you can't normalize
Nov. 16th, 2009 10:42 amMost of my favorite books are my favorite books from 6th grade and under. It was just highlighted for me while I was filling out my ~OkCupid~ profile and my favorite books section looked like this:
During high school I probably would've thrown in, like, Catch-22 and some other book I enjoyed without having any particular opinion on it, or worse, a book that the person I wanted to be would like (anything by Haruki Murakami. I've given up on pretending to like him). During elementary school the list would've included Little Town on the Prairie (my faaavorite Little House book!) and Dealing with Dragons by Patricia C. Wrede. (Oh I guess I could include Marya Hornbacher's Wasted: A Memoir of Anorexia and Bulimia, since I did actually really love that book, but I feel a little weird putting that as a favorite.)
It's hard for me to love books like I did when I was younger. There is no deep reason for this, I am just dumb and get bored easily with Grown Up Books. (I am still at chapter 3 of The Age of Innocence.) Also a lot of them intimidate me, in that I get all hung up over 'omg I'm so brainless, everything is going over my head, I don't Get This.' Also, if I don't like your stupid douchebag characters, I sure as hell not going to read 300+ pages about them.
speculative to read list
Miyuki Miyabe's The Devil's Whisper
Shaun Tan's The Arrival
M.T. Anderson's The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing, Traitor to the Nation, Volume I: The Pox Party
Greg Marinovich and Joao Silva's The Bang Bang Club (DT1945 .M37 2000)
Neil Gaiman's Fragile Things
Ander Monson's Other Electricities
Michio Kao's Hyperspace
Patricia Gaffney's Wild at Heart
Justina Chen Headley's Girl Overboard
Maile Meloy's Both Ways Is the Only Way I Want It
Vladimir Nabokov short stories
Zilpha Keatley Snyder's The Egypt Game
Kelly Link
Andrea Smith's Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide
Susanne Colastani's When It Happens
(most of these come from stalking coffeeandink; every time I look at her book recommendations I feel an overwhelming longing for the entire world)
OMG WAIT! I CAN PUT THE SILENT MIAOW ON MY FAVORITES LIST. YESSSSS
JJB is reading a lot of our manga and it's kind of making me want to start reading manga again. After being failed by a lot of my favorite series, I forget what I lurved the most about my favorite manga: the art, the humor, the characters -- people who act the way they do because of who they are (I am articulate!!), the emphasis on relationships and the past and frondzzzzzz. I think this is why I can't get it up for most American comic books. The emphases are like completely different.
A Little Princess, Catcher in the Rye, Howl's Moving Castle, Le petit prince, Calvin and Hobbes, things by Neil Gaiman (particularly the Sandman), things by Maile Meloy
During high school I probably would've thrown in, like, Catch-22 and some other book I enjoyed without having any particular opinion on it, or worse, a book that the person I wanted to be would like (anything by Haruki Murakami. I've given up on pretending to like him). During elementary school the list would've included Little Town on the Prairie (my faaavorite Little House book!) and Dealing with Dragons by Patricia C. Wrede. (Oh I guess I could include Marya Hornbacher's Wasted: A Memoir of Anorexia and Bulimia, since I did actually really love that book, but I feel a little weird putting that as a favorite.)
It's hard for me to love books like I did when I was younger. There is no deep reason for this, I am just dumb and get bored easily with Grown Up Books. (I am still at chapter 3 of The Age of Innocence.) Also a lot of them intimidate me, in that I get all hung up over 'omg I'm so brainless, everything is going over my head, I don't Get This.' Also, if I don't like your stupid douchebag characters, I sure as hell not going to read 300+ pages about them.
speculative to read list
Miyuki Miyabe's The Devil's Whisper
Shaun Tan's The Arrival
M.T. Anderson's The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing, Traitor to the Nation, Volume I: The Pox Party
Greg Marinovich and Joao Silva's The Bang Bang Club (DT1945 .M37 2000)
Neil Gaiman's Fragile Things
Ander Monson's Other Electricities
Michio Kao's Hyperspace
Patricia Gaffney's Wild at Heart
Justina Chen Headley's Girl Overboard
Maile Meloy's Both Ways Is the Only Way I Want It
Vladimir Nabokov short stories
Zilpha Keatley Snyder's The Egypt Game
Kelly Link
Andrea Smith's Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide
Susanne Colastani's When It Happens
(most of these come from stalking coffeeandink; every time I look at her book recommendations I feel an overwhelming longing for the entire world)
OMG WAIT! I CAN PUT THE SILENT MIAOW ON MY FAVORITES LIST. YESSSSS
JJB is reading a lot of our manga and it's kind of making me want to start reading manga again. After being failed by a lot of my favorite series, I forget what I lurved the most about my favorite manga: the art, the humor, the characters -- people who act the way they do because of who they are (I am articulate!!), the emphasis on relationships and the past and frondzzzzzz. I think this is why I can't get it up for most American comic books. The emphases are like completely different.
