![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chelseagirlFinally finished my reread of *The Silmarillion*, which almost counts as a first read for all I remembered. Random thoughts:
Elrond is really Elrond Three-QuartersElven, not Elrond HalfElven, isn't he? Of course, that would lead to complicated messes like Arwen Seven-EighthsElven, so better left where it is, really.
Isildur comes off much better in *The Silmarillion* than he does in LOTR, particularly the film, because of the fuller picture. Between rescuing the sapling of the White Tree from Numenor at great risk to himself and a peaceful and cooperative coreign with Anarion, he's more than just the guy who makes a Really Bad Decision -- thus all the touting of Aragorn as Isildur's Heir makes more sense.
I've got all sorts of thoughts about the nature of invented myth, but looking at the clock ticking away I shall set them aside for the moment. I admire people who write lengthy and thoughtful essays in their LJs; I'm often disappointed at the surface-skimming nature of mine (I either want to be funnier or deeper, preferably both ;-) ), but that seems to be the nature of my life -- trying to keep too many balls in the air and unable to devote myself fully to anything.
Onto the 19th c., I've been reading a couple of things set in 19th century America -- *The Devil in the White City* by Erik Larson, about the Chicago Columbian Exposition of 189something (and the serial killer, Dr. Holmes, who preyed on some of the visitors), and *Chang and Eng* by Darin Strauss. Larson's book has all the strengths and weaknesses of popular history: it was a real page-turner, though I would have liked to know more about the architecture and exhibits of the fair. I know, I know, what a dork; she reads the book for the architects, not the serial killer.
Chang and Eng, the original Siamese twins, have always interested me, particularly the facts that they married sisters and that Chang became a heavy drinker while Eng became a temperance advocate. Strauss does a wonderful job of delineating the characters, particularly the twins themselves. One of the things that's so fascinating is how they don't really understand one another, despite a life lived only inches apart. The preface to the paperback has Strauss warning that while he worked from the facts of the twins' lives, he created many of the incidents, but I wonder how many of his suppositions will suddenly transform themselves into popular knowledge. There's something depressingly familiar in the plot, though -- once decision that Strauss made which drives much of the plot seems too obvious, and I wonder once again at the capacity of literary fiction for making all families unhappy in surprisingly similar ways. (Or is that real life? Louis Sullivan and Chang Bunker had quite a bit in common in their later years . . . )
Elrond is really Elrond Three-QuartersElven, not Elrond HalfElven, isn't he? Of course, that would lead to complicated messes like Arwen Seven-EighthsElven, so better left where it is, really.
Isildur comes off much better in *The Silmarillion* than he does in LOTR, particularly the film, because of the fuller picture. Between rescuing the sapling of the White Tree from Numenor at great risk to himself and a peaceful and cooperative coreign with Anarion, he's more than just the guy who makes a Really Bad Decision -- thus all the touting of Aragorn as Isildur's Heir makes more sense.
I've got all sorts of thoughts about the nature of invented myth, but looking at the clock ticking away I shall set them aside for the moment. I admire people who write lengthy and thoughtful essays in their LJs; I'm often disappointed at the surface-skimming nature of mine (I either want to be funnier or deeper, preferably both ;-) ), but that seems to be the nature of my life -- trying to keep too many balls in the air and unable to devote myself fully to anything.
Onto the 19th c., I've been reading a couple of things set in 19th century America -- *The Devil in the White City* by Erik Larson, about the Chicago Columbian Exposition of 189something (and the serial killer, Dr. Holmes, who preyed on some of the visitors), and *Chang and Eng* by Darin Strauss. Larson's book has all the strengths and weaknesses of popular history: it was a real page-turner, though I would have liked to know more about the architecture and exhibits of the fair. I know, I know, what a dork; she reads the book for the architects, not the serial killer.
Chang and Eng, the original Siamese twins, have always interested me, particularly the facts that they married sisters and that Chang became a heavy drinker while Eng became a temperance advocate. Strauss does a wonderful job of delineating the characters, particularly the twins themselves. One of the things that's so fascinating is how they don't really understand one another, despite a life lived only inches apart. The preface to the paperback has Strauss warning that while he worked from the facts of the twins' lives, he created many of the incidents, but I wonder how many of his suppositions will suddenly transform themselves into popular knowledge. There's something depressingly familiar in the plot, though -- once decision that Strauss made which drives much of the plot seems too obvious, and I wonder once again at the capacity of literary fiction for making all families unhappy in surprisingly similar ways. (Or is that real life? Louis Sullivan and Chang Bunker had quite a bit in common in their later years . . . )
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-08-01 12:44 pm (UTC)A bunch of comments:
Why do I keep pronouncing "Silmarillion" with the Spanish "y" sound for the double-l? It's been YEARS since high school Spanish class!
The books you're reading sound interesting. Do you read them at the same time? Well, of course not at the same instance, but a chapter or two from one book, a chapter or two from another. I ask because I do that and I'm hoping I'm not that strange. I tend to do this with books I'm enjoying, but aren't quite engaging me fully. Now that I re-read your post, it doesn't sound like it. Darn.
I read somewhere, or maybe I heard it on one of those "strange but true" type shows, that Chang and Eng could have been separated easily, but nobody knew that at the time. I cannot imagine having the twin you're physically attached to dying. ::shiver::
I ordered some books from Amazon.ca, two of the Harry Potter books I don't have and then a book that is the basis for a movie that my one true love will be in this fall. I would love to go to the Vancouver Film Festival again, but I don't know if I can make it and I don't know if the Swansons can handle another visit. I tend to bring too many mint meltaways (as if that's possible).
no subject
Date: 2003-08-03 10:50 am (UTC)I often have several books going at the same time -- fiction and nonfiction, or academic and relaxation, or etc. I'm trying to learn to just not read books that don't really absorb me (unless they're for my work) but it's hard to unlearn the habits of a lifetime.
My understanding was that Chang and Eng's stomach was partly conjoined; medical technology of the time probably couldn't have separated them safely. I don't think. Lord knows if I lived in the 19th c., I would not want to get sick. Ever. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2003-08-02 05:26 am (UTC)The same here. But since we have to write lengthy and thoughtful essays in real life, perhaps we've earned the right to be a wee bit lazy in our LJs?
Haha... well that's how I justify my rampant silliness ;)
no subject
Date: 2003-08-03 10:52 am (UTC)Though I constantly think about how I want to use this -- as a personal journal, a fannish journal, or as a place to journal about my work. So I do a little of each and probably confuse the hell out of people. ;-)