OBPL Adult Summer Reading 2008

Book review: Choice of Evil by Andrew Vachss

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:58:00 +0000

My review

rating: 4 of 5 stars
When con-man and unlicensed private investigator Burke's girlfriend is killed at a gay-rights rally, Burke seeks vengeance, only to find out that the killers have already been dispatched by a serial killer who is murdering anti-gay activists. Employed by a gay-rights group who wants to help this vigilante get away, Burke is drawn into a very complex web of crime and murder that could possibly involve the only man he has ever feared, the ice-man assassin Wesley. Vachss turns the conventions of tough-guy noir on it's head with strong women and gay characters that defy the stereotypes of the genre. He is a master of the form, and this is one of the most memorable of the Burke stories.

View all my reviews.

Library Event Review: The Wag Band Concert

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 13:38:00 +0000

Reader number 51 wrote: What an enjoyable Saturday afternoon listening to the acoustic sounds of the Wag Band. I immensely enjoyed their mix of songs which included Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel as well as the Boss, "Bruce". I highly recommend seeing this band performed locally in our area as evident by the fact I signed up for their email listings of performances.
Rating: A.

Book review: Ghosts of the Garden State by Lynda Lee Lacken

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 13:32:00 +0000

Reader #110 wrote: This was a very interesting book. Grade: B.

Book Review: The Second Home Book by Marylouise Oates

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 13:28:00 +0000

Reader # 110 wrote: This had lots of helpful tips. Grade: A.

Book Review: The Science of Fear by Dan Gardner

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:33:00 +0000

Librarian Tim wrote:

The Science of Fear: Why We Fear the Things We Shouldn't--and Put Ourselves in Greater Danger by Daniel Gardner

My review

rating: 3 of 5 stars
As someone who suffers from anxiety and fear problems that can be pretty debilitating at times, it was looking forward to reading this book to see if there were any ideas that could help me recognize and alleviate my fears. Gardner focuses on the psychological aspects of fear, quoting at lengths from researchers and their experiments. While he does bury the reader at times in numbers and studies, he narrows his thesis down to humans having split personalities: the head, thoughtful and rational, and the gut, impulsive and reckless. In this sense, it is the flipside to Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink. In that book, the gut was responsible for good decisions, in this book the gut the gut takes all information at face value and ratchets up the fear. Gardner is successful with presenting his ideas, but the scope is somewhat narrow, as he focuses on the psychological and it would have been interesting if he could have included some neurological research about how gut and head co-exist and conflict within the brain.

View all my reviews.

Book review: True Believer by Nicholas Sparks

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 16:39:00 +0000

Reader #529 wrote: Good summer read - romance and supernatural mystery. Grade: B.

Book review: Scarlet Feather by Maeve Binchy

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 16:37:00 +0000

Reader #529 wrote: An okay read, a little predictable. Grade: B.

Book review: The Joys of Reading by Burton Rascoe

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 13:41:00 +0000

Reading old books about books is enlightening. One discovers that authors were considered great and lasting in 1937 are completely forgotten now, and one is perhaps reminded that many authors currently in favor may fade from view in another few decades. THE JOYS OF READING: LIFE'S GREATEST PLEASURE by Burton Rascoe (copyright 1937, and of course there is no ISBN) has hapters on "The Joys of Reading" and "How to Judge Literary Values," but it also has lists. The list of twenty-five favorite authors from 1900 to 1925 includes many that have withstood the
test of time: H. G. Wells, G. K. Chesterton, Rudyard Kipling, Henry James, and Jack London. But it also includes Joseph Hergesheimer, Gamaliel Bradford, May Sinclair, and W. J. Locke, and omits (for example) Arthur Conan Doyle. A list of the twenty-five favorite books lists two by Wells: THE OUTLINE OF HISTORY and MR. BRITLING SEES IT THROUGH. Admittedly, his classic science fiction novels were written before 1900, but this century still saw THE FIRST MEN IN THE MOON, THE FOOD OF THE GODS, and IN THE DAYS OF THE COMET. Grade: B-.

