Sam's Magical Book Club

So it's a given fact that I'm ALWAYS ALWAYS going to like the book better than the movie. I don't know if I've met a movie yet that I liked better than the book it was based on.

Simple fact.

So, with that in mind, I DID like the new "Hunger Games" movie.

I was a little discouraged when one reviewer in Friday's newspaper said that the movie wasn't great as a stand-alone original, but seemed more like a prequel of things to come. Well, obviously the movie was based on the first book in the Hunger Games series, so that's to be expected, BUT... the first book was the best in my opinion, so I was hoping the movie would do it justice.

After seeing the movie, I doubt whether that particular movie critic had read Hunger Games at all, because the movie obviously followed the plot line of the book. And it was fine. Still a great story by itself.

Loved Katniss. I thought Jennifer Lawrence did a great job, and is a far superior actor (I hesitate to even mention the name, but so many comparisons are already being made) to Kristen Stewart as Bella in the "Twilight" movies.

The Hunger Games books definitely have the same sort of star-crossed love triangle that also exists in the Twilight books, but for some reason I was not as annoyed by it in Hunger Games. Probably because it was a little less dramatic and contrived. Yep. That's probably why.













In other words, Katniss's relationship with both Gale and Peeta seem grounded in believable events and experiences that they undergo. They're not just another angelic face that induces instant true love.

Ahem. That said, Liam Hemsworth playing Gale is a total hunk. I didn't even realize he is the brother of Chris Hemsworth ("Thor") until my husband saw the last name match! How did I miss that?

If you liked the book, then I am happy to say you will probably also like the movie.

"Hunger Games" seems to be making enough money that they will probably get to do their sequels, so we can finally replace the "Twilight" craze with something a little better! (Did they really need to split "Breaking Dawn" into 2 parts? No, thank you.)

If anyone would like more  of a literary review of Hunger Games  or if you want to nominate it for our monthly read, just let me know! I'm happy to re-read books, especially ones that read fast anyway. :)                       

Hm, yes please! Sign me up.

That would be for The Thirteenth Tale by Diane Setterfield. It is the overwhelming winner for April's book club read with an astounding 1 VOTE! Amazing.

And it was my vote, too.

I might have to rethink the premise of this blog seeing as how it's not really a book club and more like a "see what Sam's reading these days and what she has to say about all these books" blog. Which is fine, of course. I'm all for calling things what they are.

Speaking of which, I've been on a reading binge lately, what with plenty of time in my car to listen to audiobooks. So check out my goodreads profile on the right sidebar if you're interested in more book suggestions. I've recently read Clockwork Angel, Born to Run, Fire Study, and I'm in the middle of The Clockwork Prince and The Lightning Thief on audiobook.

The official April read is still The Thirteenth Tale  and I'll probably just make Unbroken the official May read. Just because I can.

Feel free to vote or suggest any other books, because I'd love, you know, some interaction.

Primary thoughts about the 2nd book, Magic Study: I resigned myself to the fact that it was no longer about a love story and more about a complex fantasy world where the main character, Yelena, has to learn to use her magic. I was okay with it, because it was still an interesting story.

Goodreads rating: 3/5 stars

Main thoughts about Fire Study: Totally disappointed that there was nothing too original in the 3rd book and that it in fact seemed to really drag. A lot. Especially through the middle. I skimmed over a lot of the pages and found  that in so doing, I really didn't miss much. So I would advise you to do the same.

Goodreads rating: 2/5 stars

Go to my Goodreads link on the right-hand sidebar if you want to check out Goodreads reviews by me and others.

The library did not have an audiobook of Poison Study, so I had to go back to reading hardcopy. I was a little worried about having time to read, but it turns out it wasn't a problem.

I blazed through this book.

It was easy reading, but that's not to say it wasn't also intelligent.

An intriguing idea - the comparison of love to slow poison. Or is being in love only like slow poison until you confess it, share it, and find out it is returned; then is love the antidote?

Yelena, the main character, is likeable for a number of reasons. She's a bit gritty with some dark history and bleak sentiments - making her similar to what a real person might be like who undergoes what she does. I liked that about her.

She is believable as a jaded character but not in a whiny or cheesy or one-dimensional way. In fact, Yelena is actually quite... decisive. And...

Dynamic. That's the word.

I'm still deciding about the love story.

On the one hand, I loved that it started out subtle. You don't realize that you've already met the love interest until, well... you start looking for him. And then you start reading into small reactions a little bit more.

But then once the love story started to gain steam, I felt like a few things happened a little too fast.

*SPOILER ALERT BELOW*


 1) Another character pointed out the supposed obviousness of their feelings before Snyder had built up enough tension to convince me that strong feelings existed. This is a classic blunder that we writers refer to as "telling" instead of "showing."

