Showing posts with label Banned Books Challenge. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Banned Books Challenge. Show all posts

01 October 2009

Wrapping up a Challenge, on to the next!



J.C.'s Banned Books Challenge is wrapping up since September ended (but Banned Books Week continues through Saturday) and I didn't finish all my books that I said I would finish this month. *hangs head* I did get through American Psycho and Frankenstein (already on the books for BNBC September) and I did manage to get to page 100 in The Satanic Verses...but I didn't have much time to read Foucault's Pendulum or make it much farther than page 50 in The Naked and the Dead. Must try harder.

On a side-note for Banned Books Week I did some Googling and figured out why A Light in the Attic was one of the most challenged books of the 1990s...it apparently inspires disobedience in children through breaking of dishes and dying because your parents won't buy you a pony. Also, it has occult underpinnings because there are ghoulies and ghosties and witches. Yup, pretty sure I never got out of doing the dishes by breaking them on purpose and I didn't start worshipping Satan because my favorite book of poetry had some imaginary beings.

I remember laughing when reading Silverstein's books. A lot. My parents did, too. Parents seem to be a big theme in BBW posts this week, how parents try to control what other parents' children read. If someone feels something is not correct for their children then it must be bad for all children. You know, some things are bad for everybody. Doing lines of cocaine and walking down the middle of the freeway is bad for everyone involved; reading Brave New World or Catcher in the Rye or even American Psycho is not bad for everyone. But that's a personal choice (dude, even the coked-up lane-divider thing is a personal choice, albeit a bad one). Don't take away another's personal choice; the First Amendment guarantees our freedom to choose, but that also means we have to respect others' choices.



Moving on. Swapna's Clear Off Your Shelves Challenge starts today. Woot! To that end I will start my challenge reading by finishing the books I said I would read for the Banned Books Challenge. All are less than half done (in two cases barely 10% read) and I've purchased all of them in the past and the books were languishing on the shelves until September. Ha.

I'm wondering how to keep track/count of the books for this challenge on the blog. Particularly since the books for the challenge have to be a percentage of the total number of books I read these two months. My coding/layout skillz are not particularly good but I'm thinking maybe a post that I update and can be placed in my sidebar like a widget? Is that even possible on Blogger? Help? If you have Blogger tech tips suggestions please comment and let me know! Many thanks in advance.

28 September 2009

Banned Books Challenge Day 28/American Psycho

I've not done so well on this challenge the major problem being I was out of town for most of two weekends (which is usually when I get most of my weekly reading done) and I was knitting a cardigan (stay tuned for a knitting post). So I haven't read nearly as much for this challenge as I should have. I know that I do have two days left in the challenge....but my books are pretty thick and I have to work. Boo. So I have only hours left to read nearly 700 pages (The Satanic Verses and The Naked and the Dead) by the end of September. Oy.

Day 28: I'm having a little trouble with The Naked and the Dead for some reason; it's not holding my interest which is surprising to me because it feels a little like Catch-22 (a book I love) but in a journalistic style. Maybe it's the ironic voice that I miss. In any case, I'll probably work on The Satanic Verses the rest of the month; although the writing is not nearly as linear I love Rushdie's prose and imagery.

*************
From this point in my post, I will be reviewing American Psycho and I will have to drop some spoilers in order to adequately process my thoughts about this book. Also, I'm probably going to swear more than normal. If you really plan to read this novel at a later date and are spoiler-sensitive I'd suggest not reading the rest of this post; to review this in a one-liner, Ellis's book has really messed up subject manner but an interesting style and probably shouldn't be read by the faint-hearted.
*************

I finished American Psycho yesterday.