Book review: Spellbound by James Essinger

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:06:00 +0000

Reader #83 wrote: SPELLBOUND: THE SURPRISING ORIGINS AND ASTONISHING SECRETS OF ENGLISH SPELLING by James Essinger (ISBN-13 978-0-385-34084-7,
ISBN-10 0-385-34084-2) is more a history of the English language
and less an explanation about spelling. Essinger also makes some
mistakes, or rather, has some misunderstandings. He refers to "a
holy book, such as the Christian Bible, the Muslim Koran, or the
Jewish Talmud" (page xxviii). The Talmud is not really a holy
book; it is more a set of annotations to the Torah, which *is* a
holy book. He says of "kosher" that it "has come to mean in
modern English not just food that is prepared according to Jewish
but also, more broadly, anything that is correct, genuine, and
legitimate" (page 26). The only problem is that that is what it
means in Hebrew; one speaks of a "kosher scroll" in a mezuzah,
for example.

And in writing about languages which do not use the Roman
alphabet, Essinger says, "where there is an accepted romanization
system, the writing of a foreign nonalphabetic name is fairly
straighforward. But a strange-looking name in a foreign language
that is written using Roman letters will not have any
standardized way of being written" (page 52). If it is already
in Roman letters, why change it at all?

On page 77 he gives a sample of text written in the International
Phoentic Alphabet (IPA). I found myself thinking how interesting
it looked. Then on page 78 he says, "purely phonetic writing
looks absolutely horrendous, as the physical appearance of
Hamlet's speech in the IPA shows all too well." Well, that
wasn't my reaction at all!

Essinger talks about how the English language became basically a
completely different language by 1500 from what it was in 1400,
and the "Great Vowel Shift", which made what had been pronounced
"Saw it is team to say the shows on the sarm fate noo," to our
present "So it is time to see the shoes on the same feet now."
Again, though, a lot of this is only marginally related to
spelling. Grade: B.

Movie review: The Incredible Hulk

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:02:00 +0000

Reader #83 wrote: The Army created but cannot control Bruce Banner, the Hulk. Banner's anger has the power to turn him into a bouncing ten-foot monster as hard as rock. Edward Norton (who plays Banner) is one of the finest actors of his generation. This may not be the best film for him, but he is an asset to the film. THE INCREDIBLE HULK is a darker and grimmer superhero film with a more tragic hero than we have seen of late from the Marvel films.

[Following the main text there is a minor spoiler on some points that did
not work for me.]

Within weeks of each other we have seen at theaters two Marvel Comics
superhero films. While they also stand alone, they are really chapters in
a longer story whose arc has yet to be revealed. IRON MAN and THE
INCREDIBLE HULK are both good as superhero films go. The public seems to
prefer IRON MAN, which I reviewed previously and gave a high +1 on the -4
to +4 bell-curve scale. THE INCREDIBLE HULK gets the same rating, but of
the two I give the edge to THE INCREDIBLE HULK. Why do I prefer this
film? First, I am never likely to meet a playboy arms dealer like Tony
Stark. Do I doubt that such a person drives around war zones drinking
cocktails? Let us say I am unconvinced. Perhaps characters like this
exist in the real world, perhaps not. On the other hand I can well
believe that there are people living in the slums of Brazil coming to
terms with personal problems like anger. Do I believe that when they
become enraged they grow to twice their scale, turn the color of avocados,
and adopt a doors- optional policy for getting around? Perhaps they do in
their imaginations. For me that is not a big stretch. And do these
people become so possessed by their rage that they become supremely
violent? You bet they do. For me Bruce Banner (The Hulk) is a much more
believable main character than is Tony Stark. He is a man of very common
emotions, simply exaggerated. Needing the violent outlet while detesting
it is very real. Iron Man being kidnapped and forced to develop missiles
is not quite as real and certainly less primal.

The plot of THE INCREDIBLE HULK can be summed up in two or three
sentences. In the Ang Lee THE HULK the military used super- science to
turn Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) into an awesome fighting man. When he
gets mad enough to fight he becomes a ten- foot-tall monster. After the
early transformations he did some really bad things (only hinted at for
those who have not read the comic or seen THE HULK). Banner ran away and
is now hiding out in the crowded slums of Brazil trying to learn to manage
the world's deadliest rage. To keep busy he corresponds electronically
with an enigmatic friend whom he knows only by the code name Mr. Blue.
The army, personified by General Ross (William Hurt), has tracked him down
and sends a special commando, Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth), to capture him.
Well, we know how well that will work. And admittedly here and elsewhere
there are few real surprises in the film. Banner evades capture and works
his way back north to an East Coast school, Culver University. At this
school is his girlfriend Betty Ross (Liv Tyler) and the scientist Mr.
Blue (Tim Blake Nelson). (There are also quaint bicycle-stands labeled
"City of Toronto".) There he will find the ultimate confrontation--or at
least the biggest in the film.

