I read an article recently about something called the "Book Bucket Challenge." Essentially, it challenges people to list the 10 books that have most influenced them or left the greatest impression on them.
Anyone who knows me knows I'm a big reader, but I'm having a lot of trouble with this concept. Not that anyone nominated me for the challenge, but it got me thinking anyway. The problem may be that I read too much, and I generally find something worth taking out of everything I read. Not necessarily on purpose, but some piece of something always sticks.
Showing posts with label reading. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reading. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Sunday, March 23, 2014
Divergent: The Movie and the concept of Girl Power
Saw Divergent this afternoon, as planned. Good movie, but of course, not as good as the book. I was pleasantly surprised by how much they actually left the same, but there were a few glaring differences that I don't really understand the purpose of changing. Perhaps if/when there's Insurgent and Allegiant the changes may make more sense. I will say that Theo James as Four is definitely a better choice than I originally thought. My mental image may have altered. Shailene Woodley isn't quite petite/tiny enough for the mental image I had of Tris, since there are comments throughout the book about her tininess, but it wouldn't have been as obvious if Christina (Zoe Kravitz) wasn't even smaller.
Overall, definitely pleased with the book to movie transition on this one.
Overall, definitely pleased with the book to movie transition on this one.
Divergent: the books- spoilers present
I finished reading the Divergent series last night. And as usual, as I'm reading along, I'm thinking about how I don't really like the female character. She seems kind of whiney and a little bit stupid. Strong and brave but still whiney and stupid. Which is why I was so incredibly shocked to find that the story ends up not really being about her in the end anyway. She was kind of just a means to an end. And yet, I still felt like crying about her loss.
Clearly the books have really well written characters, or I wouldn't have gotten that attached. The story itself is really just another of the super common (right now) dystopian society themes, but has a little bit of an interesting twist on the basic. Enough to make you wonder where our society is headed, what faction would you choose.
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in it's own way.
- opening line of Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy
Interesting thought. Does it apply to individuals in the same way? Maybe what makes each person an individual is his or her own unhappiness and in our happiness we all become alike. Does it mean happiness is universal? Does that explain why depression is isolating, but people look to gather during the happiest moments?
- opening line of Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy
Interesting thought. Does it apply to individuals in the same way? Maybe what makes each person an individual is his or her own unhappiness and in our happiness we all become alike. Does it mean happiness is universal? Does that explain why depression is isolating, but people look to gather during the happiest moments?
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Gatsby ... the great?
I've often commented that a movie will never, and can never, be better than the book upon which it is based. But, in one particular instance, I have been proven wrong.
To start at the beginning, I never had to read The Great Gatsby in school. I'm not sure how I missed it, or it me, whichever, but somehow it was never required reading in my English classes. So, a few years ago, I decided to try to catch up on all those books that somehow I managed to avoid in school, Gatsby obviously being on that list. Considering the general reception the novel is greeted with, I understandably had expectations. I don't think that I've ever heard anyone say anything against it, never mind finding someone who didn't like it. That, it seemed, would be almost like heresy.
As I read though, I became more and more frustrated. Nothing about the characters made me like any of them. And the language made them all so ... I don't know, pretentious? I understand that there is a point to that impression, but I felt at least the narrator should have gotten some favourable impression from me. Thankfully, the book is short, and I finished it with relief, becoming the only person I know who could say they honestly disliked it. I felt it was a waste of my time having read it, except to be able to say that I had. Even with a fluffy romance novel, I end up with a feeling of having enjoyed it, even if I don't take anything meaningful away from the experience. I couldn't say that for Gatsby. I was actually so disappointed, that I struck F. Scott Fitzgerald from the list of authors that I ever wanted to read.
Flash forward about a year, when I learn that Leonardo DiCaprio is starring in an adaptation of the book. I enjoy Leo - I have since his first appearance on Growing Pains, with only a minor pause during the Titanic trend. (I liked the movie, but not the hype and freakishness that went with it.) Anyway, I believe I probably audibly groaned when I found out about the Gatsby movie, knowing that I'd have to see it, considering the star. I guess my only hope was that I might get a little more something out of the story than I had initially.
So, this past weekend, I saw the film. In 3D. In typical Baz Luhrmann fashion, the images were breathtaking, the colours and spectacle made perfect sense in the framework of the story. (The music was a bit incongruous and out of time, but dealable.) Everything was that bit over the top that excellently illustrated the excess of the lifestyle being portrayed, and I walked out of the theatre with a much better understanding of the character of Gatsby than I expected. From the book, I just felt the behaviour was selfish and self-indulgent, but from the movie, I grasped something else, a vulnerability, a need to please that I hadn't noticed before. All the roles were well-played, and made much more sense for me in the movie than the book, perhaps because I could see the emotions (or lack there-of) where in the book I had to make it up for myself. With no sense of relation to any of the characters, I found that impossible.
