YotG with spoilers

M Elizabeth Parks meparks at mtholyoke.edu
Fri Dec 15 19:34:21 EST 2000


s


p


o

i


le


r


s!

hi, everybody!  it's been a while, hasn't it?  For me it's not
christmas. . . it's finals.  Someone else mentioned a religion final
paper; I've got one, too.  Good luck to all students, especially those
with fifteen to twenty page papers due tuesday. . . .

a stressed out lizzie (keep reading, there's more)

here are my thoughts:

Hallie wrote:

All DWJ's books are like this to some degree.  How about a
> short story of _Homeward Bounders_ from Konstam's point of view?  _Dark
> Lord_ told from the POV of the pilgrims in Blade's party (the book it
seems
> I really wanted to read)?  Sometimes she actually does it:  _Deep
Secret_
> springs to mind as an excellent example of at least two books
overlapping in
> a single volume.

Philip wrote:
I'd never seen it that way, but yes.  I agree with everything except the
bit
about DL from the point of view of the pilgrims.  A good idea, but I don't
think
it would work for me as well as the DL we have.

Me:

Just on the subject of points of view: I think I would have liked YotG
better had it been from one point of view, and focused on one main
character.  I felt like it was so spread out over all the different people
that I didn't have the same connection with any of them that I've felt
with Cat and Sophie and other main characters who were the main characters
in their books.

Philip on the Grinch:
(Sorry, this is my rant.  And I haven't even seen the latest film.  It's
just
that the original film of TSG's book, which animated his wonderful
drawings so
wonderfully, was perfect in every respect apart from the Christmas carols
sung
by the villagers.  The new film goes OTT on special effects to achieve
something
that I don't believe can possibly match up to the previous one in
humanity,
charm, or sensitivity to TSG's original

Me:
I agree with you on a lot of that.  Not the use of the word.  It's a great
word, and I like using it.  But the new film. . . yick.  I saw the
commercials and decided not to go.  I loved the book; I still cry when I
read it.  And the original film was wonderful.  Boris Karloff narrated it,
and you just can't top Boris Karloff.  As for the live action aspect, I've
got a friend who has ranted on and on about America's bias against
animation; think about it.  Animation is okay for kids, but when going
after an adult audience, the powers that be always turn it into live
action (think all those superhero movies, from Teenage Mutant Ninja
Turtles to X-Men).

.  And all the merchandising and
advertising spinoffs already all over things in the USA when I was there
last
week...)

Me: even the post office is in on it.  I find that really depressing.

Kyla wrote:
. Haven't you ever seen anyone for the
first time and said "Oh my, I'm going to *like* this person," I mean as a
friend? Someone who looks *neat*, interesting and nice and someone you'd
love to talk to for hours? I don't believe in *love* at first sight, but I
believe in *potential* love at first sight. You have to know people before
you can really love them. But that spark can be there.

Me:
I was thinking about this and I realized that out of the five or so people
I consider my closest friends, four of them I hated on first sight.  I
took one look at them, thought, I detest this person, and then somehow
ended up closer to them than to anyone else.  And the people I think I
might like when I first meet them, I usually end up disliking or not
caring at all about.  That's why I wouldn't trust love at first sight.  I
think it can be sort of sweet in fiction, though, and I think it fit Titus
and Isodel's personalities.  I had no problem with any of the matches
(except maybe Lydda and Herrick) by themselves, but altogether they were
just too much for me.  It was a little too neat.

Inside the front cover, on the page with copyrights and library of
congress listings (US edition) there's a note that says "the right of DWJ
to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by her."  I
checked in several other books, by her and otherwise, and none of them say
the same thing.  What does this mean?  It almost sounds to me like she
didn't necessarily write it all. . . . 


*******************************************************************************
Back home, we have one hundred and twenty six words for my kind of loving.

	--Johnny Bravo to a sexy Arctic mama.

Madam, kindly do not attempt to confuse the matter with facts!

	--Mary Poppins (hi, isabel!)

All witchcraft comes from carnal lust, which is in women insatiable.

	--Sprenger and Karmer in "Malleus Maleficarum"

When under stress, such as in captivity, some octopuses eat their own
arms, which regenerate.

	--from "The Useless Digest"  www.uslessknowledge.com

"Women are expected to do twice as much as men in half the time and for no
credit. Fortunately, this isn't difficult."
          
	--Charlotte Whitton (1896 - 1975)

"Women have served all these centuries as looking-glasses possessing the
magic and delicious power of reflecting the figure of man at twice its
natural size."
                                     
	--Adolph Simon Ochs

What can I say?  I'm quote happy.

--
To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at suberic.net with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at http://suberic.net/dwj/list/



More information about the Dwj mailing list