2) The relationship was consummated a bit too hastily (even though it was near the end of the book). Let's leave room for some tension for the 2nd and 3rd books, shall we? I also wanted to see the brave but emotionally fragile Yelena struggle a bit more to reach the point where she was ready to be with him. (Part of her dark history included rape, after all - so I would have believed more readily in hesitance as opposed to haste.)

3)The lover seemed a little too easily accepting of her magical abilities, especially for an assassin's history of killing anyone with magical demonstrations. I just thought Snyder could have played with that tension a bit more too.

But maybe we'll see more relationship strain in the 2nd book. I have reason to believe we will.

Aside from those smallish criticisms, I'm enjoying the series and have already begun tracking through Book 2. Hope you're liking it too!

Let's think about how genius it is - just for a second - that Yann Martel managed to give an Indian boy a French name that was metaphorical not just for the ocean of his Rite of Passage but also for the infinite cycle of narration in this novel.

A moment of silence, please.

Ah, there.

Piscine = a pool, a body of water.
Pi = a Greek symbol, a never-ending decimal beginning 3.14...
Pi, the character= the first layer of narration in this novel which leads to almost endless possibilities of what you can take from this story.

It's brilliant, really.

Okay, this post is going to have spoilers. That's the only way I get to ask you what you thought about the conclusion!

You may also get a better idea of why I was an English Major. Because I could easily write up a squeaky neat  analysis paper on this book. Nevertheless, you will get the informal layout of what I want to say!

(Click "read more" if you have finished Life of Pi.)

I love twists at the ends of books. Only if they're good ones. Or thought-provoking ones. And Life of Pi totally blew them out of the water! (Excuse the awful pun).

START OFF THE DISCUSSION
The question I want to ask is (well, there are many) - but did you find yourself relating to the Japanese investigators at the end of the book who wanted to know how the ship, the Tsimtsum, sank but didn't believe all the details of Pi's story of being at sea?

I was like the investigators, because even though I love to suspend my disbelief when reading stories (or watching movies) I, too, would have liked to know whether it was all true. Pi certainly tells the story as if it really happened.

But then he gives us a second, more realistic version, which is surprisingly metaphorical to the first version. Did you find yourself believing the second story more readily... but not wanting to?

If so, then the job of the Japanese investigators was truly done well. They exposed hard, cold realism without the warmth and richness that Pi gave them... then realized that they preferred Pi's first story.


THE CONSTRUCT OF NARRATION
Looking back on the entire novel, it becomes obvious how it was a constructed story of metaphors and symbols. The end of the book is where you get to appreciate the layers of narration. And in Life of Pi, there are several.


LAYER 1
Remember all those chapters talking about animal nature as it related to the zoo and human nature as it related to religion?  It turns out that those subjects become metaphors for each other in Pi's mind.

Telling the story to the Japanese investigators - you know, of all of those months at sea - was only 1 layer of narration that uses a story of animals to illuminate some fascinating points about human nature... especially when under duress.

Did you like that Pi was the tiger? I did. There's a whole world of analyzing there, if you want to go there.

LAYER 2
What about the telling of Pi's story to the Narrator whom we're introduced to at the beginning of the book? You know, the one who writes the "Author's Note" but isn't really Yann Martel, the author?

We have evidence along the way that this is a narrative layer as well. When "the author" meets with Pi, doesn't Pi cook up rich Indian dishes seasoned with spice and various sides?

Doesn't Pi have a natural tendency to embellish, or even just to appreciate details and revel in the richness of life as well as in his spicy Indian food?

LAYER 3
I truly admire anyone still reading this utterly English Major analysis at this point. Thanks a million!

Finally, what about Yann Martel himself? Isn't this Layer 3 of narration? Doesn't Yann Martel too like to "spice up" his story (the novel) and embellish it with elaborate descriptions? (Which I'm pretty sure I spent an entire post gushing over.) Doesn't he also discreetly present "the author" as if it were himself?

Before I read Life of Pi, I had actually spoken to someone who read it and thought that it was all a true story. That the author Yann Martel and "The Author" of Pi's story were one and the same.

It's not true. There are 3 storytellers in this novel. Yann Martel, The "Author", and Pi Patel.

So there you go. Suddenly the whole book turns into a neatly contrived story of 100 precise chapters that could be a metaphor for just about anything.

Well. :) I take that back. It's most likely about animals and humans. And storytellers.


STORYTELLING LOVE
Oh yes, I love the whole idea of storytelling and layers of narration. My overall assessment of Life of Pi is that it was expertly done. I was moved, at times I was convinced, the metaphors were subtle, but they were also unmistakable.

And I loved the descriptions! Contrived tool that they are!

Thanks for sticking it out with this post. I hope you appreciated Life of Pi as much as I did after analyzing just a few aspects. :)