I have started re-reading the novel now, while the film images are still fresh in my mind, because I hope to be able to take something more from it than I did the first time. But I do need to applaud Baz Luhrmann for the interpretation/adaptation that has created an appreciation of this story in me. And for casting Leo in it because with another actor, I may not have made the effort of seeing it. He will likely always be the image of Jay Gatsby that I see.
To start at the beginning, I never had to read The Great Gatsby in school. I'm not sure how I missed it, or it me, whichever, but somehow it was never required reading in my English classes. So, a few years ago, I decided to try to catch up on all those books that somehow I managed to avoid in school, Gatsby obviously being on that list. Considering the general reception the novel is greeted with, I understandably had expectations. I don't think that I've ever heard anyone say anything against it, never mind finding someone who didn't like it. That, it seemed, would be almost like heresy.
As I read though, I became more and more frustrated. Nothing about the characters made me like any of them. And the language made them all so ... I don't know, pretentious? I understand that there is a point to that impression, but I felt at least the narrator should have gotten some favourable impression from me. Thankfully, the book is short, and I finished it with relief, becoming the only person I know who could say they honestly disliked it. I felt it was a waste of my time having read it, except to be able to say that I had. Even with a fluffy romance novel, I end up with a feeling of having enjoyed it, even if I don't take anything meaningful away from the experience. I couldn't say that for Gatsby. I was actually so disappointed, that I struck F. Scott Fitzgerald from the list of authors that I ever wanted to read.
Flash forward about a year, when I learn that Leonardo DiCaprio is starring in an adaptation of the book. I enjoy Leo - I have since his first appearance on Growing Pains, with only a minor pause during the Titanic trend. (I liked the movie, but not the hype and freakishness that went with it.) Anyway, I believe I probably audibly groaned when I found out about the Gatsby movie, knowing that I'd have to see it, considering the star. I guess my only hope was that I might get a little more something out of the story than I had initially.
So, this past weekend, I saw the film. In 3D. In typical Baz Luhrmann fashion, the images were breathtaking, the colours and spectacle made perfect sense in the framework of the story. (The music was a bit incongruous and out of time, but dealable.) Everything was that bit over the top that excellently illustrated the excess of the lifestyle being portrayed, and I walked out of the theatre with a much better understanding of the character of Gatsby than I expected. From the book, I just felt the behaviour was selfish and self-indulgent, but from the movie, I grasped something else, a vulnerability, a need to please that I hadn't noticed before. All the roles were well-played, and made much more sense for me in the movie than the book, perhaps because I could see the emotions (or lack there-of) where in the book I had to make it up for myself. With no sense of relation to any of the characters, I found that impossible. I have started re-reading the novel now, while the film images are still fresh in my mind, because I hope to be able to take something more from it than I did the first time. But I do need to applaud Baz Luhrmann for the interpretation/adaptation that has created an appreciation of this story in me. And for casting Leo in it because with another actor, I may not have made the effort of seeing it. He will likely always be the image of Jay Gatsby that I see.
Saturday, June 2, 2012
Fifty
I've just finished reading the E.L. James trilogy, beginning with Fifty Shades of Grey. I'm clearly not a reviewer or a critic, and I don't really have a leg to stand on as far as ever being published or having any kind of reputation that grants me the right to say anything at all about someone's written work.
But below, I'm planning to post my thoughts. If you don't want to know what I think. Stop reading.
Also, there will be spoilers, so anyone looking to avoid knowing what the stories are about, then you need to avoid reading this.
Are you still here? Okay.
And so, my thoughts:
I find it awkward to admit that I actually did enjoy reading these novels. And it's not awkward because of the content. Everyone who's heard anything about them already knows that they're erotica, and so there's no cause for any awkwardness there. I find it awkward, because I was often pulled out of the story by the writing itself. The awkwardness comes because I didn't find the righting very good. But I kept wanting to know where the story was going. Clearly, eventually they would both get past at least some of their issues, or there would be no satisfactory conclusion to the story, but when, and how. That's what I wanted to know.
The sex, while definitely graphic in moments, didn't tend to be superfluous. I found that after each encounter I had learned something about one or both of the characters that led to some revelation or other of their personality/character. That's a very positive point. Because often sex in a novel is just there for the fun of it. It doesn't actually tell us anything. The writing, by the way, was often much better in the sex scenes than in the more mundane scenes. Interesting.
The writing in the more mundane scenes was a bit lacking. It seemed repetitive, using the same phrases and words over and over, and throwing in overly large words, seemingly just for the sake of using an overly long word. And the character development in anything other than a sex scene was almost nil. We'd seem to get somewhere with a particular development and in the next chapter, that same character would be having the same issue again. I understand that people don't always grow the way that we want them to, but in this particular story, we seemed to be having the same conversations over and over, with no movement toward any resolution.
There were also editing issues. In one specific example, there's one person driving the car, and then three lines later, someone else is parking it. When did they switch? Is it a multiple personality disorder and there was only one person all along?