2009: 50/50/50
Jan. 8th, 2009 06:54 pmInitially stolen from
streetmission, but I've seen this modification floating around (I am the opposite of goal-oriented).
( read, watch, listen )
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
( read, watch, listen )
MONDAY MADNESS!!!
Mar. 31st, 2008 07:28 pmSorry.
OMG the two Alabama 5th graders on the Yahoo front page thing are incredibly endearing to me. I don't know why. I think the "LITTLE HEROES!!!" story is blown up a good deal, and I think the two kids know it too. They're all stiff and polite in the face of the sick blaring of the newscasters. I don't know why they look so much alike though. Or why television personalities are so soulless and disgusting.
Every time I come back to UCLA after experiencing any kind of joy, I am reminded anew of how those two happenstances will never overlap. I hate this fucking place. College is a four-year long exercise in tolerating misery and learning how to bend over and take it. THANKS, UCLA!
I was seized with a desire to get some books for reading to-day. I rather like looking up books in library catalogs and writing down the call numbers on those scraps of paper they give you and then hunting them down all over the library. Wot I borrowed:
I put a request out on Patricia C. Wrede's Dealing With Dragons because I wanted to re-read it. I first read it in 5th or 6th grade and I really liked it. Actually I should re-read the sequels, since I remembering Dealing quite well and the sequels, not at all, but LOL WHATEVER!
Additionally I am sort of in the middle of re-reading Paul Gallico's The Silent Miaow and reading Martin Amis's Experience. Guilt is attached to both these books: The Silent Miaow because I liked the book so much that I just kept Stanislaus County's only copy and paid the fine instead of doing all that tiresome "going to the bookstore and paying full price" business, thus depriving future cat-lovers the joy of discovering this delightful unsung gem of a book (I'm not being sarcastic! the book is a gem!); Experience because I was supposed to have finished it 2 years ago, as it was what I ~ostensibly~ wrote my extended essay on (along with Dave Eggers's A Heartbreaking Work which I also have not finished). The furthest I've ever gotten has been page 25, and I only got there yesterday.
Okay now I'm going to type up Sandra Tsing Loh speaking some truth about IKEA:
OMG the two Alabama 5th graders on the Yahoo front page thing are incredibly endearing to me. I don't know why. I think the "LITTLE HEROES!!!" story is blown up a good deal, and I think the two kids know it too. They're all stiff and polite in the face of the sick blaring of the newscasters. I don't know why they look so much alike though. Or why television personalities are so soulless and disgusting.
Every time I come back to UCLA after experiencing any kind of joy, I am reminded anew of how those two happenstances will never overlap. I hate this fucking place. College is a four-year long exercise in tolerating misery and learning how to bend over and take it. THANKS, UCLA!
I was seized with a desire to get some books for reading to-day. I rather like looking up books in library catalogs and writing down the call numbers on those scraps of paper they give you and then hunting them down all over the library. Wot I borrowed:
Dave Barry's Dave Barry Turns 40I tried to be unambitious wif my book choices, since out of any 10 books I ever borrow I only read more than 5 pages out of 3 of them. Still, I predict that I will not get halfway through Mother Tongue. Or tbh the Korman. Yes, it is an elementary school-level book.
Bill Bryson's The Mother Tongue: English and How It Got That Way
Neil Gaiman's Fragile Things
Gordon Korman's A Semester in the Life of a Garbage Bag
Sandra Tsing Loh's Depth Takes a Holiday
I put a request out on Patricia C. Wrede's Dealing With Dragons because I wanted to re-read it. I first read it in 5th or 6th grade and I really liked it. Actually I should re-read the sequels, since I remembering Dealing quite well and the sequels, not at all, but LOL WHATEVER!
Additionally I am sort of in the middle of re-reading Paul Gallico's The Silent Miaow and reading Martin Amis's Experience. Guilt is attached to both these books: The Silent Miaow because I liked the book so much that I just kept Stanislaus County's only copy and paid the fine instead of doing all that tiresome "going to the bookstore and paying full price" business, thus depriving future cat-lovers the joy of discovering this delightful unsung gem of a book (I'm not being sarcastic! the book is a gem!); Experience because I was supposed to have finished it 2 years ago, as it was what I ~ostensibly~ wrote my extended essay on (along with Dave Eggers's A Heartbreaking Work which I also have not finished). The furthest I've ever gotten has been page 25, and I only got there yesterday.
