'The Snow Child' by Eowyn Ivey

Why these stories for children always have to turn out so dreadfully is beyond me. I think if I ever tell it to my grandchildren, I will change the ending...We are allowed to do that, are we not Mabel? To invent our own endings and choose joy over sorrow? 

(excerpt from the book)

It's been awhile since I've felt the need to really review a book but then it's so rare to come across a book that is so utterly enchanting and captivates you wholly. That is what I got from reading the achingly beautiful 'The Snow Child', the debut novel by Eowyn Ivey (jealous of the author's name!)

The narrative wraps itself around this fairy tale of an old couple who create a snow child in winter and she comes alive, a creature of the snowy wilderness. The book is split between the POVs of Mabel and Jack, a couple who've escaped to Alaska to start a life of their own after not being able to have children. It's a lonely and extreme existence but as surely as the snow melts, their lives are quietly transformed by the seasons, their neighbours - and a girl of the snow who lives in the mountains behind their homestead, who they alone can see after building a snow girl one night.

I couldn't get over how much the book affected me and overwhelmed me. I knew from the first page that this was going to be a keeper; it was the way the author spun the tale with sharp, simple but ever so vivid prose. After putting it down, I realised it's pretty much near perfectly weighted between the fantastical and practical, a subtle weaving of what it takes to carve a living off this harsh landscape and  being taken in by the mystic elements, largely encompassed by the ethereal character of the snow child herself.

It's coming of age, it's all the bittersweet aspects of parenthood and endurance, the fleeting moments of beauty life gives us - everything I adore. Some of it reminded me of 'Princess Mononoke', the film by Hayao Miyazaki about a girl of a primal forest, raised by wolves - that whole untamed beauty of the natural world that is both more substantial and more insubstantial than the working, 'human' world.
I can only urge you to pick it up and read it yourself. You cannot be disappointed by any of it. This book has firmly and surely placed itself at the top of my 'must read' list.

VERDICT: 10/10

The Help - thoughts on the book

"I come home that morning, after I been fired, and stood outside my house with my new work shoes on. The shoes my mama paid a month's worth a light bill for. I guess that's when I understood what shame was and the color of it too. Shame ain't black, like dirt, like I always thought it was. Shame be the color of a new white uniform your mother ironed all night to pay for, white without a smudge or a speck a work-dirt on it." 

It's very rare that you come across something so charming that the mere thought of it makes you smile. That's the response attributed to the wonderfully written 'The Help' by Kathryn Stockett. I didn't have many expectations before reading this, as I understood the basic premise from seeing the movie trailers. I didn't expect it to be written in the speak of the South and so be full of such wonderful charisma and immediacy. I'm always envious of writers who can pen the sound and nuances of local language and dialect - and this is why books are so magical - they give you a window into a world and culture you would never have otherwise encountered.

All this and more helps to the make 'The Help' a real classic - there's plenty of laughs to be had (and you know they're good ones when you're chortling on the Tube or train), heaps of pathos and poignancy, all without any heavy handed author input - it's presented without overt exposition on the view points that could otherwise get too political and didactic. Instead, there's a subtler, more honest approach and there's enough variety in all the multiple POVs to give us a full flavour and wide berth, whilst stilling remaining intimate. It's always a tricky balance to get right, as there's the bigger arena of race relations in Mississippi and the South to represent (and on lesser scale all of the USA), as well as just these vignettes of the 'real' people in these closed off, behind doors situations.

I don't have anything negative to add - when I finished, I thought the author didn't 'wrap' up the story lines of Skeeter and her mum very well but in a way, as with the rest of the narrative, it was just right because the Civil Rights Movement was still underway and there was (and still is) a long way to go. I kind of respect the fact that things weren't polished off neatly - while there were small victories to be had, most of the revolutions came from within and as a result, the journey never really stops then, does it?

I highly recommend this book as a must read. It's definitely up there with all the best loved American classics. 

The Hunger Games - just misses the mark

Ok, so totes in dange of (sorry, sorry) - and again...! I'm in danger of sounding like a broken record when it comes to novel to film adaptations (and slightly aghast that peeps in the biz aren't reading my reviews as wonderful analyses of how adaptations could work and applying them to their own work - it's free consultancy, yo!)