I read somewhere that this series was rushed to print. I would guess because they wanted to take advantage of a marketing situation of some kind. They likely would have done better to spend some more time on fleshing out the story and the characters. And editing. Making sure that the people in the end of the scene were the same people that were in the beginning. And that they weren't quite so repetitive.
I give the author props for managing to get published, though from the author bio, I would guess that she likely had some contacts in the industry that helped with that situation. But I found myself longing to rewrite many of the scenes to make them flow better, to avoid the repetition and to make everything more consistent in tone and content. This is probably a flaw on my part, but I don't often have the urge to do that to a novel, so I think it also says something about the work that I was reading.
Overall, as I said, I did enjoy reading it. The story was quite interesting, if not entirely unique. With a little more polish on the writing, I'd happily read something else that E.L. James had written.
But below, I'm planning to post my thoughts. If you don't want to know what I think. Stop reading.
Also, there will be spoilers, so anyone looking to avoid knowing what the stories are about, then you need to avoid reading this.
Are you still here? Okay.
And so, my thoughts:
I find it awkward to admit that I actually did enjoy reading these novels. And it's not awkward because of the content. Everyone who's heard anything about them already knows that they're erotica, and so there's no cause for any awkwardness there. I find it awkward, because I was often pulled out of the story by the writing itself. The awkwardness comes because I didn't find the righting very good. But I kept wanting to know where the story was going. Clearly, eventually they would both get past at least some of their issues, or there would be no satisfactory conclusion to the story, but when, and how. That's what I wanted to know.
The sex, while definitely graphic in moments, didn't tend to be superfluous. I found that after each encounter I had learned something about one or both of the characters that led to some revelation or other of their personality/character. That's a very positive point. Because often sex in a novel is just there for the fun of it. It doesn't actually tell us anything. The writing, by the way, was often much better in the sex scenes than in the more mundane scenes. Interesting.
The writing in the more mundane scenes was a bit lacking. It seemed repetitive, using the same phrases and words over and over, and throwing in overly large words, seemingly just for the sake of using an overly long word. And the character development in anything other than a sex scene was almost nil. We'd seem to get somewhere with a particular development and in the next chapter, that same character would be having the same issue again. I understand that people don't always grow the way that we want them to, but in this particular story, we seemed to be having the same conversations over and over, with no movement toward any resolution.
There were also editing issues. In one specific example, there's one person driving the car, and then three lines later, someone else is parking it. When did they switch? Is it a multiple personality disorder and there was only one person all along?
I read somewhere that this series was rushed to print. I would guess because they wanted to take advantage of a marketing situation of some kind. They likely would have done better to spend some more time on fleshing out the story and the characters. And editing. Making sure that the people in the end of the scene were the same people that were in the beginning. And that they weren't quite so repetitive.
I give the author props for managing to get published, though from the author bio, I would guess that she likely had some contacts in the industry that helped with that situation. But I found myself longing to rewrite many of the scenes to make them flow better, to avoid the repetition and to make everything more consistent in tone and content. This is probably a flaw on my part, but I don't often have the urge to do that to a novel, so I think it also says something about the work that I was reading.
Overall, as I said, I did enjoy reading it. The story was quite interesting, if not entirely unique. With a little more polish on the writing, I'd happily read something else that E.L. James had written.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
The wise words of Marilyn Monroe...
Not a phrase someone expects to hear - Marilyn Monroe, wise? Really? Wasn't she just a vapid sex-pot?
I'm reading a biography right now, and no, she really wasn't. She was constantly searching information, knowledge. Reading classic literature, studying art. It's interesting.
Wise words of today are: "I can be smart when it's important, but most men don't like it." (spoken as Lorelei Lee in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes - 1952)
And now you'd suggest that she didn't actually speak them, they were scripted for her. Except that it was Marilyn's idea to add them to the movie. They weren't originally scripted. And truer words have probably never been spoken. And, it seems she based her entire persona on them.
It's sad that 59 years later it's still the same. Men/boys do not like smart women in general. Are they threatened by it? Do they just like to feel intellectually superior? Who knows but them. And they're not telling.
So, we learn to either play stupid, or suffer their intolerance of us. It's a petty game, really. But even as young girls we know we have to learn how to play it. Because even now, there's judgement if a woman can't get a man.
And a smart girl, even a pretty one, can rarely get a man as easily as a pretty dumb girl.
I'm reading a biography right now, and no, she really wasn't. She was constantly searching information, knowledge. Reading classic literature, studying art. It's interesting.
Wise words of today are: "I can be smart when it's important, but most men don't like it." (spoken as Lorelei Lee in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes - 1952)
And now you'd suggest that she didn't actually speak them, they were scripted for her. Except that it was Marilyn's idea to add them to the movie. They weren't originally scripted. And truer words have probably never been spoken. And, it seems she based her entire persona on them. It's sad that 59 years later it's still the same. Men/boys do not like smart women in general. Are they threatened by it? Do they just like to feel intellectually superior? Who knows but them. And they're not telling.