Patrick Bateman is one sick fuck and that's an understatement. I knew that before starting the novel and it still gave me pause. The level of violence and objectification perpetrated on women in general over the course of the novel is nauseating (Bateman does nasty things to a few men, too, but the overwhelming majority of victims are women). Leading up to the first major sex/rape/murder scene, Ellis drops only a few hints as to his main character's extra-curricular activities. A mention of an axe or mabye a bloody coat or a random line about someone's head in a freezer. It's enough to let the reader know something is very wrong with Bateman but really doesn't prepare one for the level of brutality of the scene...hmmm...brutality isn't quite the right word, neither is psychotic...it's really a sadistic savagery. That sounds like a bad line from a pulp novel. Take the Marquis du Sade and ratchet it up about a 1000 times, throw in a lot of drugs, and add some cannibalism. Then that's about right for that first scene. Hannibal Lecter was a gourmand but Bateman is like a coked-up hyena.

After about three seriously fucked up scenes Ellis eases up on the specific description of the murders. After that Bateman will refer to a girl's hands, or brain, or whatever-body-part he's got decorating his apartment - the reader is no longer really party to the act itself (which is fine because I'd more or less started skimming the graphic scenes). The change in description got me to thinking, because I watch a lot of Criminal Minds, about why Ellis had a main character who was not just killing but torturing and eating his victims as opposed to the violence itself (over kill). Patrick Bateman has a lot of rage (again, understatement) which is directed for the most part at women (but only some women because some of his close female acquaintences remain unscathed) and at non-white/non-yuppie members of society but I think that Bateman also victimizes those who objectify him.

This is not a completely thought-out theory. I feel that the emphasis on things - labels, styles, colors, fashion houses, brands, gyms, etc. - creates a shell around Bateman. He's bat-shit psychotic on the inside but on the outside he's Richie Rich. People seem to want to be his friend/want him for his name, money, family, where he went to college but in reality none of them can remember who the hell he is. The bums and ethnic-minority business owners only want his money because he's another rich guy. He's frequently called by someone else's name and this point was driven home near the end of the novel (major SPOILER approaching). After a police chase (because Bateman really lost it and shot a bum while a squad car was passing) Bateman makes a phone call to a friend (lawyer?) and confesses everything to the man's voicemail....but nothing happens, no one comes to arrest Bateman; when Bateman later mentions the lengthy voicemail to the recipient the man believes Bateman was someone else, accusing Bateman of all those murders as some sort of joke. So Ellis demonstrates that Bateman isn't real, he's not authentic, no one is authentic because all the depraved acts committed by Bateman really don't matter and no one really seems to care. At all. Bateman's anger at being marginalized within his own tribe finds an outlet in extreme violence but even a confession fails to make those around him see him and so the cycle continues. I think seeing Bateman as himself is what saves Bateman's secretary, Jean, from becoming one of his victims when she shows that she thinks there's a real person inside Bateman - one who is considerate of others and kind, even though the readers know otherwise in the extreme - and never mistakes him for another cookie-cutter yuppie in a designer wool suit; she gives him some sort of identity.

This is a pretty rambling analysis/review (sorry) of a book that uses a lot of elements to tell a single story. The fastidious descriptions of what each character is wearing at each point in the novel, down to the dollar amount or the meals eaten and paid for or the obsession with stuff in general probably says more about what was going on in the book but I'm having trouble shaking the violence out of my head (which was probably the point of all the violence, but still). I did like the novel but Ellis made my hair stand on end and freaked me out to the point that I had to read about Harold Bloom's Falstaff/Hamlet obsession in order to go to sleep. American Psycho was made into a movie and as sick as this sounds I really want to see what the filmmakers did; this book done straight is easily an NC-17-level film so I want to see how it was adapted.

17 September 2009

BBAW: Books I found via other bookaholics

Er, book bloggers. Bloggers, not addicts. [ha]

My first selection is Shelf Discovery and sadly enough I have no idea which book blogger gets the credit for it; all I remember is that I saw it, thought immediately "I must have that!", was disappointed I had to wait 6 weeks for it to actually be printed, and then couldn't remember what lovely person informally pointed me to it in the first place. I loved this book, if you couldn't tell by my review, so whomever you are....THANK YOU!! Otherwise, I'll just cheat and say I saw it on Lizzie's blog [larfs].