Anyhow, getting back to the necessary task at hand - The Hunger Games viewing for moi et Arctic Bunny was last night. I had pegged this as a 'must see of 2012' as most others did and I refrained from reading reviews, though I cracked when Incredible Suit posted this week (gah!).

*SPOILERS ALERT* Dare I say it, but it was an all around decent film but exceptionally and lazily adapted from the book. It took too long to 'get to the good stuff' and there were some other obvious flaws that have nothing to do with flaws from the book itself - it's all down to the film-makers.

I kind of guessed at this the moment the film opened and we see Game-Maker, Seneca Crane talking to blue haired presenter (played solidly well by Stanley Tucci) - and it became a continual problem - removing us out of Katniss's POV and the games and into the 'behind-the-scenes' world of the Capitol. UGH. It completely leached the strength of menace that an antagonist has - seeing Presi Snow chatting to Crane on various occasions, I sat there trying to fathom why this was in the narrative at all. It's like seeing the most bad ass robot and then they take you to see it nuts and bolts - or find it works on water. Lame.  Another classic example is when Katniss is in that ante-room before entering the pod-lift into the arena. It's suspenseful stuff and then [cut], we're in that control room with some lady telling us 'Ok, they're in.' Geez - talk about removing oneself from the suspenseful moment of Katniss entering the arena in one seamless sequence. That warrants a hit to the head, editor. 

Another issues were Peeta and Katniss - it wasn't good chemistry between Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson, but Josh came across stronger in his performance as the 'boy with the bread'. Which also brings me to the 'bread' scene - why is it raining and why wasn't it made clear that Katniss was literally starving to death with nothing to take to her family? The flashbacks were lazy and confusing. There could have one sequence of 'father's death - starving - bread via Peeta - daffodil' but no, that would have been too simple. If we knew she was at the end of her tether, that moment would have been more significant and so to, their relationship. Instead, when it's time for Katniss to turn on the 'charm', it's not even obvious that she has turned on anything. And then we kept cutting to see Gale in District 12, *shakes head*. And if they'd done the bread scene properly, we'd have known that Katniss does whatever it takes to survive - she's survived near death before - this is her trait, her winning element - not the bow and arrow.

The Hunger Games

So, I've been in what I can only say is something of a reading 'depression' and it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that it's been going on for some time - perhaps years really, when I try and think about any book that has ignited me - I mean, really and truly to the point where I'm immersed in it my head it still in the narrative long before I put the book down. I was momentarily lifted by 'Revolution' by Jennifer Donnelly but that is a stand alone book and the momentum didn't carry me on to further great reads.

So I stumbled upon 'The Hunger Games' by Susanne Collins - thanks to my sis, who sent me a link to the trailer of the upcoming movie. I watched it, read the general premise for the original books and was like 'OM%G, why haven't I heard of these?' Apparently, it was the series that Hogwarts graduates fell into after the void Potter left us in (Hogwarts graduates meaning the age group of people who are Harry Potter's year - i.e. when the first book came in 1997, we were the kids starting Year 7. So if JK had stayed true to the book a year thing, we would have been graduating high school the same year as Harry - what? Don't give me that look!) I must have missed the memo about these books though because I only came to know of it the Friday two weeks ago, harassed my sister into buying the series on Monday and was reading it Monday evening. I've read the second but am putting a breather between tackling the third.

It really is riveting - the premise is strong, clear (and though I know The Hunger Games fans will hate me for it, it has shades of the ORIGINAL Battle Royale books by Koshun Takami) which makes me a wee bit envious because I sometimes forget the whole premise/purpose of my own book because it's such a huge story. Writing one person POV must be nice too. I let various characters sidetrack me totally.

I love that the Minotaur-Cretan-Athenian-conflict legend inspired the whole 'send the kids to their death' - of course I would love that!