So, we learn to either play stupid, or suffer their intolerance of us. It's a petty game, really. But even as young girls we know we have to learn how to play it. Because even now, there's judgement if a woman can't get a man.
And a smart girl, even a pretty one, can rarely get a man as easily as a pretty dumb girl.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Thinking and thoughts
Nothing really exciting today. I've had thoughts running rampant all
day, but never the impulse to get up to put them here. I should have,
really, because then it would be far more interesting than this post.
I finished reading the last of the Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants books this afternoon, and started to think about my connections with my friends. There's a lot of letter writing in that book - at least between Lena and Kostos, which isn't really between the friends, but still makes my point. I think letter writing is a lost art. And something that should be more missed than it is. It's much more personal to have someone's handwriting on a physical page in front of you, than to see a random font on a computer screen. The words take on more meaning, more emotion with the flow of the script on the page.
That's probably why I also feel more comfortable writing fiction with a notebook and a pen, than directly on to the computer. The typing is part of the editing process. When I write with a pen I have less time to think about the process, and less impulse to edit as I go. Less chance to self-censor. It's a truer version of what I'm trying to write, even if it's in desperate need of editing.
That's how I feel about letter writing. You're more likely to write what you actually feel with a pen in your hand, and truer version of it, if you don't have the easier way to edit that's provided by being able to delete your thoughts as you go. Even if you cross it out in ink, it's still there on the page.
*shrug* Maybe I'm just born in a wrong era. Perhaps I belong back in the 40s, or 50s where there was no internet, no email, not the use of the telephone that there is now.
Or maybe I can start a new trend. Try something old, and make it new again.
Here's to writing a letter.
I finished reading the last of the Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants books this afternoon, and started to think about my connections with my friends. There's a lot of letter writing in that book - at least between Lena and Kostos, which isn't really between the friends, but still makes my point. I think letter writing is a lost art. And something that should be more missed than it is. It's much more personal to have someone's handwriting on a physical page in front of you, than to see a random font on a computer screen. The words take on more meaning, more emotion with the flow of the script on the page.
That's probably why I also feel more comfortable writing fiction with a notebook and a pen, than directly on to the computer. The typing is part of the editing process. When I write with a pen I have less time to think about the process, and less impulse to edit as I go. Less chance to self-censor. It's a truer version of what I'm trying to write, even if it's in desperate need of editing.
That's how I feel about letter writing. You're more likely to write what you actually feel with a pen in your hand, and truer version of it, if you don't have the easier way to edit that's provided by being able to delete your thoughts as you go. Even if you cross it out in ink, it's still there on the page.
*shrug* Maybe I'm just born in a wrong era. Perhaps I belong back in the 40s, or 50s where there was no internet, no email, not the use of the telephone that there is now.
Or maybe I can start a new trend. Try something old, and make it new again.
Here's to writing a letter.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Wow...
Okay, so I'm obviously being a slacker with this blog lately. Mostly because there's not a whole lot to say.
Financially, things are basically the same. I have to be really careful with everything I spend. I do have amazing friends, who are making things easier by figuring out plans for me. Like the friend who has decided that she's going to come to my other friend's wedding in Vegas, because she knows a travel agent and we'll maybe get a better deal, and well for me, if I'm splitting a hotel room that makes it cheaper. So amazing!!
I also have amazing parents. I lost my Ipod Touch just over a week ago, and was kind of depressed about it. I have no idea where it got lost; I swore it was in my purse and then it wasn't and it's just gone. But my parents replaced it. I didn't ask them to. In fact, I said I didn't want them to because I already owe them a lot, but they did and I very much appreciate it, because I was feeling very lost without it. It's amazing how attached we get to our technology.
Otherwise there's really nothing going on. NKOTBSB released a single this week. It's pretty awesome. So I'm looking forward to the tour even more now. And another friend pre-ordered the album for me, for my birthday, so that's exciting.
On the job front, there's nothing new. I'm still struggling to control my frustrations, and the changes that it makes in my personality are not pleasing, but for now, it's a paycheck and I just have to suck it up. Everyone isn't always happy. I just have to deal with that. I should be grateful I have a job. I know. But that's precisely all it is. A job. There is nothing else it can be. As everyone tells me, the next best thing will come. And I know that. Everything happens for a reason. I'll survive. Hardship makes you stronger, right? It'll make me more appreciative in the future.
Right now, I'm just being grateful for my friends and my family and my books that allow to escape on a regular basis.
Financially, things are basically the same. I have to be really careful with everything I spend. I do have amazing friends, who are making things easier by figuring out plans for me. Like the friend who has decided that she's going to come to my other friend's wedding in Vegas, because she knows a travel agent and we'll maybe get a better deal, and well for me, if I'm splitting a hotel room that makes it cheaper. So amazing!!
