people saying that there is no proof of him ever doing what he said he did.

I shall clap my hands together and bow to the corners of the world.

In an Ancient China, that never was, Yu Lu (not to be confused with the eminent author of The Classic of Tea)^[1] sets out on a quest to save the children of his village. Everyone between the ages of 8 and 13 has been struck down by a mysterious plague. He is sent to the Peking in order to bring back a wise man who can help them solve the mystery of this plague that can count. Soon Yu Lu (also known as Number Ten Ox due to his great strength) and the wise man Li Kao^[2] are racing across China in an attempt to locate the Root of Power that just may save the afflicted children.

I am fairly sure that I came across this book through a book-blogger’s recommendation, however, I cannot recall who it was that mentioned the book. My bad. If it was you, let me know and I’ll give you major props :)

At the moment I’m a bit undecided about my final opinion of this novel. On the one hand it was entertaining and humorous, plus it had a likeable narrator. But on the other hand it never really grabbed hold of me and *made* me read it. Plus, while Number Ten Ox was likeable and Master Li was entertaining, I never felt like they were wholly real characters. Of course that was part of the style of the telling so can I really criticise the book for that…

So I liked it, a lot, but am also ambivalent about it.

Lets concentrate on what I enjoyed. The style of writing was easy to read and easy to understand. The story itself was engaging, if never absorbing, and the use of fairy tales and folk tales was wonderful. But I do really like that sort of thing, so I was predisposed to enjoying that aspect of it.

Overall, it is one I would recommend, and while I don’t know if I’ll be rushing to buy the others in the series, I wouldn’t turn my nose up at them if I stumbled across them.

Other reviews: The Labyrinth library ; A book a week ; Bentangle.

I am going to bring a great deal of criticism on myself.

Although the 1930′s mini challenge has come to an end, when I spotted this book at work I thought it might fit, and wanted to read more books of that time. Of course then I read the details and discovered that it was actually written earlier than that… Oh well :)

The devil in the flesh created quite a bit of a scandal when it was published, semi-autobiographical, the author wrote it from the age of sixteen to eighteen, after his own affair with a married woman. And that, my dears, is the central theme to this book. In fact, it is the end all and the be all of everything in this book. Our 15/16 year old narrator’s affair with a married woman. And I found that incredibly off-putting.

Plus he is a selfish little shit.

Typical teenager I suppose, although this was written before that term was used, and in the note at the back the translator goes to great lengths in pointing out just how ahead of his time Radiguet was in this idea of the selfish teen, and indeed the modern idea of the self as being more important that society. As such, as an examination of the selfishness and downright ignorance of an individual this book really really works. Our narrator, whom the blurb calls Francois, but I don’t remember him being named in the book, is an ass. But a thoroughly believable and real character. Totally believable, someone you would want to avoid.

And the writing, though sparse, is perfect. But at the same time I just can’t rave about this book. It strikes me as one of those books that white literary men like, you know, it tells the tale of a young man, a boy really, and his view. The whole world is seen through his eyes, no one else matters, or even really figures as a character. Even his lover, Marthe isn’t a person. She is merely another part of the world that the narrator sees, uses and abuses. His viewpoint is so self-centred that he sets out to hurt his so-called love just to prove that she really loves him. That isn’t love, it is selfishness and obsession. It is the Twilight of love. And I just can’t stand that level of preciousness and drama. It makes me want to slap him. And when you add in the fact that he is grateful for World War I because it means that Marthe’s husband is away- I just couldn’t stand him.

And as for the whole issue of a 15 year old having a sexual relationship with an older woman, there is something very sordid and disturbing about it all.

Other reviews: Books quotes poetry ; The Guardian ; Book lit.

From Paris with love

Before I go any further I will say one thing: Do NOT watch this film.

And I mean that with all my heart, do not watch it! It is terrible. The first ten minutes are quasi-serious and maybe hint^[4] at an interesting film, and then John Travolta arrives and it turns into crazy meets stupid who then get together with ignorant and moronic.

Only worse than that sounds.

Honestly this film sucks so much that I had no problem ignoring large parts of it and folding clothes to put away in the hot-press, in fact, discussion of the folding of clothes is probably of more interest that the crap that does on in this film. It makes no sense. It is racist. It tries to pretend that Travolta is a convincing *young* action star by hiding his tummy through the judicious use of scarves. It has pointless action scenes that are boring and utterly lacking in flair or style. It bores. It fails to engage. It. is. crap.^[5]

My verdict, bleurgh!

