Archive
Book Review: The Penelopiad by Margaret Atwood
Summary:
Hopefully anyone who’s read The Odyssey remembers Odysseus’s long-suffering wife, Penelope, who waited years for his return from the Trojan War, all while raising their son and fending off suitors who were eating her out of house and home. Here, Atwood turns the focus from Odysseus onto Penelope, who from the underworld of Hades tells us about her own life, interspersed with choruses by the 12 maids who were hung to death upon Odysseus’s return.
Review:
I’ve taken to loading an audiobook on my ipod for those frequent times when I either have to walk from a T stop or am crammed onto a train with literally no elbow-room to hold onto my kindle. I was excited to see this on the shelf at my library, since I had decided rather spur of the moment to pick one up, and I do love Atwood. Plus, this is only three discs long, which is good for my audiobook attention span.
For me the story ultimately fails, although I don’t blame Atwood for that. The thing is, Penelope, to a modern woman, is kind of pathetic. It’s not easy to make her into a heroine we can root for, the way we can root for Odysseus. Ok, so he’s a womanizer and a liar, but he’s also brilliant and hilarious. The kind of guy you want to be friends with, but don’t want to date. Yet Penelope not only is married to him, but has never stood up to him. Even when he’s been gone for years and years fighting in a war. Atwood is a great writer, but that’s just not a situation you can fix. I completely get Atwood’s fascination with Penelope’s story, not to mention the 12 maids. I don’t think any woman can read The Odyssey and not wonder about it. But it ultimately doesn’t hold up for a story.
Penelope comes across as a woman who lived in tough times to be a woman, yes, but who never does anything really to fight the status quo. She can’t even bring herself to stand up to the elderly maid who takes the run of her household. Plus, she willingly puts her maids into situations where they are likely to get raped (indeed, do get raped) and then doesn’t stand up for them when her wayward husband finally comes home. Is it within character? Sure. Is it something that holds up as the main focus of a story? Nope.
I did enjoy Atwood’s modern take on the Greek chorus using the dead 12 maids. I appreciate her choice to include a chorus in the book, as well as how she played with different ancient and modern music styles. It even left me wishing the maids were the focus of the book instead of Penelope! Of course, interspersing music between chapters is something I’ve seen Atwood do before in The Year of the Flood, and she’s very good at it. It’s an Atwood style that works perfectly in this book.
So what does this all ultimately mean? Atwood’s writing style is creative and pleasant as always, but the topic of the book just isn’t. I think the constraints of who Penelope is from such an ancient story placed a sour note on Atwood’s work that normally isn’t there. It’s an interesting exercise, but not one I found particularly enjoyable to read. I was more interested in it as an academic exercise. If you’re a fan of retellings of the classics, you’ll be intrigued by it.
3 out of 5 stars
Source: Public Library
Book Review: The Walking Dead: Rise of the Governor by Robert Kirkman and Jay Bonansinga (Series, #1)
Summary:
The first in a prequel trilogy that relates how the baddest villain of The Walking Dead’s zombie apocalypse came to be–not just how he came to rule Woodbury, but how he became an evil sociopath.
Review:
Wow. Just wow. If I could be a good book blogger and just say that I would, but I can’t so I suppose I must attempt to put my love for this book into words.
First of all, it’s important to know that this is sort of a prequel to The Walking Dead graphic novels. It’s the origin story of The Governor (aka one of the most evil comic book villains ever). Only instead of sticking to his graphic novel format, Kirkman, with the assistance of Bonansinga, went with the written word. Now, I was offered this book as an audiobook, and I have to say this really affected my reading of it. The reader, Fred Berman, does an absolutely amazing job. He has a natural standard American accent, but seamlessly slips into a Southern drawl when the characters speak. Beyond this though he is able to bring the anguish and tensity to the survival scenes that is necessary without seeming melodramatic. It reminded me of being read to by my own father when I was a little girl. I found myself choosing to curl up with the audiobook over many other activities. So. I’m not sure if the experience is the same reading it yourself. I do know that listening to the audiobook is a remarkable experience.
Now, this is a zombie apocalypse horror novel about an evil man. It gets uncomfortable. Kirkman and Bonansinga bring us inside the minds of men warped by situations and psychiatric problems alike. It’s not pretty. It makes you squirm. But it’s supposed to. Some reviewers have accused this book of being misogynistic because bad things seem to happen an awful lot to the female characters. I have a couple of things to say about that. First of all, hello, do you live in this world? Because women have to survive a lot of bad shit. Second, this is an apocalypse. Think of it as a war zone. Do women get molested, raped, murdered, treated as less strong and unequal? Absolutely. The book isn’t misogynistic. It’s realistic about how a south torn apart by zombies would treat women. The way to determine if a book in this sort of situation is misogynistic is to look at how the author treats the women. Does he present them as hysterical, over-reacting? Do they refuse to stand up for themselves? I can unequivocally say that although horrible things happen to the women in this book, they fight for themselves. It is therefore not misogynistic, but realistic.