I also have amazing parents. I lost my Ipod Touch just over a week ago, and was kind of depressed about it. I have no idea where it got lost; I swore it was in my purse and then it wasn't and it's just gone. But my parents replaced it. I didn't ask them to. In fact, I said I didn't want them to because I already owe them a lot, but they did and I very much appreciate it, because I was feeling very lost without it. It's amazing how attached we get to our technology.
Otherwise there's really nothing going on. NKOTBSB released a single this week. It's pretty awesome. So I'm looking forward to the tour even more now. And another friend pre-ordered the album for me, for my birthday, so that's exciting.
On the job front, there's nothing new. I'm still struggling to control my frustrations, and the changes that it makes in my personality are not pleasing, but for now, it's a paycheck and I just have to suck it up. Everyone isn't always happy. I just have to deal with that. I should be grateful I have a job. I know. But that's precisely all it is. A job. There is nothing else it can be. As everyone tells me, the next best thing will come. And I know that. Everything happens for a reason. I'll survive. Hardship makes you stronger, right? It'll make me more appreciative in the future.
Right now, I'm just being grateful for my friends and my family and my books that allow to escape on a regular basis.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Huh?!
Alright, so I mentioned earlier that I was reading The Great Gatsby, because I have this goal to read a bunch of the novels that most people read in school, but somehow I never had to. The latest on this list is Catcher in the Rye. And, honestly, between these two novels I'm completely confused as to why we study these things. I'm apparently just missing something, because I'm not seeing anything worth studying in either of those books.
This really just makes me wonder why people think the books that I really enjoy are just "fluff". At least I get something out of them. So far in Catcher in the Rye, all I want to do is strangle Holden Caulfield. Though, wait... maybe that's the point? Is it? Because isn't this the book that the guy who killed John Lennon was reading? That he said drove him to do it? Maybe dude just got really confused and pissed off at Holden and shot John instead?....
Seriously, I really just don't get it... Anybody got any explanations?
Oh, remember you can see my reading time line here: http://www.shelfari.com/limada
(Psst... there's also a widget on the right side of the page, anytime you wanna check it out...)
This really just makes me wonder why people think the books that I really enjoy are just "fluff". At least I get something out of them. So far in Catcher in the Rye, all I want to do is strangle Holden Caulfield. Though, wait... maybe that's the point? Is it? Because isn't this the book that the guy who killed John Lennon was reading? That he said drove him to do it? Maybe dude just got really confused and pissed off at Holden and shot John instead?....
Seriously, I really just don't get it... Anybody got any explanations?
Oh, remember you can see my reading time line here: http://www.shelfari.com/limada
(Psst... there's also a widget on the right side of the page, anytime you wanna check it out...)
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Currently reading
The Great Gatsby
For some reason, I never had to read this in school, even though pretty much every other person I know has memories of reading it. And I'm making my way through this relatively short book, thinking, wow, they really read this in school? It seems very different from the kinds of things I read in school. I can't put my finger on it exactly, but it's definitely not like anything I read. Because of this, I may have to find something that explains to me how it's taught in school. Just for curiosity sake. I'm enjoying the book, but I can't see how it was studied. I'd probably be better off if I didn't know that it was, because often, in my experience, I don't read into a book the things that teachers/instructors are looking for.
That particular trait changed my perspective on school a bit. In eleventh grade, we were reading Hamlet. When I gave my opinion on a particular passage, my teacher actually told me that I was wrong. My question at the time, though I didn't voice it, was how did she know I was wrong? Shakespeare is dead. We have no idea exactly what he was thinking when he wrote the play. Maybe he didn't think any of the things that they teach us about when they're dissecting his plays. That's why, and yes, this will sound enormously dorky, I prefer to read Shakespeare on my own now. To go back and re-read the things that I was forced to read in high school. Because I find that I get so much more out of the stories now, than when I was forced to look for all the metaphors, and foreshadowing and everything else. Plays should be read for the feeling you get from them, not for all the minutiae ... and I think I just spelled that wrong. (Just to finish the story, I never again gave an opinion in that class. Completely stopped discussing. Teacher wasn't impressed.)
Anyway, so yes, if there's anyone out there reading this blog (is there anyone out there reading this blog?) who has an opinion or thought on The Great Gatsby, I'd be happy to hear it. It may actually be one of the few books, I'd prefer to discuss rather than to just enjoy in my own head.
For some reason, I never had to read this in school, even though pretty much every other person I know has memories of reading it. And I'm making my way through this relatively short book, thinking, wow, they really read this in school? It seems very different from the kinds of things I read in school. I can't put my finger on it exactly, but it's definitely not like anything I read. Because of this, I may have to find something that explains to me how it's taught in school. Just for curiosity sake. I'm enjoying the book, but I can't see how it was studied. I'd probably be better off if I didn't know that it was, because often, in my experience, I don't read into a book the things that teachers/instructors are looking for.
