dwj-digest (Diana Wynne Jones) V1 #730

Sarah sarah-neko at dove.gen.nz
Mon Nov 3 21:07:28 EST 2003


> I was always put off by Anne, who seemed quite perfectly perfect and
> annoying, and by the sense that I would have been Diana instead.  (I 
> had a
> friend who was CLEARLY an Anne, so....)  Though as I read the rest of 
> the
> series, I realized I identified far more closely with the prickly 
> Leslie
> Moore, which was comforting.  And still I enjoy the series!  But I 
> read the
> Emily books for the first time last year, and liked them even better.
> Overall they seem more...not realistic, but mundane, quotidian (to use 
> a
> fancy word I can never feel entirely comfortable with)...and that was 
> very
> appealing to me.  And that's despite the mystical aspects of the 
> series--or,
> I don't know, maybe it's the contrast that makes it work.

I found myself deeply frustrated by the mystical elements of the Emily 
books, because they didn't strike me as convincing, and found the 
character increasingly *wet* as she aged, which was a disappointment 
since I'd started out liking her very much. By the end of 'Emily's 
Quest' I was only finishing the book so I would have got it out of the 
way. (But then, I would have married Jarback; I guess you have to make 
allowances for taste.)
But I did love the Anne books. They're a tradition in my family. We're 
very matriarchal. I was THRILLED to discover that the house where I 
rented a room in England had a *name* (Broadeaves) so I could sign my 
letters home 'Sarah of Broadeaves.' So much nicer to be Sarah *of* 
somewhere.

> Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 21:31:55 +0100
> From: =?iso-8859-1?B?S2F0YXJpbmEgSGrkcnBl?= 
> <head_overheels at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: BBC Narnia movies
>
> I'm not too fond of them, although the music is pretty nice... and 
> they have
> Warwick Davies in a couple of parts (among others as Reepeecheep, I 
> think?)
> which is always a good thing. But if you're thinking of borrowing - as
> opposed to buying - I still think you should give them a shot and make 
> up
> your own mind. They're not *bad*.
>
> Katta

It seems the *best* anyone can say about these movies is 'they're not 
*bad*' - talk about damning with faint praise.
I prefer to be praised with faint 'damn!'s.

> Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 13:56:46 -0700
> From: Melissa Proffitt <Melissa at Proffitt.com>
> Subject: Re: Self-introduction
>
> I *am* sort of an anime fan, but I still think Howl could be a 
> live-action
> film and that it would be great in that form.  I have a feeling that 
> when
> Miyazaki's version comes out, I'll like it a lot on its own merits, 
> but it's
> not going to be enough like the book to be satisfying as an adaptation.
>
> Besides, Calcifer has a day job.  :)

The few comments from Miyazaki that I've read so far puzzle me a little 
- okay, the stuff about nineteenth-century 'illusion art' is 
understandable as a design approach, but curious given that it implies 
(to me) Heath Robinson devices and contraptions, which doesn't really 
match up with the style of magic we see in the novel. And he talks 
about a war in which one must choose a side. *War*? Who's having a war 
now?
So I'm a little puzzled about the direction of his adaptation, but I'm 
pretty confident that it will be something good.
A *good* adaptation of a book is such a rare thing, anyway. I can only 
think of two right now and they're 'The Princess Bride' and 'From 
Hell,' which is scaring me.

> Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 17:56:02 -0500 (EST)
> From: Kyla Tornheim <kyla at sccs.swarthmore.edu>
> Subject: Re: OT A Wrinkle in Time
>
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Melissa Proffitt wrote:
>
>> On this topic, though, does anyone have an opinion on the Narnia 
>> movies
>> produced by the BBC in the late '80s?  I've been considering checking 
>> out
>> the new DVD version from the library, but I don't want to waste our 
>> time if
>> they aren't any good.
>
> The only one I've seen is The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe 
> (although
> we might still have the others on tape--we never get rid of *anything* 
> in
> this house), and while I agree about the puppety-ness of Aslan (who 
> also
> has an intensely lame roar), I will say that Peter is absolutely 
> perfect.

I think I thought Peter rather handsome at the time.
Embarrassing thing to remember.

> Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 23:08:21 -0000
> From: "Charles Butler" <hannibal at thegates.fsbusiness.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: Self-introduction plus meaningless ramble
>
> - - La Déesse (http://www.airandangels.com)
>
> Do I guess from the web site name that you're a John Donne fan too? 
> But then
> that's another Howl link.

Quite fond of Donne, yes, although I haven't read much of his work 
since I was an undergraduate. The origin of the domain name is a rather 
long, silly story; I ended up calling it that pretty much by accident.

> Pleased to make your acquaintance, anyway, Sarah - enjoyed your blog!
>
> Charlie

Well, thank you!
- @}->-->---
E you later,
Déesse
(the artist formerly known as Sarah-neko)

http://www.airandangels.com/
Air and Angels Anime Shrines


--
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