Sunglasses, Shakespeare (not the one you think) and some Sci-Fi

I've been reading a lot lately, so some of these are going to be short and sweet.

The Meaning of Sunglasses was really good. The author parses the meaning of fashion very well, and while I disagreed with many of her points (there is an exception to almost every rule she set forth), the guidelines are overall are good. Grown women shouldn't wear pink, a little black dress looks good on everyone and sunglasses can improve almost everyone. Being a Brit, I don't know when she gets the chance to wear sunglasses, but there it is. It was pretty funny and just about everyone can benefit from her advice.

As She Climbed Across the Table was recommenced on the io9 site and I'm still not quite sure how much I liked it. It was (to use a British expression) too clever by half. By that I mean it was very clever and well aware of it. It's the story of a grad student and the particle physicist he loves-who falls in love with a black hole. The black hole was developed in the lab and she's become obsessed with it. The bring things to (food, furniture, grass clippings) and it takes some of them and others it leaves behind. And she loves it. I did like how the story wound up-how he goes into the black hole (and it will take him but not her) and in doing so, becomes part of it-they fuse, in a way. That part was very cool and interesting. If only it weren't so self-aware! Look how clever I am! Look how witty I can be! It's just on the verge of greatness and that's what annoyed me-that it never made it over that edge.

More than Human by Theodore Sturgeon is one of those books that all sci-fi people say you have to read, even though they haven't read it themselves. It's always on the list of 100 Best Science Fiction books and since I'm trying to read some classic sci-fi, I thought I'd give it a shot. This is a book that I can say I didn't really like until the end, when it was really good. There's a cast of several characters-a boy who seems to be mentally deficient, a girl with telekinesis, little twin girls who can teleport and a baby genius, (who can speak only with his brain-it's a good thing he can talk to telekinetic girl) and a very clever boy with no conscience whatsoever.

There were things that annoyed me about this book. I've read books set in the 50's and 60's and did women really talk this way? The women all call everyone darling and dear, in a very idiotic way. And the guys are the ones with the brains-the girls can only move things (or themselves) or tell other people what the smart baby is thinking. It's books like this that help me to realize why the revolution of the 60's happened-the women are smart but are still being condescended to. Nevertheless, the plot as a whole about this group of disparate personalities and how they belong together (and why) really came together at the end. It was almost enough to make up for the rest of it.

After all these books, I was going to read The Story of Edgar Sawtelle (which I Bought LONG BEFORE Oprah announced it as her pick. Thanks Oprah-I do my best to avoid the books you pick mainly because they seem to be women in distress books who find a way to overcome their problems, which are not my type of book-and then you pick a book I bought two months ago. Thanks a lot) Anyway, I did not start Sawtelle. Instead I read Shakespeare's landlord and Shakespeare's Trollop by Charlaine Harris. I've liked her Southern Vampire books (although not lately, but the first three were really good) and I liked theses two. They're traditional murder mysteries, set in the south, but the characters are engaging. They won't make you work for the story but they were fun.

And now I've started Edgar Sawtelle. It;s quite good-well written and interesting-and I'm hoping it doesn't take me forever to read-it's quite long. Edgar (who can't speak but can hear very well) and his mother and father raise dogs in Northern Wisconsin...and his father's brother comes to visit. His father dies (of what seems to be a stroke but the prologue makes it clear was not) his uncle stays to help...and marries his mother. Yes, it's based on Hamlet (and the names alone let you know this-Claude, Trudy and Gar) and I like it so far. We'll see what happens.

Ghost Town

I was a little wary of Ghost Town. I like Ricky Gervais, Greg Kinnear and Tea Leoni, but I wasn't sure how well they would all mesh together. And I'm not a big fan of romantic comedies unless they were made in the 30's or 40's-the ones made recently are awful (see: The Holiday. Actually, don't. The most interesting thing in it was wondering why Brit Jude Law was more tna than LA'er Cameron Diaz). But I loved Ghost Town. Ricky Gervais as the people-hating dentist who sees ghosts after he dies for seven minutes during a colonoscopy (and props to Kristen Wiig as the surgeon-she was very funny), Greg Kinnear as the ghost/cad who wants Gervais to help him and Leoni as his widow-the person Kinnear wants to help. They were funny, effervescent and wonderful. Everyone's timing was great, Gervais was nicely acidic, Leoni was not a woman who spills out her feelings-she's tough, funny and smart. And Greg Kinnear seemed to be channeling Cary Grant, and I mean that in a positive way. And now I'd like to discuss how nice it was to see a movie where the characters looked like human beings. Now that Kinnear has a few lines (and you can see them!) he's not as pretty-but he has much more character. And Leoni is beautiful-always. And it was a pleasure to see a woman my age who has a few small lines on her face, not botox (she can make an expression!) and no lip-plumper. She looked real-and gorgeous. And what about Ricky? He is not beautiful. But when someone can make you laugh that hard, you don't even notice-he was hilarious and touching as well.

