High expectations

This week I watched The Hunger Games with my niece. I have read the books but I'm going to say up front, it's been a while (year and a half?). Anyway, I enjoyed the series--well, enjoyed may not be the right word, but you know what I mean. However, there were some people I know who didn't really like the last book, Mockingjay, because Katniss just wasn't the strong superhero overcoming all the odds that people expect.

I will admit that the third book has a very different feel to it. And no, she doesn't come off as the stereotypical heroine who never lets life get her down. But I don't think that is a bad thing. Because how many people are like that? And how many of you that have had a very hard challenge (or challenges, which is the case for a lot of people, unfortunately) appreciate a heroine that knows that life is hard and sometimes, enduring is a heroic feat? I sometimes feel like the heroine who is never stressed or teary or worn out with all the hardship is pretty shallow. I know that I get worn out by how hard life gets sometimes, and while I try to be the kind of person who always comes out on top, I also know that it's not that easy.

So, yes, I think Mockingjay is not what we expect or even necessarily look for in our heroic protagonists. But I don't think that is bad. I think there is value in showing that there are different types of heroism.

I also think that Mockingjay highlights the clash between Katniss's personality and what circumstances have forced her to become. Katniss was never very comfortable with attention, and never signed up to be an icon, and Mockingjay is all about Katniss the icon. The other books show us Katniss the survivor, which is her strength. Now the story is about Katniss the image, not Katniss the person and that changes things.

Now I feel like I should have this brilliant and witty conclusion (my english and lit teachers ruined me for life--I still cannot write anything without including some kind of conclusion!) but really I guess the moral of this post is that comparing books is fun, but sometimes it is interesting to weigh a book in the context of its characters and plot, rather than other characters and plots and such. The end.

But wait! There's more....

This week, I finished listening to The King's Speech, by Mark Logue and Peter Conradi. It was terrific, especially if you like history. I really wanted to see the movie, but couldn't for the simple fact that I have this standard of no R movies. So, I did the next best thing--or maybe the better thing--and listened to the book. It was terrific. You get your British history, your world history, your WWII history, your medical history (the history of speech therapy), a lot of biography, and your speech therapy/psychology. Highlights:
-King George VI was a really good person. There have been a lot of rotten rulers from a lot of countries and from every time, but this guy was a pretty stand-up person. It's always great to read about a quality person.
-The perspective people had on stammerers and speech 'defects' (not my phrasing). It is kind of mind boggling. The trend was to treat it all as a psychological problem. So, Lionel Logue approached it as a physical problem, and it got some good results. Of course, there is a psychological element--any physical problem has psychological effects. But Logue helped people move past the physical problem, and that resolved any psychological side effects.
-Score one for archivists! This is a great example of how valuable our records can be.
Verdict: Well written story, definitely a worthwhile read.

But wait...there's more!
I also finished The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood. So, I have mixed feelings about this one. It was interesting, and I would say it was good, but to say it was good seems the wrong approach. And it isn't really a question of did I like it or not. This is one of those books that just doesn't fit into the regular categories. 'Good' and "liked it' don't seem to be the right words. Should you choose to read it,you should know it is a bit risque, on the surface, but there is more to the story than that, and that is not what the story is about. -Ask people you trust, people who know you and your standards before you read it. There are a lot of really interesting issues addressed in the book, but the route it takes may not be up your alley. (I don't know if there is any other route that could have been taken).
Verdict: I liked the book. I think Atwood is a good author. But read with caution.

But wait...there's more!

I am currently listening to Planet Google: One Company's Audacious Plan To Organize Everything We Know, by Randall Stross. It is fascinating! I think I mentioned that this was a random choice at the library. But it turned out to be serendipitous. So far, the book has covered Google's dedication to openness, their approach to business, their growth, the Google Books project (which, I have heard a lot about, but this was a new perspective), Google translate (so interesting!), and the acquisition of YouTube. Just to name a few topics. I am learning a lot about Google, which, given it's huge presence in the world, can't be a bad thing. I haven't finished the book yet, but I definitely like it. I think the major disappointment is that the book was published in 2008, so there are 4 packed years that aren't covered!
Verdict: A delightful surprise, I'm really glad I pulled it.

But wait! One more...
I am also reading A Wrinkle in Time, by Madeleine L'Engle. An oldie but a goodie. I have read this one before, but it's been a while, so I'm doing a reread. I have a niece who has been dragging her feet about reading this one, but I've got to get her to read it. It's terrific, so far. (But having read it before, I know it's good). I think I'm going to have to read more of L'Engle's books, though.
Verdict: A must read for everyone.

But wait! Just kidding. That's all for now. I did remember one more book I'm listening to, but I'll save that for later. I think I've reviewed enough for now. So, there you go. Happy reading!