Now one thing that probably a lot of people wonder is is the story predictable? We already know who The Governor is and that he keeps his zombie daughter as a pet. That would seem to remove the ability for the authors to surprise us at all. I am happy to say that in spite of knowing the end result, this story kept me on the edge of my seat. Some readers didn’t like all of the surprises and twists. Personally, I feel that they brought the novel up a notch in both talent and enjoyability.
Overall, this is a wonderful addition to The Walking Dead canon. Fans of the graphic novel series will not be disappointed, although fans of the tv show seem to be taken aback by it. All I can say is that the books don’t pull any punches and are not for the squeamish. If you don’t want to be challenged, stick to tv. Everyone else should scoop this up as soon as possible.
5 out of 5 stars
Source: Copy from the publisher in exchange for my honest review and a giveaway
Book Review: The Walking Dead, Book Three by Robert Kirkman (Series, #3) (Graphic Novel)
Summary:
The rag-tag band of survivors have adjusted to living in the prison. One day they spot a helicopter go down in flames. Rick, Michonne, and Glenn head out to check on it and end up finding another group of survivors whose leader is known as The Governor. Unfortunately for them, not everyone has maintained their humanity amid the walking dead.
Review:
This entry in the series puts the graphic in graphic novel. We’re talking mutilation, torture, and rape. Also the usual murders and zombies. It is not a book for those disturbed by those things or who find them gratuitous. However, for those of us who love violence all up in our literature, it’s a squee-inducing violence fest. Although you may not want to read it in public just in case someone glances over your shoulder during the rape and/or torture scenes.
The addition of another group of survivors where everything is not hunky dory and evil has arisen was exactly what this series needed. It shows the very dark possibilities that the group we’ve been following have thus far managed to avoid. It puts things like Tyreese and Rick’s fight in the previous book into perspective. Woodbury and The Governor also demonstrate how key Rick has been to the group’s survival and maintenance of a healthy community. All it takes is one bad apple wanting the power for a bad culture to spring up. It’s a good lesson that’s taught here in a subtle way.
I thought long and hard about how I feel about Michonne’s rape. At first I was angry about it with reactions ranging from, “she’s so strong; it doesn’t make sense” to “oh sure, rape the only black woman *eye-roll*.” But the more I thought about it I realized I was being unfair. In a world gone to hell and full of evil rape is going to happen. Rape happens every day now let alone in a post-apocalyptic world, and Kirkman manages to show it in a graphic novel in a way that is respectful to the victim, which I am sure was not easy to do. The concept of what is happening is clear, but at the same time, the drawings focus in on the victim’s emotions and reactions. Similarly, Michonne is the logical choice because she is the most adventurous of the women. She does not stay at home with the kids while the men run out and do things. She’s a strong woman, yes, but being strong doesn’t stop bad things from happening to you. That said, if you are a person who finds rape scene triggering, you should definitely skip this entry in the series and get someone to sum it up for you.
Overall, this is a strong entry that keeps the series fresh and introduces more drama into the post-apocalyptic world. Fans of the first two books will not be disappointed by this one. Highly recommended.
4 out of 5 stars
Source: Public Library
Previous Books in Series:
The Walking Dead, Book One (review)
The Walking Dead, Book Two (review)
Book Review: A Stolen Life by Jaycee Dugard
Summary:
On June 10, 1991, eleven year old Jaycee Lee Dugard was abducted from her school bus stop by Phillip and Nancy Garrido with the aid of a stun-gun. Jaycee was locked up in a backyard compound and repeatedly raped and abused by Phillip in a bid to satisfy his pedophilia. Over the course of her 18 year captivity, Jaycee gave birth to two daughters in the compound. Eventually with her increasing age, the sexual assaults stopped, but she was still held captive. Finally, on August 26, 2009, Phillip brought Jaycee and her daughters with him to the parole office in an attempt to explain away why he was spotted in public with the two girls. Jaycee, who hadn’t been allowed to speak her name for 18 years, was able to write it down for the police. This is the memoir of her experience and gradual recovery from the captivity.
Review:
Jaycee wrote this memoir without the assistance of a ghost writer, something very uncommon in memoirs by victims of abduction. She states in the beginning that her way of remembering things is a bit off because of the trauma, but that her way of telling her story will provide a genuine experience for the reader to truly see how the abduction affected her. She is correct that the memoir is not set up in a traditional way, but this tends to make for stronger books when discussing something as painful as this. It reminds me a bit of the very non-traditional story-telling methods used in another memoir When Rabbit Howls. Eliminating the ghost writer and letting the victim speak grants us, the readers, the opportunity to truly connect with a survivor. I humbly thank Jaycee for her bravery in this.