Okay now I'm going to type up Sandra Tsing Loh speaking some truth about IKEA:
... the bottom line is, shopping IKEA is a complete, spiritually rejuvenating experience.That's an inelegant place to end it but the following section is not relevant to my point, which is I LOVE IKEA. And I don't want to type anymore. Anyway. I LOVE IKEA. It's a coincidence that I found this essay thing on IKEA because my fambly and I went to IKEA on Friday for a delishous dinner and an invigorating shopping trip. I don't understand the shame Sandra Loh talks about elsewhere in the essay thing or the Fight Club disdain for IKEA. IKEA IS AMAZING.
[...]
Gay blue-and-yellow banners out on the boulevard herald your arrival, as if to some world's fair. Enormous signs tell you where to park, where to walk, where to load: one half expects to see a monorail whizzing up above.
In the IKEA foyer, you are seized with a feeling of indescribable happiness. The general feeling -- of bright colors, big windows, educational displays -- is of having entered some marvelous Montessori-type school for creatively gifted children. (For some of us, being named a "gifted child" was the last happy time we can remember, before endless adult temp experiences disappointed.)
On your left are some enormous metal bins with bright yellow carrier-bags in them. Pencils are also provided. To your right is the "ball room," a glassed-in room full of colorful balls! In fact, it is for one's children. You can sign them in and leave them there for hours. Just ahead is the "diaper room."
A wave of liberal emotion sweeps over you. Good God -- American corporations cannot even provide on-site child care for families and mothers. And here is IKEA, a home-furnishing store, bending over backward to provide free diapers. Surely on-site, IKEA-sponsored medical care cannot be far behind.
Across from the diaper room is a quasi-scientific exhibit of more clever "child-proofing" doodads than one could ever imagine. But underneath is the kicker. Image after image has been piling up, but what takes the vision of a whole New Democratic Order over the top is a shiny, brand-new Volvo with a big bow on top.
Of course. Scandinavian ingenuity. Safety meeting design; the Volvo; the very sanctuary of the modern family. Atop the car -- under the bow -- sits a special removable IKEA luggage rack with which you can haul your furniture home. Price: twenty-two dollars. (Needless to say, a full refund will be cheerfully given upon the rack's safe return to mother ship IKEA.)
Because IKEA is the mother ship; IKEA is a mother, a good mother, whose white pine and goose-down comforters sing the song of Sweden! IKEA stands for incredible human goodness, of a certain long-forgotten standard of Western morality. The Italians have had their ugly moments, and God knows the Germans have, but never the Swedes! The Swedes are a neutral people, a fair people, a moral people!
It is all we can do not to throw ourselves down on the floor and bow before the image of the slightly balding Ingvar Kamprad [founder of IKEA]. Not so much a nerdy dweeb as, really, an honest guy from the little town of Almhult who sold matchbooks and had a simple dream...
"To create a better everyday life for the majority of people."
How many Republican politicians can say they've done that? How many Democrats?
oh the dumb, how i have it
Oct. 14th, 2007 01:07 pmRe-read "How to Tell a True War Story" from Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried today. This book still makes me feel enormously conflicted. Just putting this entry as a placeholder for when I can gather my thoughts better. I got BBQ sauce on the book btw.
- - -
To calm myself down after being annoyed by mon roomie (after listening to some Nina Simone, which also soothed my spirit) I'm going to bash through my issues with this book.
"How to Tell a True War Story" fucked with my head A LOT. I remember reading it two summers ago and feeling FUCKED WITH. I think I can only write about it if I literally respond pace by pace to the lines of the story.
"If a story seems moral, do not believe it. If at the end of a war story, you feel uplifted, or if you feel that some small bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, then you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie. There is no rectitude whatsoever. There is no virtue. As a first rule of thumb, therefore, you can tell a true war story by its absolute and uncompromising allegiance to obscenity and evil." It's so hard to read accounts of war and not think that it was one hundred percent horrible, that it is and completely is evil. Later when he talks about how war brings you closer to life, how war is beautiful in its own way, when people talk about bonds between soldiers and closeness - it's hard for me to reconcile those things with how bad war is supposed to be. Maybe that's just binary thinking, an unrefined desire to take information to extremes, to keep concepts in strictly delineated boxes. War as utterly contradictory? EVERYTHING IS SO CONFUSING IN THIS BOOK, I AM SO DUMB.