Jeez, just go see this movie-it was really good-did I mention I saw it twice? I didn't plan to, but I was just as happy the second time around. And for God's sake, all of you-make more movies! If they all come out like this, the world will be a little bit better place.

Quote of the Week

Actually, this quote from last week, but I had to put down before I completely forgot it. It's from the government report on mismanagement at the Bureau of Minerals Management. The BMM is supposed to oversee the oil and gas companies-make sure they're complying with regulations-that sort of thing. Instead, the women who worked there were taking gifts, partying and having sex with the guys who worked for Hess, Chevron and other companies. And this is a quote from the report "If you are having sexual relations with the persons which are supposed to be overseeing, you are, by definition, not keeping them at arm's length".

I love that quote. It's dry, factual and witty, all at the same time. I want to meet the person who wrote it and thank him or her for putting this into a government document. H.L. Mencken himself would love this sentence. Thank you, anonymous report writer, for this sentence-I've been quoting it for a week now-it's a classic.

Shut Up, Kenley

I haven't written much about Project Runway, mainly because I think they are the most untalented bunch I've ever seen. When they had the avant-garde challenge, I could only think about Christian and Chris's beautiful dress from last season-and then I had to look at the horrible dresses made by this season's contestants. Last night's episode was particularly annoying-badly made clothes (Joe), something I liked that got picked on (Suede, God forbid), liking something form someone whose work I previously hated (hello, Jerrell!)and yelling at Kenley to shut up. Honestly, as Leeanne said (and she is the ONLY one who is talented), Kenley is ridiculously over-confident. She's one-trick pony her pony isn't that great. Say what you like about Laura Bennet or Ulie (who were often accused of doing the same thing) there clothes were beautiful. Impeccably made and stylish, which I would never say about Kenley, who refuses to listen to anything anyone has to say and when criticized, becomes extremely defensive, to the point of ridiculousness. Last night, Tim offered a different point of view, not even a criticism, and there's Kenley talking about how she ever listens to Tim. Think about that. She doesn't listen to the most stylish man on television, the man who knows the judges, who knows style and fashion. And she doesn't listen to him. For that alone, she should be auf'ed. Please make her go away. Please, I'm begging here.

In The Wood

I'm still mulling over how I feel about In The Wood and I think I have a love/hate relationship with it. In a way, it reminds me of that Jodie Foster movie about gang rape, (The Accused)which I thought was a great movie and yet would never watch it again because parts of it were so painful. I really liked In the Wood. The story is compelling-and it's hard to write in the first person and have it be believable, especially when the narrator is unreliable at best. Adam Robert Rogers ran off to play with his two friends as a 12 year-old. They went to the woods near their houses, and when they didn't come back for dinner, a search party was sent to look for them. Adam was found hours later, clinging to a tree so hard that bark was under his fingernails and there was blood in his shoes that had soaked from the shoes into his socks-and it wasn't his. Of his friends, there was no trace. 20 years later, Adam has adopted his middle name as his first name, become a policeman and has a partner that he adores. And now a little girl has had her skull crushed at Bronze Age altar, not that far from where Adam/Rob grew up. Are they connected?

Rob is not the epitome of an unreliable narrator-he calls things like he sees them. What he doesn't see is everything he's done to run away from his past will come back to smack him in the face. And he doesn't see how self-deluding he is-that's left to his partner, Cassie Maddox. So why wouldn't I read it again? Me, who loves to reread my favorite books?
It's really depressing. Really, really depressing. And it's clear from the begin inning that some thing bad is going to happen (something other than the little girl being killed, I mean) and you don't know if it's going to happen to Rob (if he dies or actually turns out to be the murderer, like in The Murder of Roger Ackroyd which was my first encounter with an unreliable narrator) or if he gets sent to prison or if Cassie dies or what. The sense of foreboding is palpable. Let me be clear, everybody lives at the end and in some ways that worse. No one comes out of this looking good and everyone has a reason for doing what they did-and others can't forgive them for it. And it irritated me that one murder was solved but the other mystery was not. All those odd details and no resolution?
So, I'm still thinking about it. It was good-really good but I don't think I can reread it.