Why am I blabbering about this, you wonder? Well because these series are about to movies very soon and I wonder whether they will capture the nature of the books because I loved how well the film adaptation of Battle Royale went down. And I'm wondering whether the USAns can do the same, because often, I'm left pretty darn miffed with their adaptations - I even got into a Twitter back and forth with Philip Bloom, much respected camera-man and my reference to all things Canon 7D (thank you) - but we had a difference of opinion regarding 'IMMORTALS' - I put an end to the discussion when I saw that Bloom had written 'You won't see a better looking film.' *I grits my teeth* Oh, Philip, you don't know me AT all! (he wouldn't, naturally...but yeh) It is so typical of a DoP to put the aesthetics over all other elements - flashbacks of university when we watched fellow students work and when left to give feedback, people would always talk about 'how pretty' it was, while I was dying to blurt out 'Did anyone get it?' or 'The story was rather weak, dude - sorry. While you're all admiring the lighting and framing and everything, I'm sitting there thinking 'why do I care about this character or whatever is happening for 5 mins'...' *sigh* Sorry, got diverted there - the discussion of story, truthful adaptation and 'good looking' film is to be left to another blog post soon.

Anyhow, I will look forward to this film coming it is all.

Heaven Help Us - the demise of story and myth thanks to 'Percy Jackson & The Lightning Thief' and Hollywood

Do not ask why I watched 'Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief'. I came into the TV room to see that my father had it on and I usually sit for ten minutes in 'Vajraasan' to help with digestion after dinner and so was committed to watching whatever Dad was viewing at the time. Then through exhaustion, I slumped on the sofa and had no will to protest at Dad's choice, which I usually always do, and thought I would let it be and spare my father some grief.

The grief fell upon me though. Alas, what a pile of terrible, terrible goodness-knows-what that film was. There was so much wrong with this film, I could write an essay on it but I shall *try* to be a little more concise for this blog post.

1. The story itself is absolutely abysmal. The fact that this is a children's book is fine or whatever but it's still a terrible story. Why, do you ask? Well because it wouldn't be so awful if it was original material but no, it's based on Ancient Greek Mythology. All those people close to me, know how much I value mythology - particularly Greece's - and how I absolutely abhor  mainstream cinema or Hollywood (and the American author of the books) constantly rape these ancient tales that so many of our ancestors cherished and from which so many of our cultures' identities springs from - thank you very much, Wolfgang Petersen for 'Troy'. Prepare yourselves for a little of my thinking on this:

2. Ok, so the original books are written by an American author. *shudder* So it's set where? USA, of course.  God, they are obsessed with adopting culture that isn't in their own, aren't they? Why else do you think they have The Senate? USA fancies itself to be a Roman Empire. There's something a little naughty about this culture that has sprung out of America. The thing is, they have done away with the native culture of the land that actually has meaning and context in terms of how old it is. Modern America does not have it's own ancient mythology and a culture that understands who it is because of it (Joseph Campbell claims that mythology helped our ancestors to understand life and our place in existence).  Instead they poach others' myths and legends and think they can 'redress' them in their own back yard. All the demi-gods in the film were bloody American. What the hell? Have the gods jumped ship and set up in USA now? It was the most ridiculous thing ever and rather insulting. I mean, the ancient Greeks were all about poetry and metaphor. The whole Olympian pantheon was just that but no, they have to make everything literal and stupid because of it.

For example, the journey to the Underworld was a joke. What happened to the River Styx? This smacks of such a lack of creativity on the writers' part - you could have done something really interesting with the original material. No one is saying you can't reinvent legendary tales but at least TRY to be creative with it - don't just slap it together like some terrible child's model of the solar system that is stuck together with rubbish glue and does the job but fails to impress.

3. 'Daddy issues' - the dilemma of being half mortal, half god. Boo hoo, daddy left me and doesn't love me. Now. I do not make light of father's abandoning their children at all. But in this tale, it's just so ridiculous - Percy is son of Poseidon. Now once you figured out you were Poseidon's son, a) you would think that was most awesome thing EVER, b) you would begin to understand why he wasn't around, I mean he is a GOD, for god's sake! He's pretty damn busy on running the world and all that? Not to mention having to deal with Zeus and brother rivalry yada yada. At the end, when Poseidon talks and says Zeus commanded that no gods see their children because it means they will forget their responsibilities, I nearly collapsed with laughter. 'Yeah, I'm a god and everything - the whole oceans, rivers and fish are my domain and such, and like I totally forgot all about that, or I was in danger of doing that, but now I know my place - as if I could forget before, right? How silly! I thought I could play mums and dads in a suburban home and then my brother had to remind me that the sea is like what I need to look after. Whoops! Nearly let the ball fall there! Sorry kid, I love you and all but we're gods. We like live on a different plane of existence. You got my cool powers though!'