Marvel films seem to be developing their own style that continues from
film to film. We have the cameo for Stan Lee. This time he is not at the
end of a garden hose as he was in the last X-Men movie, and he is not at
the end of a conversation as he was in IRON MAN. This time he is the
end. More specifically he is a very much a loose end in the plot. I
waited in vain for the plot to explain what happened to his character, but
if it was there I missed it. Also there is a certain inexorable
predictability in the plotting. There is segregation of each to his own
type. What does a man in a power-suit fight in the climactic battle? He
is matched against a man in a bigger and more mighty power- suit. What
does a hulk fight in the climactic scene? It has to be a bigger meaner
hulk. Another element of the Marvel style in recent films to have a final
scene at the end of the credits. It has some unexpected twist to reward
those audience members who stay through the credits. X-MEN 2 had such a
scene, as did IRON MAN. Here the scene is moved to the beginning rather
than the end of the credits. It looks like someone in production decided
that too many people were missing what could be a pivotal teaser scene.
Stan Lee is not the only in-joke casting. We get to see/hear Lou Ferrigno
as both the voice of the Hulk and as a minor character. There are cute
allusions to Godzilla movies, to King Kong, and even to Tiananmen Square.

Edward Norton acts with a low-key style. I am not sure he conveys the
angst as much as was needed, but his persona is a nice counterpoint to the
thrashing monster he becomes. The most memorable acting in the film is
from Tim Blake Nelson, whose boyish glee for studying the Hulk makes him
one of the most likeable mad scientists in recent film history. Nelson,
some of the realistic settings, the tragedy of the main character, and the
dark style make this a better than average Marvel superhero film. For my
money it is also better than the very recent IRON MAN. Grade B

Film Credits: http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0800080/

Minor spoiler warning:

I did have a few problems with the script. At one point after a blackout
spell Banner asks a stranger, "where am I?" The stranger responds, "In
Guatemala." If a stranger asked you where he was, would you say "the
United States"? My wife wanted to know how Banner had managed to cross
the Panama Canal without anyone noticing how really big and green he was.
Perhaps he had switched back to Banner. After all, the rules of this
particular mutation are unclear. There is a nice tender King-Kong-Anne-
Darrow sort of scene in which he is Hulked, but does not seem to have been
angry for hours. Why is he still engorged?

If someone about 160 pounds actually threw a helicopter, it is the human
who would do most of the flying according to the laws of physics. You
learn to ignore the fact that he would have to be a lot more massive as
the Hulk than he is as Banner. It is therefore probably bad form to show
an examination table that held Banner perfectly well moments before but
crushes under the massive weight of Hulk. It rubs our noses in the fact
that Banner's mutation circumvents conservation of mass.

Movie review: Untraceable

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:50:00 +0000

Reader #5 wrote: This "R" rated, action-packed, suspense/thriller movie stars Diane Lane as the lead FBI agent assigned to a track down a killer who airs his murders on his web site. This movie is not for the weak at heart but milder than the "Saw" movie series which made it much easier for me to watch. Not too many movies made in the last few years have kept my interest but this one I would say is the best I can remember watching since the movie "Seven" with Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman (watch that one too). The box cover compares "Untraceable" to "Silence of the Lambs" and I would have to agree. "Untraceable" is creepy and you may want to watch it with someone and keep some lights on! I would definitely say that it is worth renting and watching not once, but a few times. It was very well made and with technology what it is these days, it is extremely believable which adds to the high entertainment quality of this film. Why are you still reading this, go out and rent it today!

Book review: Apocalipstick by Sue Margolis

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:33:00 +0000

Reader#536 wrote: Even though it took a while to finish, I really enjoyed it. It's based in the UK. I can relate to it. I love the love twists...The main character is Rebecca. She works for "Vanguard" which is a small newspaper (based in UK). She finally gets her big break when a girl working for a cosmetic company reveals the dangers of a popular cream. On top of that, her enemy from school has re-emerged and is about to marry her dad. At the end it all works out...with a good mix of sweet suspense! Grade A.

