When I first picked up The Fellowship of the Ring I was about fourteen. I soon put it down again. I picked it up and put it down a few more times after that. For the life of me I just couldn't get myself past the prologue 'Concerning Hobbits.' So, this time when I set myself the challenge of reading it all (or at least all of The Fellowship) I was not expecting to fall completely in love with the story, or actually want to proceed to The Two Towers and then The Return of the King. In many ways, I felt obliged to want to read it. The fact that The Lord of the Rings topped the BBC's Big Read list of novels voted for by readers made me feel like I had been missing out on something, although I didn't exactly get what it was. If I'm honest, I felt like seeing the movies was enough because they were so great anyway. This time I persevered with it and although I did not get into it straight away, once I did I was rewarded for my efforts. I could not put it down. I was completely drawn into Middle-earth.
So, I'm going to give brief outline of the plot. A young hobbit named Frodo Baggins inherits a ring that turns out to be the One Ring of power of the Dark Lord Sauron. Discovering Sauron's evil purposes for the ring he sets off on a quest to destroy it with three other hobbits and the guidance of Gandalf the wizard. On the way they are joined by two men, an elf and a dwarf, each of whom are charged with protecting the ring-bearer (Frodo) on his journey. As their journey becomes more perilous the fellowship is forced to split up and take separate paths. On their different journeys they endure many hardships and battles, and meet different peoples of Middle-earth whose fates are joined to that of the ring. Frodo and his companion Sam also encounter a former ring-bearer, whose desire for the ring will push him to the ultimate levels of treachery and deceit. All of this the company must endure before the enemy can be vanquished once and for all.
That is the plot in brief, but it does not do the novel any justice. The scope of The Lord of the Rings, the sheer magnitude and depth of craft, imagination and intellect cannot be conveyed in a mere paragraph. Tolkien has not just written a novel, he has created a whole world with languages, history and different cultures. He has also created an incredible landscape for Middle-earth, with different climates and geographical features. The result of all these things creates a work of literature where fantasy and reality interweave seamlessly, creating a world that is at once unlike ours, and yet could have been our own once upon a time.
The Lord of the Rings is considered to be a work of 'high-fantasy' because it is set in an alternative world or universe. To a certain extent, this is true. In many ways, Middle-earth seems otherworldly, with elves, dwarves and wizards running around. However, many of the customs, histories and the very geography of Middle-earth makes it feel very much of this world, even if it is of this world in a very, very different time. It is a fantasy novel which, because of the way it has been crafted, seems almost real.
Published between 1954 and 1955, The Lord of the Rings is certainly influenced by the experiences of the two World Wars of the early Twentieth Century. Certainly, the war depicted in the books is by all accounts a world war, with all the people's of Middle-earth caught up in it for one side or the other. The anticipation of death and destruction, and the fear of their fate should their enemy succeed, is in everyway a reflection of what Tolkien must have experienced as a veteran. I think that reading it in this post-war light, adds an extra level of poignancy to an already moving story.
Above everything else, the thing that I love the most about The Lord of the Rings is the relationships between the characters. The fact that there is a love-story or two going, however welcome, is of much less interest than the friendships forged between the comrades at arms. The relationship between Frodo and his faithful servant, Samwise Gamgee, is especially moving. Sam's role throughout the books has been a supportive one to Frodo. He is loyal, would follow him through thick and thin, and always puts the needs of Frodo above his own. Sam is an unassuming character and considers his main duty to be serving and protecting Frodo, and yet through this master/servant relationship a true friendship is formed. Sam is very much the underdog, and yet in the end I believe him to be the true hero of The Lord of the Rings. Without Sam, Frodo could not have succeeded in his quest.
Needless to say, I LOVE The Lord of the Rings. I was not expecting to, having had my many failed attempts at reading it in the past. However, now I have read it I feel that I will read it time and time again. Once I had finished, I felt genuinely sorry that I had to put it down and leave Middle-earth. I have also come to a conclusion that I didn't think was going to be possible. As great as the movies are (and I do love them), they are no where near as great as the books.