Men, Women and Politics

I am a life-long Democrat. To me, that means caring about people who have less than I do, it means freedom of choice when it comes to abortion and it means I'm anti-NRA and anti-death penalty.

So I really don't think Sarah Palin was chosen as VP to appeal to Democratic women. I decided long ago that I would never support a woman just because she was female. Why would I support a pro-NRA, pro-life, evangelical who doesn't believe in evolution and wants to teach creationism in schools? Sarah Palin was chosen by John McCain to consolidate the Republican Party. He has decided that he cannot win without the evangelicals, so he decided to pick a candidate that they would love. It was quite the interesting pick, but it did nothing for me. Another Republican woman, calling for abstinence (not working very well), deriding community leaders (the ones fighting drug dealers because the government won't come up with the cash to do it) and saying that they are for the middle class while protecting the richest people in the US.

Please don't vote for Sarah Palin because she's a woman. Vote for her (if you must) because you agree with what she she says. But if you want equal rights for women, for the freedom to decide what you want to do with your body for the government to stay out of it, then you have to vote for Obama.

Many years ago, my brother told me that the only issue he looked at when he decided who to vote for, was abortion. If the candidate was pro-choice, he would for them. If not, he wouldn't. I thought it was odd at the time, most guys don't use abortion as a single issue unless they're right-wing Christians, but as time goes on, I respect him more and more for this choice. His choice and my choice and everybody else who wants the freedom to choose and not have the government decide in what should be a personal decision.

I Hate What You're Wearing Part XXXXXX

Whenever someone in Washington wears something that's fashion-forward, I feel a little better. It means that not everyone here wears the most boring clothes and that they are buying into the prevailing thought that you can't be well-dressed and be a serious thinker. However, the girl wearing the skirt the other day had me re-thinking this idea. The skirt was silver gray, some kind of stiff material-maybe taffeta-I wasn't close enough to tell. And it was tight at the high waist, with a wide waistband, with many small pleats (almost origami-like)that ballooned out, then all met up at a band right at the knee. This skirt was serious fashion, the problem was:

A) With that beautiful material, why the gray heather tank top that looked like it should be worn with a pair of jeans? That top was way too casual for that skirt.

B) The skirt made her butt look enormous. This girl was thin-really thin and even she looked gigantic in that skirt. It was not flattering at all.

But it was interesting. So, thank you, bubble-skirted girl. You tried, at least. It may not have been flattering, but it was interesting, which is more than you can say for many people who live here.

Many Books and a Few Movies

So, I've read the latest (in paperback) Stephanie Plum. It was more of the same (which is why I gave up buying these books in hardcover years ago), but it was fun. Stephanie gets in trouble, has sex with Joe, kisses Ranger once or twice and comes close to dying a couple of times. And Grandma says some outrageously funny things. I wouldn't buy it but a friend lent it to me and it was entertaining.

Better was F Paul Wilson's first attempt at a young adult novel. I couldn't figure out for awhile what made this book different from the adult Repairman Jack series (this features Jack as a teen) until about halfway through the book I realized that no one jack cared about in this book was going to die a horrible death, unlike in the regular series where they die not only in a long and drawn-out manner, but the corpse is usually desecrated in some way. This story didn't have that, but it did have some creepy parts, some nice nods to what comes later to a grown-up Jack and the first inkling of how he became the man he is now. What I can't figure out is the audience. Does he want young adults to read the books later in this series? Because I read them in my very early twenties and they scared the hell out of me-I can't imagine letting a teenager read them, except for me. The thing is, The Keep was probably the first real supernatural horror book that I read and loved. I had read Stephen king and it was entertaining, except for The Shining, which also scared the hell out of me but I think that was due to the scary/crazy father thing going on as well as the scary monster thing in the hotel/or was the hotel itself. But The keep was different. It was well-written. It had a plot. It didn't mention pop-culture stuff just to do it. And it had a couple of antagonists so strong that they have to numerous other books and series that have all become intertwined. The Keep made me realize that I like this kind of scary book-and it's taken me a long time to admit it, so any book that Wilson writes that ties back to The Keep (and right now it looks like almost all of them do, although I don't think they did when he wrote them) are all right with me.