I think part of the problem is this equation with war with truth, and the association of truth as good. If war is so close to human truth, and people in war have then come so close to this human truth -- which I think is what O'Brien argues, with all his "you don't understand"ness -- and war changes you, changes you in an irreversible way -- for better or worse? People are not meant to know that truth, how far people can go?
The Rat Kiley letter thing: an unmanageable pain that manifests in this small ugly way, the small ugly pettiness of swear words when you're really trying to mean it. I always cringe when I read that section though. There's too much history of it, of women denigrated with those words and all other words like it. There's too much power behind it, and then for it to be excused with "because it's so incredibly sad and true: she never wrote back." What about her story, her pain, her brother dead half a world away and a letter written by someone she doesn't know describing her brother as someone she doesn't know, couldn't know, because the war had changed him and she can't understand. But is me asking that going to detract from the point he's making? It's not about our story, the civilians, whose pain is out of negative space and the lack of experience. It's about the ones who were there right? Is it right of me to demand a balanced view? He has a right to say "this is going to about my perspective, that's it". And maybe he's not blaming the sister for not writing back; maybe the "incredibly sad and true" is about the abstract pain of putting your soul and sending it away and waiting and never getting anything back, of silence when someone nineteen yrs old and so so out of his depth can't get even grasp this. And even though it sounds obnoxious, what Rat says, "Jesus Christ, man, I write this beautiful fuckin' letter, I slave over it, and what happens?", maybe you transcend the words and access that abstract pain. Because in war, words become meaningless? Does that mean different standards have to be used in evaluating people in war? Then what does that say about their stories?? OMG SO CONFUSED.
edit @ 6/22/08/
Just noticed this part: "Send guys to war, they come home talking dirty." What does that mean? If you send guys to war, they come back talking dirty, because they no longer can try to soften what they say, they can no longer format and paste their thoughts for polite society? Or they've fallen out of "polite society" and the ugliness of swear words is the way they can express themselves? WHAT THE FUCK, I HATE THIS BOOK, I WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND IT. URRGHHHH WORRRRGHHH.
/edit
Thing that fucked me up: the baby water buffalo story. I still don't really know what I make of it. I think I get it, and then at the end he calls the old woman dumb cooze in his head and calls that story a love story. AND I DON'T GET IT. OMG. WHAT THE FUCK.
This story was such a mindfuck, I swear. I don't think I'll ever get it. Maybe the point is that it jumbles you up? I SWEAR I WILL NEVER GET IT.
For a brief glorious window in senior year, I thought I understood what O'Brien was saying. LOLOLOL NOT ANYMORE!
Thoughts I wrote down from senior year:
In war it's hard to tell what's actually happening from what you think is happening. And that perception of reality supercedes reality. The confusion you feel about trying to find out the truth: THAT is the truth. ??????
But what about the rest of it? OMG. Seriously tell me what you thought about this.
- - -
To calm myself down after being annoyed by mon roomie (after listening to some Nina Simone, which also soothed my spirit) I'm going to bash through my issues with this book.
"How to Tell a True War Story" fucked with my head A LOT. I remember reading it two summers ago and feeling FUCKED WITH. I think I can only write about it if I literally respond pace by pace to the lines of the story.
A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain men from doing the things men have always done. If a story seems moral, do not believe it. If at the end of a war story, you feel uplifted, or if you feel that some small bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, then you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie. There is no rectitude whatsoever. There is no virtue. As a first rule of thumb, therefore, you can tell a true war story by its absolute and uncompromising allegiance to obscenity and evil. Listen to Rat Kiley. Cooze, he says. He does not say bitch. He certainly does not say woman, or gilr. He says cooze. Then he spits and stares. He's nineteen years old -- it's too much for him -- so he looks at you with thos big sad gentle killer eyes and says cooze, because his friend is dead, and because it's so incredibly sad and true: she never wrote back.
You can tell a true war story if it embarrasses you. If you don't care for obscenity, you don't care for the truth; if you don't care for the truth, watch how you vote. Send guys to war, they come home talking dirty.
Listen to Rat: "Jesus Christ, man, I write this beautiful fuckin' letter, I slave over it, and what happens? The dumb cooze never writes back."