Book review: The Kite Runner by Khalid Hosseini

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:27:00 +0000

Reader# 83 wrote: Khalid Hosseini was born in Afghanistan and today lives in California as a physician and now a novelist. In fact, THE KITE RUNNER (ISBN-13 978-1-594-48000-3, ISBN-10 1-594-48000-1) is his first novel, it was adapted into a popular film, and he has now written a second novel, A THOUSAND SPLENDID SUNS which itself is in the early stages of production as a film.

THE KITE RUNNER begins as the story of the relationship of two boys. Amir is a boy of Kabul whose father, a wealthy merchant, owns a nice mansion with servants. Hassan is the son of Amir's servant. The two boys are inseparable. They seem apart only when Amir goes to school and Hassan returns home to for the household chores of a servant.

For sport Amir flies kites competitively and is becoming very good at the
sport, attracting local attention. His servant Hassan is his kite runner.
That means Hassan chases after the rival kites that Amir has decapitated.
Hassan dotes on Amir, which bother Amir a little. Amir also tells stories
that enchant Hassan. Together they face the local bullies who terrify them
both.

The day of a great kite competition comes and Amir has a great victory.
Hassan runs to get the loser's lost kite. Eventually Amir runs after
Hassan and sees him being confronted by the bullies. Amir watches on as
his friend is raped. He wants to defend his friend and knows he should,
but is terrorized and instead sulks off.

After that nothing is the same between the boys. Amir comes to hate
himself for his cowardice and disloyalty. Hassan does not admit to knowing
of his friend's betrayal of him, but he almost certainly does. Amir turns
his shame into rejection of Hassan.

This is all just the set-up of the story. We will follow Amir through
tumultuous years of history for Afghanistan and his father's and his own
perilous escape to the United States. His shame at the one action will
bring him back to a Kabul under the Taliban in an effort to redeem his
life and to recover his self- respect.

There are some minor faults to the book. The character of Hassan is just a
little too perfect and it adds a melodramatic feel to the book. Amir did
so much worse than betray a friend, he betrayed the wonderful, loyal,
faithful Hassan. He denied, if you will, a Christ-figure. This weakens the
story. If Hassan had not been so perfect would the betrayal be any more
forgivable? Do we need to be just only to the faultless?

Much of the thrust of the book is the contrast of life in Kabul before and
after the coming of the Soviet invasion and later of Taliban. The old
Kabul under the monarchy is a place of contentment (at least for the
wealthy Amir and his family) whose similarities to the West are more
apparent than the differences. Kabul under the heel of the Taliban is a
place of constant fear, of public executions, of corruption, and of
systematized child rape under the guise of religious orthodoxy. It is the
place that Amir must go to redeem himself and his self-respect.

As bad as the Taliban is for the men in THE KITE RUNNER, it is far worse
for women as we see in the haunting A THOUSAND SPLENDID SUNS. These are
purported to be the first novels written in English by an Afghan. If so
they are an enthralling start.

I read in sequence THREE CUPS OF TEA (by Greg Mortenson and David Oliver
Relin), THE KITE-RUNNER, and A THOUSAND SPLENDID SUNS. The three make a
very good combination. The Mortenson book is non-fiction and tells of his
efforts building schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan. At least to
Mortenson this work is a powerful weapon against the Taliban and other
Islamic extremists. His schools give education to the young and with
education they can resist the extremists. His book also describes what a
virulent evil the Taliban has been for Afghanistan. It also sees that part
of the world through the eyes of an American. This has a downside and an
upside. The downside is that Mortenson cannot understand the area as
thoroughly as someone who was born and raised there. The upside is that he
knows how an American would see that part of the world. To Mortenson the
area is very alien to his and our expectations. On the other hand in
Hosseini's writing Kabul sounds not too unlike the town I grew up in. Each
book in the succession expresses more rage and frustration at what the
Taliban did to Afghanistan. Together they make a strong case for anything
anyone can do to defeat this terrible movement. Grade A.

Movie review: Refusnik

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:27:00 +0000

Reader #83 wrote: This is the saga of the Refuseniks, Jews in the Soviet Union who requested to leave knowing they would be treated as enemies of the state and given harsh and at times barbaric treatment. A new documentary written and directed by Laura Bialis tells the story of the nearly thirty years of courage in the face of repression in the Soviet Union. This is polished and evocative filmmaking.