Most of my blogger discoveries have gone into the TBR pile/stack/bin/wishlist because I'm so backed up on reading right now I haven't gotten to any *sob*.

Rebecca has raved about The Help very often and it's on the list of things-I-must-read. I've seen many great reviews but Rebecca is the one who actually told me I must read it. I promise I will remember it's a recc from Rebecca when I finally get to it.

The last one is a tangential book-I-got-off-another-blogger. I had already purchased The Naked and the Dead in a book buying binge but hadn't decided when I should read it. Enter JC (aka bibliobrat) and her Banned Books Challenge. Which also pushed The Satanic Verses: A Novel and American Psycho to the forefront, too. I'm liking all three. Hooray books.

15 September 2009

Teaser Tuesday: The Naked and the Dead





Teaser Tuesdays is a weekly bookish meme, hosted by MizB of Should Be Reading. Anyone can play along! Just do the following:

- Grab your current read
- Open to a random page
- Share two (2) “teaser” sentences from somewhere on that page
- BE CAREFUL NOT TO INCLUDE SPOILERS! (make sure that what you share doesn’t give too much away! You don’t want to ruin the book for others!)
- Share the title & author, too, so that other TT participants can add the book to their TBR Lists if they like your teasers!
In the grove while they were cutting stretcher poles, Roth found a bird. It was a tiny thing, smaller than a sparrow, with soft dun-colored feathers and a crippled wing, and it hopped about slowly, chirping piteously, as if very tired.
~
p 528, The Naked and the Dead by Norman Mailer

01 September 2009

Banned Books Challenge: It begins..



September 1, 2009 has arrived and my first blogging challenge, hosted by Bibliobrat, starts today. The Banned Books Challenge (as previously stated) is pretty simple: read at least one banned/challenged book during the month of September. Banned Books Week officially occurs September 26 - October 3 this year so I would like to have my challenge books read by then.

I am officially reading The Satanic Verses and The Naked and the Dead (since I already own those) and I'm going to try and finish American Psycho by the end of the month as well.

Day 1: Will start The Naked and the Dead when I get home; due to two-hours' worth of panicking over recalled library book that I needed to return or incur UI Library wrath/recall fine of $4/day after 9/8 I forgot to put the Mailer in my bag this morning; the cats hid the library book under the desk (I found it - the fur babies really do love me...I think)

Current books-in-progress: Frankenstein, Foucault's Pendulum, The Moonflower Vine, and Hush, Hush (plus the aforementioned challenge titles)

Current knitted item: 16-button cardie - almost ready to bind off for fronts/backs and start the sleeves
Current movie obsession: Videodrome (Banned Books Week might put me in the mood for an odd movie or two)
Current iTunes loop: Wait, wait...don't tell me!

31 July 2009

My first reading challenge: Banned Books


There's a first time for everything. I usually don't consider doing challenges; the subject might not be something I'm interested in and I have so many books to read (and am so mercurial in my reading habits) that it gets hard to work in a challenge.


I jumped at this one: BiblioBrat is hosting a Banned Books Challenge during the month of September. This challenge is really simple: read at least one book that has been challenged/banned (for a list you can visit the UCSD page or the ALA). Read at least one book that has been challenged/banned.....I can do that! And I get to flaunt my "I read banned books" buttons! Challenging books makes me grumpy so I'm all for a challenge that highlights infringements on the individual's right to the Freedom to Read.

I've decided to read two books. I've never actually read The Satanic Verses so that will be book Numero Uno. I also have Mailer's The Naked and the Dead in my to-read pile so I'll read that, too. Since I'm still only half done with American Psycho, if I polish that off in September then that would make three.

Who's with me on this challenge?