Other reviews: Metacritic ; Heckler spray ; Geeks of doom ; Every Joe

A Civil Contract - Georgette Heyer

The library at Fontley Priory, like most of the principal apartments in the sprawling building, looked to the south-east, commanding a prospect of informal gardens and a plantation of poplars, which acted as a wind-break and screened from view the monotony of the fen beyond.

Adam Deveril has just left the army and the Peninsular War. Not through choice, but because his father recently died and he must assume his family responsibilities as the new Viscount Lynton. Added to his problems is the fact that his father was not the most reliable with money, and Adam finds himself hugely in debt. He may even be forced into selling the family home, as not only does he have mortgages and debts, but he will also have to support his mother and provide for his two sisters. But he is also a man of principle and honour; he does not even consider his advisor’s opinion that he find himself a wealthy bride. But he forced to reconsider when the wealthy business man Jonathan Chawleigh suggests he marries his daughter.

Jenny Chawleigh is well aware that Adam has no interest romantically in her, but she is determined to make his life as comfortable as she can. Plain and practical she is as different from Adam’s previous love interest, Julia Oversley, as it is possible to get. Julia in turn cannot understand why Adam can’t still ask for her.

I read this book in two or three sittings. And I have to say that while it isn’t exactly a typical Heyer romance I really enjoyed it. It is more serious than her more light-hearted work, but there it is still plenty of recognisable Heyer moments and characters.

Of course there is no wedding or even a proposal at the end of this book, because that happens at the start. Instead the book is a look at how these two perfect strangers, forced to spend their lives together work things out. And Heyer doesn’t hide the fact that Adam often wishes he could have been free to marry the beautiful Julia, next to her Jenny inspires only revulsion. This is something that Jenny is well aware of, she is well aware that she is plain, fat, and unappealing. Talk about your low self-esteem. It makes for painful reading on occasion, especially when the reader is well aware that Jenny is by far the better person than the selfish Julia could ever be.

As for out “romantic hero”, well, Adam certainly doesn’t win the reader over with his behaviour towards his wife. He is often well meaning in thought, but in action he is more often cruel and heartless towards her. She does everything possible to make his life as easy as possible, and while he acknowledges this, he still doesn’t seem to go out of his way to do anything similar for her. Indeed he often makes her feel unwanted and out of place.

It makes for a wonderful, if painful read.

Other reviews: Shelf love ; Madame Guillotine ; Constance reader

Course that is all beside the point, I only brought it up because there is one scene of all these journalists listening to the album and getting ready to write their articles, and as I watched I couldn’t help but say, “I have no idea how people write about music” I can’t even really discuss what it is I like about a song^[3] I mean, yes, you can investigate and analyse the lyrics, but music is much more than that, and I have absolutely no knowledge about the theory of music. I either like it, or I don’t.

But I still found this discussion on metafilter all about Eminem & Rihanna’s Love the way you lie.

I’m a casual fan of Eminem. I think some of his songs are very very smart, and he knows how to hook a listener.^[4] So maybe I’m predisposed to take “his side” in this argument over whether or not this song & video glamorise domestic violence. Because if you actually listen to what the Eminem character says then it is quite clear that he is aware he is an abuser, and that he won’t stop, no matter what he might say. And the Rihanna character, well she isn’t about to leave either. Sure she threatens it and fights and argues, but some part of her likes the passion. She likes it.

Please note, this does not mean that the song thinks this is right. It is simply a fact. And, as Eminem is the main character in this song and is telling the story from his point of view, maybe that’s just what the abuser wants to think.

Music is a work of art. And real art should make you think about things. A great book can force you to rethink issues, why can’t a song? Is it, as one of the metafilter commenters suggests, a case of snobbery. That this is a “popular” song, worse than that, it is hip-hop & rap and so the only people who listen to it are “the uneducated masses.” Is criticising it simply an example of privilege in action?

Who knows, in the mean time I’ve got some of Eminem’s older albums playing for the first time in a long long time.

Many animals display their feelings openly, publicly, for anyone to see.

The back of this book tells me that “award-winning scientist Marc Bekoff” has spent years studying social animal communication. And that amid the stories of animal joy, grief, and empathy the reader will find the “latest scientific research”. Unfortunately there are just too many anecdotes in this book, and not enough science.

I agree with much of Bekoff’s argument; that animals feel emotions. I just disagree with the manner in which this book writes about them. It simply feels like a collection of “he said she said”.

Which is disappointing.

However, it has provided me with a list of other books to check out. So it isn’t all negative.

Other reviews: Rabbit Reader ;