That particular trait changed my perspective on school a bit. In eleventh grade, we were reading Hamlet. When I gave my opinion on a particular passage, my teacher actually told me that I was wrong. My question at the time, though I didn't voice it, was how did she know I was wrong? Shakespeare is dead. We have no idea exactly what he was thinking when he wrote the play. Maybe he didn't think any of the things that they teach us about when they're dissecting his plays. That's why, and yes, this will sound enormously dorky, I prefer to read Shakespeare on my own now. To go back and re-read the things that I was forced to read in high school. Because I find that I get so much more out of the stories now, than when I was forced to look for all the metaphors, and foreshadowing and everything else. Plays should be read for the feeling you get from them, not for all the minutiae ... and I think I just spelled that wrong. (Just to finish the story, I never again gave an opinion in that class. Completely stopped discussing. Teacher wasn't impressed.)
Anyway, so yes, if there's anyone out there reading this blog (is there anyone out there reading this blog?) who has an opinion or thought on The Great Gatsby, I'd be happy to hear it. It may actually be one of the few books, I'd prefer to discuss rather than to just enjoy in my own head.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
life
I'm not sure what I'm posting today. No major events in my life, which is not unusual, though is getting highly redundant. Or repetitive. My language skills are off today.
I did manage to consolidate the greater majority of my debt. This is good. One payment instead of 3 is nice. It relieves a lot of stress. And helps with the goal of budgeting. Though now I'm on a tighter budget because I no longer have any credit products. But it's nice to think that I can live actually on the money that I'm bringing in, instead of putting it on a card. Which is stupid, because even when I had the cards I could have done that. I just wasn't forced to the way that I am now.
So, my forms of entertainment, now that I'm living on a major budget, are: reading the books I already own, watching the cable that I already pay for, using the internet that I already pay for, exercising using the DVDs and equipment that I already own, and cleaning. These are all things that relate to my resolutions, so this is good. Everything comes together sometimes.
Now, if only I could work out what I'm doing with the rest of my life, instead of being bitter and angry where I am, everything would be great! ; P
I did manage to consolidate the greater majority of my debt. This is good. One payment instead of 3 is nice. It relieves a lot of stress. And helps with the goal of budgeting. Though now I'm on a tighter budget because I no longer have any credit products. But it's nice to think that I can live actually on the money that I'm bringing in, instead of putting it on a card. Which is stupid, because even when I had the cards I could have done that. I just wasn't forced to the way that I am now.
So, my forms of entertainment, now that I'm living on a major budget, are: reading the books I already own, watching the cable that I already pay for, using the internet that I already pay for, exercising using the DVDs and equipment that I already own, and cleaning. These are all things that relate to my resolutions, so this is good. Everything comes together sometimes.
Now, if only I could work out what I'm doing with the rest of my life, instead of being bitter and angry where I am, everything would be great! ; P
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Dilemma
Not so much a dilemma actually, but a conundrum. Or just confusion.
I have this feeling, that I need to be more spiritual. That I need to pay more attention to the small details in life. That I am, in essence, letting my life slip by, because I concentrate on the things that I don't like, rather than on the things that I should be happy about. And I think I need to do something about that. The problem, or question, is how to do that. What does it mean for me to be more spiritual?
I was raised presbyterian, and we did go to church on a semi-regular basis. At least, until I started figure skating and the competitions were on weekends and we'd be out of town, or just too tired from a late Saturday night to get up to go to church in the morning. Sometimes I think that was probably a bad thing for me. Maybe I'd have a better sense of self, if I had a better sense of what religion is.
But maybe that's just an excuse. I really do know what I believe. And I have a strong sense of how I feel about organized religion. To put it simply, I don't understand the need to gather in order to affirm what you believe in. If I believe something, I believe it, whether or not I get together once a week with people who believe the same thing as me. I also believe that the Bible is a great book of stories, that can give us guidance in how to live life, but that it's not a "rule book" for how to live. I also don't think everything in it is strictly true. How could it be? The stories were passed down for many generations before they were written down and it's been translated so many times that it couldn't possibly be exactly the way it was originally. Have you ever played a game of telephone? Things get changed/re-interpreted. So I choose to believe in it. But not to live as though it's the law.
I've chosen to label myself an agnostic. I believe there is a higher power, but I don't know what that is, nor do I know how much control he/she/it has over how we live our lives. I also think that there probably is a grand scheme, but that there is also a lot of free will. So maybe there are options along the way, but eventually they all lead to the same end? I don't really know. I can't be an atheist because I do believe in something, and I can't, with any conscience consider myself a Presbyterian (though I am technically a full-fledged member of the church) because I'm not sure that I follow the entirety of the beliefs.
Which is where my need for more spirituality comes in. I guess, it's not a need for spirituality in the form of religion, but maybe it's a need to learn more to see where I fit into the grand picture. To figure out if what I believe actually makes sense. So, maybe it's a need for education in a spiritual realm. Maybe I need to read about all the major religions, and the minor ones to find things out. To educate myself. Just to learn. Somewhere in all the writings there has to be something that I could glean from that.