Link for BBC Big Read:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/bigread/top100.shtml
Friday, 15 July 2011
Wednesday, 13 July 2011
Animal Farm by George Orwell
Before I begin I should state that I have never been Orwell's greatest fan. I read Nineteen Eighty-Four in school as part of my A-Level course and I have to say I did not get on easily with it. When I eventually got into it I found I respected the novel but that I could not enjoy it. Indeed, is Nineteen Eighty-Four a novel that can be enjoyed? So, it was with a feeling of foreboding that I looked for Animal Farm in the library. I believed that it would be like the other in terms of, well, just about everything. You can probably imagine my surprise (and relief), therefore, when I realized that it was nothing of the kind. True, both act as a sort of critique of communism in the case of the Soviet Union, but I feel that the two novels do this very differently. Where Nineteen Eighty-Four supposes a time in the future (or the future when Orwell was writing) and one can recognize it as a work of fiction, with Animal Farm we get a concise political history of the Soviet Union in the guise of a 'fairy tale.' Plus, it is much shorter.
Published in the United Kingdom in 1945, Animal Farm chronicles the rebellion of the animals on Manor Farm and the consequent overthrowing of their human master Jones. The animals then take over complete ownership of the farm and start to envisage a world without humans at all. Indeed, 'four legs good, two legs bad' becomes the central party line. However, amidst the fight for total equality amongst the animals, we bear witness to the rise and power struggles of the pigs. Before long, the pig Napolean takes his place as the 'leader' of the animals. In his rise we see a complete turn around in policy. Indeed, the initial commandments of the rebellion become so edited they now have the reverse meaning. Even the basic precept of animalism, that 'all animals are equal,' changes to 'all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.' Along the way animals disappear and even the most hardworking are betrayed. Ultimately, we see how the pigs break each of the formative principles of animalism and in doing so treat the animals worse than their human counterparts ever did. The final sentence of the book sums this fact up succinctly:
"The creatures outside [the farmhouse, looking in on a gathering of pigs and local human farmers] looked from pig to man, man to pig, and from pig to man again; but it already was impossible to say which was which."
As with Nineteen Eighty-Four, I can't exactly say that I particularly like Animal Farm. Both are books I respect more than like. This is especially the case with Animal Farm. I respect the way in which Orwell has made a complex subject i.e. totalitarianism, in particular that of communist totalitarianism, accessible by conveying it in the manner of a 'fairy-tale.' It is easy to read as the language is uncomplicated, and the fact that the characters are animals creates the impression of a story that even children could understand. Yet the fact is that if you were to replace the animals with human characters you would not have a 'fairy-tale.' 'Fairy-tale' implies fiction, made up, fantasy. If Animal Farm were about humans you would have a book that is pretty far removed from the realm of fiction.
It is a book that I am glad that I have now read, if for no other reason than just to be able to say that I have. Maybe one day I will go back to Orwell and have my mind opened further to his works, but in all honesty I am in no rush to pick them up again any time soon.
Published in the United Kingdom in 1945, Animal Farm chronicles the rebellion of the animals on Manor Farm and the consequent overthrowing of their human master Jones. The animals then take over complete ownership of the farm and start to envisage a world without humans at all. Indeed, 'four legs good, two legs bad' becomes the central party line. However, amidst the fight for total equality amongst the animals, we bear witness to the rise and power struggles of the pigs. Before long, the pig Napolean takes his place as the 'leader' of the animals. In his rise we see a complete turn around in policy. Indeed, the initial commandments of the rebellion become so edited they now have the reverse meaning. Even the basic precept of animalism, that 'all animals are equal,' changes to 'all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.' Along the way animals disappear and even the most hardworking are betrayed. Ultimately, we see how the pigs break each of the formative principles of animalism and in doing so treat the animals worse than their human counterparts ever did. The final sentence of the book sums this fact up succinctly:
"The creatures outside [the farmhouse, looking in on a gathering of pigs and local human farmers] looked from pig to man, man to pig, and from pig to man again; but it already was impossible to say which was which."
As with Nineteen Eighty-Four, I can't exactly say that I particularly like Animal Farm. Both are books I respect more than like. This is especially the case with Animal Farm. I respect the way in which Orwell has made a complex subject i.e. totalitarianism, in particular that of communist totalitarianism, accessible by conveying it in the manner of a 'fairy-tale.' It is easy to read as the language is uncomplicated, and the fact that the characters are animals creates the impression of a story that even children could understand. Yet the fact is that if you were to replace the animals with human characters you would not have a 'fairy-tale.' 'Fairy-tale' implies fiction, made up, fantasy. If Animal Farm were about humans you would have a book that is pretty far removed from the realm of fiction.