4. Individual aspects of this 'film' that are so abhorrent (I must use this word continually):

- The pronunciations of Greek words - what the hell? Are the cast unable to get their heads around simple, well known words like 'Minotaur' and 'Satyr', that they have to go even further with their insufferable American-ness and use 'special' pronunciations of these words. Sort it out - it made the film even more ridiculous, as if the film makers were blatantly trying to say, 'Oh yes, this is a complete piss take, look, we cannot even say the Greek words properly! Haha, we're so silly!'

- Pierce Brosnan and Uma Thurman - for shame, for shame! Former 007 reduced to having a horse's ass. Enough said on him. Uma, seriously, what the hell?! 

- ABUSING Athene part 1- Athena has a DAUGHTER??? Since when??!! Who the hell did she get off with? She's the Virgin Goddess, for Christ's sake (and no, I don't think there was such thing as immaculate conception to the Greeks, even if Athene popped out of Zeus' head - correct me if I am wrong). The great thing about Athene was that she was removed from the world of the over-sexed gods like Aphrodite and her father - she was all about *wisdom* and *strategy*. Totally asexual in that respect. Why would she have a DAUGHTER??! (This is a gripe against the author of the books, who I shan't name because if I do, a cute kitten dies somewhere). Better to have this girl (who was too stupid to be Athene's daughter, even if the goddess had 'adopted' here) be Artemis's daughter - she had a bow and all that, so that would have made MORE SENSE. Instead, she was just created to be Athene's daughter so they could be this stupid 'enemy' dynamic between her and Percy, because Athene and Poseidon are not BFFs.

Entering a new chapter

This is a week late somewhat and what's more, this kind of post is usually reserved for my other journal where I gush about 'feelings' and 'life's journey' etc etc.

Yet, allow me some space to do this here. I entered a new 'phase' of life, now that I have been a quarter century on this earth. This year is going to be full of intention and then those intentions actually coming into being - or whatever. 

Last week we celebrated this occasion by going to see the Cirque du Soleil (Totem) at The Royal Albert Hall. It was splendid and wonderful, I loved every minute of it. And that was the first time I had been to the Royal Albert Hall. Stunning really. I was determined to dress up and forgo practical attire which meant my feet froze as we walked from the car park to the venue. Then we finished the evening off at a lovely restaurant in Knightsbridge and the manager heard it was our birthday, so brought out a plate of yummy chocolate desserts, all wheat free. I told him I loved him for that :) Then back home to cut the cake at some insane hour but it had to be done. 


This post does actually have something of interest to read about, namely this article I read on Kazuo Ishiguro which was enlightening, even though I haven't read his work really. I tried to get through 'Remains of the Day' when I was preparing for my interview at Oxford but I couldn't get into it. Needless to say (for I hear you asking, where is the relevance here?), he's being interviewed to talk about 'Never Let Me Go' being made into a film yada yada. 

"When I see films made from books, I make a huge effort not to remember the book," he says. "It's important to see the film as a film. Of course, it's easier with an old book. If it's Wuthering Heights or something, it's like going to the theatre and seeing another version; it might as well be Chekhov. This book came out in 2006, so it's harder to do that. But it's a movie. Every discussion shouldn't be dominated by a comparison with the novel."

Cool, what do you think - do you agree? It's a fair point and in all honesty, quite right, though I couldn't wholeheartedly agree, for that would render this blog's primary aim rather useless. I haven't read the book or seen the film, so cannot make a comparison either way. 

Yet there is something to be said about the film adaptation standing on its own two feet. Do you agree? I'm still thinking that there is a ineffable thread, as it were, that will always bind the film to it's original adaptation - can you ever really separate the two?

Furthermore, what's your favourite book to film adaptation and why did it work for you?