Most of the chapters start with Jaycee remembering the events from the perspective of her younger self. This absolutely makes scenes such as her first molestation by Phillip incredibly haunting. She then ends each chapter with a reflection from her adult, free perspective on the past. This structure is unique, but it provides an interesting perspective, showing both Jaycee the victim and Jaycee the survivor. Toward the end of the book this structure is lost a bit as we suddenly are shown many pages from the journal Jaycee carefully kept in captivity, as well as talking in a more present manner about the therapy she’s been going through. Her therapist sounds truly remarkable. She uses horses to help the survivors deal with problems, which seems to work incredibly well for Jaycee who often only had animals around to talk to during her 18 year ordeal.
Although Jaycee does recount her abuse and manipulation at the hands of Phillip, that is not at all what stands out in this memoir. What comes across is what a strong, sensitive, caring woman Jaycee is. She is not lost in woe is me. She does not even think she has it the worst of anyone in the world. The one thing she repeatedly states she’s learned is that she was not assertive enough as a little girl, and that personality trait backfired on her repeatedly throughout the ordeal. She states that she sees this as the reason abuse of all kinds are able to go on, because people don’t speak up.
There are moments in which all of us need to have a backbone and feel that we have the right to say no to adults if we believe they are doing the wrong thing. You must find your voice and not be afraid to speak up. (page 143)
This message of “speak up” is stated repeatedly throughout the book and leaves the reader feeling empowered rather than downtrodden at such a tale. If Jaycee could live through such a situation and come out of it stronger and as an advocate for victims and survivors of abuse to speak up, how can any of us do any less?
I recommend this book to those who enjoy memoirs and survival stories and can handle scenes of a disturbing nature.
4 out of 5 stars
Source: Amazon
Movie Review: Original vs. Remake Comparison: The Last House on the Left (1972 vs. 2009)
Summary:
1972:
Mary is a sweet-tempered, girl-next-door that every boy in the neighborhood has the hots for, but she has a best friend from the wrong side of the tracks. They frolic in the woods together and drink alcohol kept cool in the river. Mary’s parents do not approve. Mary and her friend go to NYC for a concert, but when her friend tries to score some weed, their night goes horribly awry. Suddenly they find themselves at the mercy of two escape convicts, a son of one of the convicts who does their beck and call for his heroin hits, and a malicious, nympho woman.
2009:
Mary is vacationing in the lakes with her doctor father and lovely mother. She goes into town to hang out with her old friend, and the two of them go back to a hotel room to get high with a teenage boy. But that boy’s father, uncle, and the uncle’s girlfriend come back, and the dad is an escaped con. He decides he can’t let the girls go and kidnaps them, finishing them off in the woods. They wind up car-wrecked and must seek help at a nearby cabin that just so happens to be Mary’s parents’. When they figure out the mystery, all hell breaks loose.
Review:
1972:
This is a classically 70s film featuring everything from feathered hair to 70s music to background music oddly upbeat for the dark tone. The opening shot is essentially of Mary’s
boobs. This was the era of really stretching the boundaries. Everything semi-pornographic and disgusting that they could get away with, they did get away with. There is one, rather controversial, scene in which Mary and her friend are forced to have sex with each other–and need I remind you her friend is female? There is a lot of rape, a lot of blood, and these killers really do kill just for fun. Not to make it sound like this is slasher porn, though. There’s nothing at all remotely sexy about the violence. It’s meant to be disturbing, and it is. There’s one scene in particular that will have all male viewers crossing their legs and quivering in their boots. All that said, this movie definitely reads as campy due to some unfortunate scenes featuring upbeat music and bumbling policemen that feel like they belong more in an episode of Andy Griffith than a horror movie. I’m really not sure what Craven was thinking sticking those scenes in there. There of course also is the enduring problem of the victims being truly, incredibly stupid. Horror is the most horrifying when it feels as if the victims did everything smart, but still got caught. The element of unsuspected revenge is what saves the movie, though.
2009:
This movie is quite creative for a modern horror. It takes a fairly sympathetic main character and has her a make a rather impulsive, but not completely stupid decision. Mary and her friend take far more agency trying to get away. They are far more modern female victims. They fight back physically and not with words and pleading. The cinematography is dark and intense. The convict’s son becomes a far more sympathetic character, and Mary’s parents much more believable as a vindictive pair. The whole plot moves at the perfect pace, and the ending is surprising.
1972 vs. 2009:
I have to say, 2009 wins for horror movie quality. It is put together more smoothly without the odd side-story of the police with the humorous background music. The story is more cohesive. However, surprisingly, 1972 is far more gory and feels more like a slasher. The violence, both sexual and physical, is surprising, and the villains are far more evil. If you’re out for the chills of a good horror, movie, go with the 2009 version. If you’re after sheer blood and violence, go for the 1972 version.
1972: 3.5 out of 5 stars
2009: 4 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
1972: Buy It
2009: Buy It