It is a book that I am glad that I have now read, if for no other reason than just to be able to say that I have. Maybe one day I will go back to Orwell and have my mind opened further to his works, but in all honesty I am in no rush to pick them up again any time soon.
Thursday, 16 June 2011
Small Island by Andrea Levy
I'm going to start this blog off with a couple of books that I have just read. Another thing you should probably know about me is that I am a fan of starting 'to do' lists etc. with a couple of bits I have already done for morale's sake... Its just one of my many quirks.
The day before yesterday I finished reading a beautiful novel called Small Island by Andrea Levy. The story takes place in Britain, Jamaica and India during and a couple of years after the Second World War. It follows two couples whose lives become entwined, Queenie and Bernard Bligh, an English couple living in London, and Hortense and Gilbert Joseph, a couple from Jamaica. It brings special focus onto life in Britain at a time of great cultural change.
One of the truly special things about this book, I found, was in the fact that Levy gives each of these characters a voice. Each of these four character becomes a narrator at some point in the story, and so the novel is given a multi-dimensional feel that is so often missing. Each character is presented with their own strengths and foibles, and although we are not asked to agree with any of the characters, their actions and beliefs are dealt with sensitively. It was refreshing to read a novel that didn't ask me to ally myself with a particular character, or to feel particular emotions. Levy presents the characters in a very human way, we are not meant to think for instance Gilbert= Good or Bernard= Bad. It is a novel that is free from the labels people tend to attach to one another. Bernard, for example, goes off to India to fight in the war and comes back with racist views and yet the novel does not refer to him as a racist. Rather, he is presented as an individual that has a set of beliefs that not everybody agrees with yet one is able to understand how he came by them. Also, Queenie she is presented as someone who is simultaneously generous and selfish. She is not the definitive heroine. Neither is Hortense for that matter, with her snooty demeanour and seemingly unfaltering pride. Small Island is a novel that is first and foremost about people and they way they act and feel in completely life altering situations, irrespective of colour, gender or nationality.
I first picked up Small Island because I remembered that there was a BBC production of it a couple of years ago that I enjoyed. Normally, I don't like to read novels if I have already seen them on the telly or in film. However, I felt compelled to pick it up and I can honestly say that I am so glad I did. I studied the Decolonization of the British Empire as part of my A-Level in History, and I found that this novel gave a truly interesting perspective (or four perspectives) on colonization. I found it intriguing that 'the Mother Country' aka Britain did not always live up to the expectations of those living in the colonies. One of my favourite bits is when Gilbert, speaking of Britain, says:
" Living far from you is a beloved relation whom you have never met. Yet this relation is so dear to you she is known as Mother....Her photographs are cherished...Your finest, your best, everything you have that is worthy is sent to Mother...
Then one day you hear Mother calling-she is troubled, she need your help...Shiver, tire, hunger-for no sacrifice is too much to see you at Mother's needy side.
The filthy tramp that eventually greets you is she. Ragged, old, dusty as the long dead...
She looks down at you through lordly eyes and says, 'Who the bloody hell are you?'"
I found it fascinating to consider that in spite of being so proud of the British Empire, only too happy to drain the colonies dry, very few in Britain could tell you very much about it. I couldn't help wondering what the point of the Empire was after all. What this novel illustrates very well, however, is the point that our colonial heritage and the Second World War has turned Britain into the country it is today; a wonderful melting pot brimming with cultural diversity.
The day before yesterday I finished reading a beautiful novel called Small Island by Andrea Levy. The story takes place in Britain, Jamaica and India during and a couple of years after the Second World War. It follows two couples whose lives become entwined, Queenie and Bernard Bligh, an English couple living in London, and Hortense and Gilbert Joseph, a couple from Jamaica. It brings special focus onto life in Britain at a time of great cultural change.
One of the truly special things about this book, I found, was in the fact that Levy gives each of these characters a voice. Each of these four character becomes a narrator at some point in the story, and so the novel is given a multi-dimensional feel that is so often missing. Each character is presented with their own strengths and foibles, and although we are not asked to agree with any of the characters, their actions and beliefs are dealt with sensitively. It was refreshing to read a novel that didn't ask me to ally myself with a particular character, or to feel particular emotions. Levy presents the characters in a very human way, we are not meant to think for instance Gilbert= Good or Bernard= Bad. It is a novel that is free from the labels people tend to attach to one another. Bernard, for example, goes off to India to fight in the war and comes back with racist views and yet the novel does not refer to him as a racist. Rather, he is presented as an individual that has a set of beliefs that not everybody agrees with yet one is able to understand how he came by them. Also, Queenie she is presented as someone who is simultaneously generous and selfish. She is not the definitive heroine. Neither is Hortense for that matter, with her snooty demeanour and seemingly unfaltering pride. Small Island is a novel that is first and foremost about people and they way they act and feel in completely life altering situations, irrespective of colour, gender or nationality.