I finished Absolution Gap, the last in Alastair Reynolds trilogy and I was baffled. So everyone gets away from the wolves (mindless machines that destroy almost everything in their way) and go to the remote planet of Ararat. In the meantime, and there is ALWAYS a meantime in Reynolds' books) an explorer working for the Ultras (and I think these may be the Conjoiners from earlier books but it was hard to tell) has found a planet with giant churches on it that move so as to always be beneath the gas giant that provides light for the planet AND sometime later a young girl escapes her family on that planet to go off and find out what happened to her brother when he went to look for work at one of the churches. How are they all tied together? Well, the gas giant isn't what it seems, neither is the girl and neither are the wolves. And what seems to be a weapon against the wolves (and this is the part that confused me) turns out not to be. I was confused this part of the book takes up about a page or two in a 500 page book. All this trouble to find a weapon to use against the bad machines, everyone goes through trials and tribulations, it's all difficult and many people die. All that and he winds it up in a couple of pages saying that the thing they unleashed is worse than the wolves but is but slower? That's it, after a total of 1500 pages for all three books? And I couldn't figure out if it was a diatribe against organized religion or technology or just a "be careful what you wish for when it comes to weapons" thing. I may need to give this more thought.

And then there's Mencken. I'm reading Newspaper Days and it is a joy. Cranky Mencken calling it like he sees it and not really caring what other people think. It's awesome and hilarious and so well-written you won't believe it. Every reporter and journalism student should be required to read this book.

The movie this week was Tell No One, a French movie made from a American book. It's a thriller about a couple who go for a midnight swim at a lake-and some awful happens. She ends up dead and he's in a coma for three days. But eight years later, two bodies are unearthed at the lake and whole series of ugly events unfold. I don't want to give away the plot because it's really a great story-but I really liked this movie. It was scary and sad and confusing and it made you think about what exactly was happening and why.

My netflix movies were Dr Strange and Hellboy and if you like this stuff enough to put it in your queue, you 'll like them-I did.

What Is This?

What is this is one of my favorite phrases because it can be used in a variety of situations from describing an outfit I don't like to a TV show I don't like to a movie I don't like (is there a pattern here?). So now I going to use it to describe a situation I don't like that I have now heard of three times. What is this situation? It's guys telling the women they are dating/living with that they won't have sex with them until they've lost weight. Let me just say that the ladies in question are by no means overweight. They range in age from youngish to older, short, tall-you name it. All are very attractive. But that's not the point. The point is that in my experience (and I've had someone who didn't want to have sex with me but never said it was because he wanted me to lose weight-it was because of something else entirely) when someone says they don't want to have sex with you unless you lose weight, they should just say "I don't want to have sex with you" because that's what they mean. Unless the person has gained so much weight that they are now a hideous beast, the weight thing is an excuse. It's the easy way out and it puts all the burden on the (usually female) other person. And then they work and work to try and lose weight, thinking that if they do the person they love will want to have sex with them again when the truth is that they could be supermodel thin and it would not make any difference because the other person has either found someone else or just doesn't want you any more. Guys-please. If you don't want to have sex anymore with her, just say so and break up with her. Do NOT say we can have sex if you lose weight because 1) It's a lie and 2) because it's about the most hurtful thing you can say to woman AND it's a lie.

Yes, this irritates me. Women are hung up enough about their weight without some guys telling them crap like this when it's really a psych-out ploy that puts all the blame on the woman so the guy doesn't have to take any responsibility at all. "She wouldn't lose weight so we broke up". It's one thing if she weighs 100 lbs pound more than she did and refuses to get help for it and sits on the couch eating ice cream all day (which sounds more like depression) and it's quite another if she looks great and he says I want you to be as thin as Kate Moss and we won't have sex until you do-so she kills herself to do it, when he wouldn't have sex with her unless she turned into a different person, preferably someone else. Guys, grow up. if you don't want to do it, say so and say why. Take responsibility for what you want and don't want and don't use weight as an excuse when you really just want out of the relationship. What IS this?