A little change in genres

Fiction is usually my genre. But recently I've been doing a little nonfiction reading with Quiet, The Tipping Point, and Forensics. Quiet and The Tipping Point are more persuasive pieces of writing, and Forensics was informative and more fact based.

I really enjoyed reading these books. Which sounds weird, because they don't have a climax or characters, but they do have something that fiction doesn't. 

The author is talking to YOU. And this is really cool because in fiction, the author is writing about another person, and the reader plays no part in the story. But in nonfiction, the author is specifically trying to persuade you, so they are deliberately trying to relate to you and make you understand.

In fiction, you are part of a third person party and aren't involved with the characters. The book doesn't call you to action or bring your attention to certain issues. Nonfiction is straight forward and is more interactive for the reader. It really pushes your thought process and causes some deep-thinking.

So I highly recommend taking a break from the fiction books we all love so dearly, and try something new: nonfiction. 

Allegiant.

So. I read Allegiant.

And we all know what happens at the end of Allegiant....

(Spoiler Alert)

TRIS DIES.

I'm sorry, I just need to beat up Veronica Roth right now.

Dear Miss Roth,

I'm sorry if I'm being rude, but um, WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?! Who do you think you are that you can just kill Tris. Tris is unbeatable, strong, courageous...immortal... and you just let her get shot? It wasn't even a very spectacular death! She just got shot. By some random flat, static character. And does anyone really remember what Tris died for? Shouldn't she have died taking a bullet for Tobias while fighting for their life together or something like that? No, Tris just dies because she doesn't want like a hundred people to die? That is not a good enough reason for of all people, TRIS, to die.

That's all.

Sincerely,

Erin Drake


Okay. So. Let's just talk about Allegiant for a little bit.

It was good.

But it definetly wasn't spectacular or amazing or even great.

Just good.

I must say, I am very disappointed.

First of all, I didn't like Tobia's voice. I felt like he sounded too much like Tris, and I wasn't able to deferentiate between the two. If an author has two perspectives in a novel, the voices should be totally different. I also really didn't like how information was shoved down my throat after Tris escaped from the city. The whole idea of GP's and GD's was cool, I just didn't like how it was thrown in my face.

And lastly, I did not like the ending.

All I wanted was a nice harry-potter-style epilouge of Tris and Tobias living in a perfectly normal world twenty years in the future with three kids. That's all I wanted! But I guess books can't really completely satisfy you unless you write it yourself.

Books vs. Movies

It seems like the credits for every movie these days include the phrase, "Based on the novel by...".

 And that's great. I really like it when books turn into movies. I think it gives you a whole new view of the book from the perspective of the director.

 But something about the image I have in my head and the image on screen just clash. Maybe it's the setting that doesn't quite seem right, or maybe the tone of voice a character has while delivering my favorite line that just makes me cringe a little.

Let me explain what I mean, taking Veronica Roth's Divergent as an example.

So there's this place called "The Pit". If you've read the book you know what I'm talking about. It's like the gym for the Dauntless, where they have fights and learn to throw knives and enjoy lots of other safe activities (sarcasm).

"The Pit"

Anyways, Roth didn't go into a ton of detail about what this place looked like, so it was up to me, the reader, to conjure up an image of it in my head. And I took a while thinking up this particular background, and it was sweet.

But I can't remember what it looked like.

And its because of that dang movie! As soon as I saw what "The Pit" looked like in the movie, the image I had in my head disappeared! I can't even tell you how disappointed I am about this.

The same thing happened in the Hunger Games. I had a vivid image of what Katniss looked like, and then the next time I read The Hunger Games, Jennifer Lawrence will replace my Katniss.

After discovering this, I've concluded that movies have deteriorated  my imagination. But of course I won't do anything about this, because we all love movies too much to stop watching them. That would be ridiculous.

First Impressions: The Husband's Secret

Based on a recommedation (thanks Ally) I began reading The Husband's Secret. *cue dramatic music*

The front flap is what first attracted me to this book. It reads, "Imagine that your husband wrote you a letter, to be opened after his death. Imagine, too, that this letter contains his deepest, darkest secret - something with the potential to destroy not just the life you built together, but the lives of others as well. Imagine, then, that you stumble across that letter while your husband is still very much alive." *cue more dramatic music*

I think the cover and summary of a book are seriously important to my decision about whether or not I will read the book. I most definately judge a book by its cover (and front flap). The summary of a book should give just enough information to hook the reader, but not spoil anything. I think this summary is perfect because as the reader starts the book, they are waiting in agonizing suspense to see what this letter is about. Now, I'm on page 25, and I still haven't learned what's in the letter and I can't wait to go home and read to figure it out.

Characterization of Jane

Now having read a whopping sixty-eight pages of Jane Eyre, I feel like I need to discuss, well, Jane Eyre.

Jane is a very adeqqate and intelligent ten-year old orphan. She narrarates the story with a specific voice of innocence and wonder, while still revealing her intellectual and unique side as she desribes her day-to-day struggles as a peculiar child

“No sight so sad as that of a naughty child," he began, "especially a naughty little girl. Do you know where the wicked go after death?"

"They go to hell," was my ready and orthodox answer.

"And what is hell? Can you tell me that?"

"A pit full of fire."

"And should you like to fall into that pit, and to be burning there for ever?"

"No, sir."

"What must you do to avoid it?"

I deliberated a moment: my answer, when it did come was objectionable: "I must keep in good health and not die.”
 
I can only imagine the look of shock on this man's face and perhaps giggles from observers as Jane objects with, "I must keep in good health and not die."  I think this exerpt is very telling as to who Jane is. Intelligent, witty and mature even at such a young age. Throughout the story, Jane's voice tells more and more about her in between the lines. For example, Jane never says that she is intelligent, but through her language and references, I can infer that she is very intelligent.