I first picked up Small Island because I remembered that there was a BBC production of it a couple of years ago that I enjoyed. Normally, I don't like to read novels if I have already seen them on the telly or in film. However, I felt compelled to pick it up and I can honestly say that I am so glad I did. I studied the Decolonization of the British Empire as part of my A-Level in History, and I found that this novel gave a truly interesting perspective (or four perspectives) on colonization. I found it intriguing that 'the Mother Country' aka Britain did not always live up to the expectations of those living in the colonies. One of my favourite bits is when Gilbert, speaking of Britain, says:
" Living far from you is a beloved relation whom you have never met. Yet this relation is so dear to you she is known as Mother....Her photographs are cherished...Your finest, your best, everything you have that is worthy is sent to Mother...
Then one day you hear Mother calling-she is troubled, she need your help...Shiver, tire, hunger-for no sacrifice is too much to see you at Mother's needy side.
The filthy tramp that eventually greets you is she. Ragged, old, dusty as the long dead...
She looks down at you through lordly eyes and says, 'Who the bloody hell are you?'"
I found it fascinating to consider that in spite of being so proud of the British Empire, only too happy to drain the colonies dry, very few in Britain could tell you very much about it. I couldn't help wondering what the point of the Empire was after all. What this novel illustrates very well, however, is the point that our colonial heritage and the Second World War has turned Britain into the country it is today; a wonderful melting pot brimming with cultural diversity.
Wednesday, 15 June 2011
Hi to everyone and nobody in particular
Right, well, since I have never been a blogger before, I don't really know how to start one of these things. I suppose introducing myself would be a good start, but I don't want to risk sounding too much like David Copperfield by giving you a blow by blow account of my life up until now...it is really not that interesting. All you need to know now is that my name is Lauren and I am 21 years old. I work in health care and I am soon to start my training as an adult nurse in a well regarded university in the north. Whilst I love what I do it can sometimes be difficult to switch off from the job. This is why I have decided to start this blog. I wanted an outlet of expanding my mind whilst being completely unrelated to my day job.
So, basically, I propose to have a book on the go at all times (and actually finish it) and to blog about it. I love to read, and always have done. I studied English Literature at A-Level and a bit at university, but I do not consider myself to be an expert by any stretch of the imagination. I am simply a girl who loves to read and wants to think about the impact of the books I am reading. I am sure that there are people out there who will find me frustrating in my lack of literary aplomb ( a word I have just learned so I am determined to use it), but they'll just have to lump it. I am not a literary snob, I am quite happy to give anything a go.
I do not have a fixed reading list, I just browse at the library and pick up whatever appeals. I also use Guardian's The 100 greatest novels of all time and the BBC's The Big Read lists for want of inspiration. At the bottom of this post please find the links to the aforementioned pages. If anybody ever wants to recommend books, please feel free to do so! I am always open to suggestion and a discussion.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2003/oct/12/features.fiction
http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/bigread/
So, basically, I propose to have a book on the go at all times (and actually finish it) and to blog about it. I love to read, and always have done. I studied English Literature at A-Level and a bit at university, but I do not consider myself to be an expert by any stretch of the imagination. I am simply a girl who loves to read and wants to think about the impact of the books I am reading. I am sure that there are people out there who will find me frustrating in my lack of literary aplomb ( a word I have just learned so I am determined to use it), but they'll just have to lump it. I am not a literary snob, I am quite happy to give anything a go.
I do not have a fixed reading list, I just browse at the library and pick up whatever appeals. I also use Guardian's The 100 greatest novels of all time and the BBC's The Big Read lists for want of inspiration. At the bottom of this post please find the links to the aforementioned pages. If anybody ever wants to recommend books, please feel free to do so! I am always open to suggestion and a discussion.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2003/oct/12/features.fiction
http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/bigread/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)