It is spring. This is time of Easter and Passover and the time of year
that it is traditional for television to run the film THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. This year there is another and somewhat parallel story being released, though this one is a documentary of recent history. The film is REFUSENIK, and it tells the story of Jews again held against their will in a country that will not let them go. The country was Russia in the last decades of the Soviet Union. Russia's tradition was to suppress and abuse the Jews with discrimination building to pogroms back in Tsarist times. The coming of communism to Russia brought only a short respite before the new rulers of the country continued with their repressive policies. Under Stalin the repression began again and it specifically targeted the Refuseniks--Jews who had requested to leave the country--for almost three decades. With American and the newly founded Israel ready and anxious to provide a haven for these Jews they needed only the permission of the government to exit. As a policy permission was never granted. Being refused the people came to be called Refuseniks, but their punishment went beyond merely being refused. Jews who requested to leave were treated with barbaric hatred. They typically lost their employment and frequently were imprisoned and even tortured. Many were exiled to the frozen Gulag. Others were treated as mentally ill for wanting to leave the "ideal workers' state" and were committed to mental institutions. With the fall of the Soviet Union and with pressure from the West and worldwide eventually the Jews of the Russia were allowed to leave. 1,500,000 of them did leave, most settling in Israel and the United States.

While in the 1970s and 1980s the Refusenik movement got some public
attention, little has been said about it since. So as not to forget what happened Laura Bialis writes and directs this documentary about the story of the Refusenik movement. The style is mostly eyewitness accounts by participants, many of whom were activists in and out of the Soviet Union in the events of the movement. Their stories are illustrated with archival and newsreel footage. Best known among the activists is Natan Sharansky, who had requested and been denied an exit visa. In 1977 Sharansky was arrested and tried for invented charges of treason and spying for the United States. These charges have since been shown to be false. Sharansky was incarcerated in Leftorovo Prison were he remained under barbaric conditions for 16 months. He was then sent to a prison camp in the Siberian Gulag where he remained for nine more years as his wife desperately worked for his release. By 1986 the USSR was foundering and was anxious for Glasnost. Then President Ronald Reagan made clear that the treatment of Soviet Jews would be a strong consideration in the negotiations. Sharansky was released in 1986. His story and the stories of Kirov Ballet star Valery Panov and of physicist Andrei Sakharov, all Refuseniks, are part of the story.

Where the documentary falls down a bit is in not discussing the motives of the Soviets in repressing the Refuseniks. Michael Gorbachov is quoted as saying that these people were considered to be people of value to the Soviet Union, but they could make little contribution as laborers in the Gulag. It is more likely that he did not want to set a precedent of letting one group go when so many other groups might have wanted the same privilege. And eventually they as well as the Refuseniks got it.

REFUSENIK bears witness to the struggle of the Refuseniks and of the
changes that their courage and that of the international community brought about. This film makes a good pairing with THE SINGING REVOLUTION (2007), which was released earlier this year and tell the story of Estonia's campaign to free themselves from the yoke of the Soviet's. Both have messages that we need just now. REFUSENIK scheduled to be released in New York City May 9 and in Los Angeles on May 23. Grade A.

Book Review: Watchmen by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:14:00 +0000

Reader #62 wrote: Watchmen is far from your average "superhero" comic. The year is 1985, and US relations with Russia are, predictably, cold. The action starts with the investigation of the murder of a "costumed crimefighter" called The Comedian (no relation to The Joker). In fact, all of the main characters in Watchmen are costumed crimefighters, mostly retired and estranged, though, after the government outlawed "vigilante justice". These "superheroes" are all too human, with broken marriages, histories of violence, and lots of old grudges against one another. Even Doc Manhattan, who as the result of a lab accident is transformed into a physics-wielding demigod, has the tragic flaw of losing his capacity to understand emotions. Despite their broken and long-past-prime condition, however, this reluctant team must solve the puzzle of who would want them out of the way. Time is running out for America, too, because Russian tanks are moving into Afghanistan, and Russian fingers are tickling the red button...

Watchmen is dark, creepy, and violent, as one would expect from the creator of V for Vendetta . It's also thoroughly engrossing; I read the entire novel, a rather hefty thing, in one day. Besides the excellent character development, I particularly enjoyed the fact that the line between right and wrong was rather blurry, something that's not often done in the superhero genre. By fighting crime without the consent of the government, the "good guys" are inherently lawbreakers (not to mention their acts of arson, sexual assault, and murder), while the "bad guy" has, arguably, the well-being of the entire world at heart. Grade: A.