I know, I'm not the first person to have these thoughts. And I'm not the first person to set myself on some kind of journey of self-exploration. But I'm the first me to do this. And that makes it a new experience for me. I don't really where to start, but I do know that I need to do something.
I have this feeling, that I need to be more spiritual. That I need to pay more attention to the small details in life. That I am, in essence, letting my life slip by, because I concentrate on the things that I don't like, rather than on the things that I should be happy about. And I think I need to do something about that. The problem, or question, is how to do that. What does it mean for me to be more spiritual?
I was raised presbyterian, and we did go to church on a semi-regular basis. At least, until I started figure skating and the competitions were on weekends and we'd be out of town, or just too tired from a late Saturday night to get up to go to church in the morning. Sometimes I think that was probably a bad thing for me. Maybe I'd have a better sense of self, if I had a better sense of what religion is.
But maybe that's just an excuse. I really do know what I believe. And I have a strong sense of how I feel about organized religion. To put it simply, I don't understand the need to gather in order to affirm what you believe in. If I believe something, I believe it, whether or not I get together once a week with people who believe the same thing as me. I also believe that the Bible is a great book of stories, that can give us guidance in how to live life, but that it's not a "rule book" for how to live. I also don't think everything in it is strictly true. How could it be? The stories were passed down for many generations before they were written down and it's been translated so many times that it couldn't possibly be exactly the way it was originally. Have you ever played a game of telephone? Things get changed/re-interpreted. So I choose to believe in it. But not to live as though it's the law.
I've chosen to label myself an agnostic. I believe there is a higher power, but I don't know what that is, nor do I know how much control he/she/it has over how we live our lives. I also think that there probably is a grand scheme, but that there is also a lot of free will. So maybe there are options along the way, but eventually they all lead to the same end? I don't really know. I can't be an atheist because I do believe in something, and I can't, with any conscience consider myself a Presbyterian (though I am technically a full-fledged member of the church) because I'm not sure that I follow the entirety of the beliefs.
Which is where my need for more spirituality comes in. I guess, it's not a need for spirituality in the form of religion, but maybe it's a need to learn more to see where I fit into the grand picture. To figure out if what I believe actually makes sense. So, maybe it's a need for education in a spiritual realm. Maybe I need to read about all the major religions, and the minor ones to find things out. To educate myself. Just to learn. Somewhere in all the writings there has to be something that I could glean from that.
I know, I'm not the first person to have these thoughts. And I'm not the first person to set myself on some kind of journey of self-exploration. But I'm the first me to do this. And that makes it a new experience for me. I don't really where to start, but I do know that I need to do something.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Officially rejoining the world
I have been home from work for 12 weeks as of today. Well, really, 12 weeks ago today I was in surgery. I had the appointment yesterday that gave me back my life. I'm okay to drive, to go back to work - to rejoin the world. And you know? I don't really want to. I kind of like being in my little coccoon, where I can read, watch television or movies, and only go out when I want to. It's ideal for someone who isn't generally all that fond of the majority of people.
But I guess, since to exist in the world it does require income for things like food, heat, electricity, then I guess I actually do have to make the effort to go back. Or win the lottery. That would work out too.
I think that's it for today. I have today, and the next 3 days, plus the weekend to continue to enjoy my hermit-like lifestyle. I'm going back to my couch in front of the fire with my book. It's a good, cozy place.
But I guess, since to exist in the world it does require income for things like food, heat, electricity, then I guess I actually do have to make the effort to go back. Or win the lottery. That would work out too.
I think that's it for today. I have today, and the next 3 days, plus the weekend to continue to enjoy my hermit-like lifestyle. I'm going back to my couch in front of the fire with my book. It's a good, cozy place.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
New Year Resolutions
I was asked yesterday what goals I had for the new year. What you need to understand, before I answer this question is that I am usually strongly against making resolutions, because I just figure that I'll break them anyway, and any changes I make in my life should be things I change because I want to change them, not because I promise myself that I need to. So my rote answer is that I resolve not to make any resolutions.
This year though, I'm going to change that. I need something to motivate me to actually make those changes that I have internally promised myself for the past few months. And so, with that in mind, I am going to list the things that I want to accomplish in 2011.
1) I want to lose 30-40 pounds. This one I actually want to achieve in the first 6 months of the year, but it also involves creating better eating habits for myself, and then maintaining that weight loss, so it is a full year promise. When I started the process to lose last time, I started a blog here: http://waistfulthoughts.blogspot.com/ I'll be attempting to keep up with that again, as well as staying here.
2) I want to better budget my money. I need to teach myself that buying things will not make me feel better about my job when I'm stressed. This actually might go hand in hand with the one above. I can substitute exercise for shopping. Some of this budgeted money needs to go into a savings account so that I can afford to go to Vegas for my friend's wedding. The rest of it needs to go into paying down debt.