"It does not restrain men from doing the things men have always done." This isn't the point O'Brien was getting at, but god that is just another strike against humanity. How history repeats itself; how individual people don't change, so how can we possibly expect this world to be okay? The world is so going to end soon, you guys. I'm pretty convinced of this. Somewhere down the line the only thing we're going to be able to do is make peace with the fact that "oh well, at least I'm not going to be alive" and say a really, really final goodbye to everything we love, and be prepared to know that we've screwed our children over to the nthnthnth degree. You can tell a true war story if it embarrasses you. If you don't care for obscenity, you don't care for the truth; if you don't care for the truth, watch how you vote. Send guys to war, they come home talking dirty.
Listen to Rat: "Jesus Christ, man, I write this beautiful fuckin' letter, I slave over it, and what happens? The dumb cooze never writes back."
"If a story seems moral, do not believe it. If at the end of a war story, you feel uplifted, or if you feel that some small bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, then you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie. There is no rectitude whatsoever. There is no virtue. As a first rule of thumb, therefore, you can tell a true war story by its absolute and uncompromising allegiance to obscenity and evil." It's so hard to read accounts of war and not think that it was one hundred percent horrible, that it is and completely is evil. Later when he talks about how war brings you closer to life, how war is beautiful in its own way, when people talk about bonds between soldiers and closeness - it's hard for me to reconcile those things with how bad war is supposed to be. Maybe that's just binary thinking, an unrefined desire to take information to extremes, to keep concepts in strictly delineated boxes. War as utterly contradictory? EVERYTHING IS SO CONFUSING IN THIS BOOK, I AM SO DUMB.
I think part of the problem is this equation with war with truth, and the association of truth as good. If war is so close to human truth, and people in war have then come so close to this human truth -- which I think is what O'Brien argues, with all his "you don't understand"ness -- and war changes you, changes you in an irreversible way -- for better or worse? People are not meant to know that truth, how far people can go?
The Rat Kiley letter thing: an unmanageable pain that manifests in this small ugly way, the small ugly pettiness of swear words when you're really trying to mean it. I always cringe when I read that section though. There's too much history of it, of women denigrated with those words and all other words like it. There's too much power behind it, and then for it to be excused with "because it's so incredibly sad and true: she never wrote back." What about her story, her pain, her brother dead half a world away and a letter written by someone she doesn't know describing her brother as someone she doesn't know, couldn't know, because the war had changed him and she can't understand. But is me asking that going to detract from the point he's making? It's not about our story, the civilians, whose pain is out of negative space and the lack of experience. It's about the ones who were there right? Is it right of me to demand a balanced view? He has a right to say "this is going to about my perspective, that's it". And maybe he's not blaming the sister for not writing back; maybe the "incredibly sad and true" is about the abstract pain of putting your soul and sending it away and waiting and never getting anything back, of silence when someone nineteen yrs old and so so out of his depth can't get even grasp this. And even though it sounds obnoxious, what Rat says, "Jesus Christ, man, I write this beautiful fuckin' letter, I slave over it, and what happens?", maybe you transcend the words and access that abstract pain. Because in war, words become meaningless? Does that mean different standards have to be used in evaluating people in war? Then what does that say about their stories?? OMG SO CONFUSED.
edit @ 6/22/08/
Just noticed this part: "Send guys to war, they come home talking dirty." What does that mean? If you send guys to war, they come back talking dirty, because they no longer can try to soften what they say, they can no longer format and paste their thoughts for polite society? Or they've fallen out of "polite society" and the ugliness of swear words is the way they can express themselves? WHAT THE FUCK, I HATE THIS BOOK, I WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND IT. URRGHHHH WORRRRGHHH.
/edit
Thing that fucked me up: the baby water buffalo story. I still don't really know what I make of it. I think I get it, and then at the end he calls the old woman dumb cooze in his head and calls that story a love story. AND I DON'T GET IT. OMG. WHAT THE FUCK.
This story was such a mindfuck, I swear. I don't think I'll ever get it. Maybe the point is that it jumbles you up? I SWEAR I WILL NEVER GET IT.
For a brief glorious window in senior year, I thought I understood what O'Brien was saying. LOLOLOL NOT ANYMORE!
Thoughts I wrote down from senior year:
sense out of the senseless:
- war is senseless
--> stories to try to make sense of it
BUT if the stories make sense it's a lie
because the true ones know what the war was like: senseless
in real life no morals
I DON'T TRUST THESE AT ALL. - war is senseless
--> stories to try to make sense of it
BUT if the stories make sense it's a lie
because the true ones know what the war was like: senseless
in real life no morals
In war it's hard to tell what's actually happening from what you think is happening. And that perception of reality supercedes reality. The confusion you feel about trying to find out the truth: THAT is the truth. ??????
But what about the rest of it? OMG. Seriously tell me what you thought about this.