Book review: Dark Prince by Christine Feehan

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:37:00 +0000

Reader #8 wrote: The first in this series, it was hard to put down. It was a love story about about a vampire and just great! Grade: A.

Book review: Lost Duke of Wyndam by Julia Quinn

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:32:00 +0000

Reader #8 wrote: I love Julia Quinn's books. They make the past come alive for me and the stories hold me and I wish they want on and on. Grade: B.

Book review: What She Wants Lynsay Sands

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:23:00 +0000

Reader # 8 wrote: Going back to 1199 and finding living so different, but life so much the same. Willa has hidden her whole life and those around her try to keep her alive. But in the end, the killer is not who you think it is. Grade: B.

Book review: Safe House by Andrew Vachss

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:50:00 +0000

Librarian Tim wrote: When ex-con, con-man and unlicensed private investigator Burke is contacted by a former jailhouse buddy about his need to disappear, he gets pulled into a secret underground of women who are protecting battered and abused women and children from harm. This is one of the wildest Burke stories, involving neo-nazis, undercover government agents and the witness protection program. When Burke gets in deep, he calls in his "family": reclusive tech genius The Mole, con-man and former strong-arm bandit The Prof and weapons expert Clarance. Together they must save Burke's friend, outwit the feds and the neo-nazis and thwart a terrorist attack. This was a very interesting book, not your typical noir crime novel. Vachss pushes a the envelope a lot, particularly in his descriptions of "warrior women" who run shelters and protect others from harm. Grade: B.

Book review: Knight's Honour by Roberta Gellis

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:41:00 +0000

Reader #8 wrote: I love books about the dark ages and how different life was then from now. Elizabeth is a strong woman in a world where women have no power. Roger has great power and is quick in all he does. Both are proud and driven to each other. Grade A.

Book review:The Eternal Highlander by Hannah Howell & Lynsay Sands

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:36:00 +0000

Reader # 8 wrote: Great stories set in 1474 about a family trying to blend in to different styles. I'd like to read more to see how they live on, I love vampire stories. Grade: B.

Book review:Single White Vampire by Lynsay Sands

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:31:00 +0000

Reader #8 wrote: A 600 year old man gets the rug pulled out from under him. I laughed out loud through most of the book. This is the second in the series about this family of vampires and I just love it. Grade: B.

Book Review: The Forger's Spell: A True Story of Vermeer, Nazis, and the Greatest Art Hoax of the Twentieth Century by Edward Dolnick

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:39:00 +0000

Reader #82 wrote: THE FORGER'S SPELL: A TRUE STORY OF VERMEER, NAZIS, AND THE GREATEST ART HOAX OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY by Edward Dolnick
(ISBN-13 978-0-06-082541-6, ISBN-10 0-06-082541-3) is primarily about Han van Meegeren, a painter who forged several Vermeers which fooled even the leading art critics of the day. Dolnick goes into a lot of technical detail of how van Meegeren did this, and even more on the psychology of convincing people that forgeries are real. He also explains how critics in the 1930s were fooled but we can tell immediately these are fakes. One reason, he says, is that van Meegeren's women have features that were considered beautiful in the 1930s when he painted them, but not now. So while his audience saw beauty, we do not. He actually makes a science fiction connection, saying, "science fiction always tells as much about the era when it was created as about the era it tries to imagine. In the future as it was
portrayed in the fifties, for instance, husbands commuted to work in personal rockets and wives stayed home and cooked up meals in a pill. For a decade or two, readers found it all quite plausible." (page 221)

One might compare this to films. We can look at a film made about Troy for example, and be able to tell whether it was made in the 1930s, the 1950s, the 1980s, or the 2000s. Even if someone tries to make a film now that looks old, there are often things that give it away. Some are technical, but others are harder to define. The Timothy Hines version of WAR OF THE WORLDS was made to look Edwardian--though obviously no one was making color sound films then--but it is clearly a product of the 2000s rather than, say, the 1950s.

I have two quibbles with THE FORGER'S SPELL. One is that the book is told in a strange order. For the first hundred pages Dolnick talks about Nazi art looting and thefts, then he jumps back to the creation and selling of forged Vermeers in the 1920s and 1930s. As each major character is introduced Dolnick has to jump back in time again to give the background of that character, which gives the narrative a "stop-and-start" quality. Then he finishes with the discovery of the forgeries, after the war. So Dolnick tells the middle chapter of the story, then the beginning, and then the end.