3) I want to continue to read. A lot. The past two years I've had 3 months where I've had nothing but time, so that I've set a good reading pace. I won't have that in 2011, so I want to promise myself that I will still keep the pace. Perhaps I'll read on the weekend instead of automatically turning on the television and watching brainless shows. I don't know yet. But I know that I've currently got a pace of at least 30 books/year. (You can watch my progress as I keep track at my bookshelf on Shelfari: http://www.shelfari.com/limada/shelf )
4) I want to go through some of the "stuff" that I've collected through my various phases and sell some of it, and just get rid of other things. I have to much stuff, and watching Hoarders has made me realize that I do not need it all. Plus, I don't have enough storage for it all. So, out it goes. I'm already working on this because my mom has a VCR that connects to the computer, so that you can create digital files from your VHS. I've been working on that for the past two days. Once they're on the computer, I will pitch the VHS. (Actually, I'll probably give it to Value Village, but I will no longer own it, which is the point.)
5) I think I want to learn to sew. I'll probably have to get my mother involved in this one. But it would be a good skill to have. And so, it's a goal.
6) I want to teach myself to cook more creatively. I'm a boring cook, and because of that, I don't like to do it. So I need to actually use the recipe books that I have, and find ways to make creative meals for a single person. This also fits with the first goal, because if I cook better for myself, then it will be easier to keep track of what I'm eating and therefore easier to lose the weight.
I think 6 is a good number of goals. None of them are impossible. In fact, all of them are things that I really should be doing anyway. But having them written out is a good thing. I have an ongoing goal of always trying to write. But as it's ongoing, and because this blog is actually part of the goal, I'll leave it off this list.
I always have other goals that I'd like to achieve in a year. Finding a new job, for example. But since it's not something that's completely in my control, I'm not including it, either. Or random things that come up along the way, that should fall in this category, but weren't visible when the year changed. I'll take those into account as I go, but if I can look back to this list on December 28, 2011 and mentally add check marks to these, then I'll feel as if I had a successful year.
This year though, I'm going to change that. I need something to motivate me to actually make those changes that I have internally promised myself for the past few months. And so, with that in mind, I am going to list the things that I want to accomplish in 2011.
1) I want to lose 30-40 pounds. This one I actually want to achieve in the first 6 months of the year, but it also involves creating better eating habits for myself, and then maintaining that weight loss, so it is a full year promise. When I started the process to lose last time, I started a blog here: http://waistfulthoughts.blogspot.com/ I'll be attempting to keep up with that again, as well as staying here.
2) I want to better budget my money. I need to teach myself that buying things will not make me feel better about my job when I'm stressed. This actually might go hand in hand with the one above. I can substitute exercise for shopping. Some of this budgeted money needs to go into a savings account so that I can afford to go to Vegas for my friend's wedding. The rest of it needs to go into paying down debt.
3) I want to continue to read. A lot. The past two years I've had 3 months where I've had nothing but time, so that I've set a good reading pace. I won't have that in 2011, so I want to promise myself that I will still keep the pace. Perhaps I'll read on the weekend instead of automatically turning on the television and watching brainless shows. I don't know yet. But I know that I've currently got a pace of at least 30 books/year. (You can watch my progress as I keep track at my bookshelf on Shelfari: http://www.shelfari.com/limada/shelf )
4) I want to go through some of the "stuff" that I've collected through my various phases and sell some of it, and just get rid of other things. I have to much stuff, and watching Hoarders has made me realize that I do not need it all. Plus, I don't have enough storage for it all. So, out it goes. I'm already working on this because my mom has a VCR that connects to the computer, so that you can create digital files from your VHS. I've been working on that for the past two days. Once they're on the computer, I will pitch the VHS. (Actually, I'll probably give it to Value Village, but I will no longer own it, which is the point.)
5) I think I want to learn to sew. I'll probably have to get my mother involved in this one. But it would be a good skill to have. And so, it's a goal.
6) I want to teach myself to cook more creatively. I'm a boring cook, and because of that, I don't like to do it. So I need to actually use the recipe books that I have, and find ways to make creative meals for a single person. This also fits with the first goal, because if I cook better for myself, then it will be easier to keep track of what I'm eating and therefore easier to lose the weight.
I think 6 is a good number of goals. None of them are impossible. In fact, all of them are things that I really should be doing anyway. But having them written out is a good thing. I have an ongoing goal of always trying to write. But as it's ongoing, and because this blog is actually part of the goal, I'll leave it off this list.
I always have other goals that I'd like to achieve in a year. Finding a new job, for example. But since it's not something that's completely in my control, I'm not including it, either. Or random things that come up along the way, that should fall in this category, but weren't visible when the year changed. I'll take those into account as I go, but if I can look back to this list on December 28, 2011 and mentally add check marks to these, then I'll feel as if I had a successful year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)