It is not until the epilogue that Dolnick addresses why a painting thought to be by painter X is worth millions, but whenit turns out to be by painter Y, it is worth $1.98. (Actually, good forgeries are worth more than that, but as curiosities rather than as art.) We have this idea that art should be valued as art, but it seems that much of it is valued as relic. Van Meegeren asked, "Yesterday this picture was worth millions of guilders, and experts and art lovers would come from all over the world and pay money to see it. Today, it is worth nothing, and nobody would cross the street to see it from free. But the picture has not changed. What has?"

Dolnick's answer is three-fold. First, "the world was full of people who thought of themselves as art lovers but were in fact merely snobs." Second, he quotes Alfred Lessing, who said that Vermeer was great because "he painted certain pictures in a certain manner at a certain time in the history and development of art." And lastly, Dolnick says, "When we praise a work of art, we have in mind not only the finished product but the way that product was made. ... [The] forger has the unfair advantage of working from someone else's model." (page 291) Grade: B.

Book Review: Agatha Raisin and the Quiche of Death by M.C. Beaton

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:34:00 +0000

Reader #82 wrote: I really like the BBC radio adaptation (I cannot find the name of who did it) of AGATHA RAISIN AND THE QUICHE OF DEATH by M.C. Beaton (ISBN-13 978-0-312-93916-8, ISBN-10 0-312-93916-7), so I decided to read the book (and possibly the whole series of Agatha Raisin books). While the book was okay--and had I read it cold, I might even have said good--I discovered that the best parts of the radio adaptation were not in the book at all. The basic plot is there: London public relations executive Agatha Raisin retires to a cottage in the Cotswolds, where she tries to gain acceptance by entering the local quiche-baking content. Her quiche, however, is actually store-bought, and what is more, has poisoned the judge! But the adaptation has an acerbic wit that is missing from the book, where the characters are flatter and less appealing, even the ones who are supposed to like. The book is very popular--there are seventeen sequels--but not up to my expectations. Grade: C

Movie review: Short reviews part 2

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:28:00 +0000

Reader #83 wrote: THE NAKED SPUR Made the same year as Shane, but THE NAKED SPUR outshone it in the box-office. Aside from the acting power the budget was not very high. It does have some nice high country nature photography, filmed in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado. Under Anthony Mann's direction it was one of the first films in which Jimmy Stewart got beyond his aw-shucks, country boy image and was shown as a driven and disturbed man. In this film he is full of rage and suspicion. The plot is sort of a portable TREASURE OF THE SIERRA MADRE crossed with 3:10 TO YUMA. Stewart is a bounty hunter looking for a former acquaintance with a big reward on his head. Along the way he picks up a gold-hungry old prospector and a disreputable ex-soldier (Ralph Meeker). They get their wanted man (Robert Ryan) and the young woman who is traveling with him (Janet Leigh wanted a role where she had to do more than just pretty up a set). The three bounty hunters have to get their prisoner back to civilization to claim the reward. Ryan is clever enough to play his three captors off against each other. Three men want the reward split as few ways as possible. One man wants to kill his three captors. One woman is deciding what she wants. This is a good story and the scenery is a plus. Grade A.

THE BARON OF ARIZONA This is a 1950 film by Samuel Fuller. Fuller worked outside the studio system and was what we would call today an independent filmmaker. Many of his films had a sort of amateurish or unpolished appearance. Perhaps they have the feel of the short film that the studios assigned to their new directors to give them practice. Nevertheless Fuller frequently took on themes that were taboo at the time. Here Fuller tells the story of real-life James Addison Reavis (1843-1914) and one of the greatest frauds in American History. Reavis used forged papers in an intricate plan to falsely justify his purported claim to virtually all of the land in Arizona. Supposedly it was his inheritance from a land grant by the King of Spain. Spanish deeds had to be honored by the US Government under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The government could not prove his claim was a fraud. With a plan perhaps more elaborate than cinematically intriguing Reavis creates and plants forged evidence to make his claim. The story is not polished, but will appeal to fans of THE HOAX and CATCH ME IF YOU CAN. In spite of some awkwardness and the mostly static telling the story is basically good. Grade B.