a book and a movie and no much else ~

okay, so i finally finished Westways (at 500+ pages, it's pretty long for me ~ my attention span seems to cap off at about 350). so here are my notes for the 50bookchallenge:

no. 52 ~ Westways by S. Weir Mitchell. a reviewer had said that the first half of the book was really strong and then it sort of went sideways and lost itself. i tend to agree. soon as the war finally arrives, rather than getting more dramatic, the novel devolves into a long quagmire of letter-writing and minor subplots (some of which are pretty amusing, but nothing substantial). Mitchell suffers us through the whole four years of war and finally brings the two Penhallow men home, both wounded, with the squire shot in the head and not quite himself anymore. the denouement then consists of them trying to "fix" the squire while John wins back Leila's love. villain Peter Lamb is satisfactorily dispatched, but Mitchell leaves his mother sort of nebulously hanging and the whole bizarre thing about reverend Mark Rivers being in love with Leila is inexplicably dealt with by simply sending him away, which is a shame because he's one of the more complex and interesting characters ~ if not a bit Morse-like. i wasn't altogether disappointed with the ending, but it did drag a bit for what was to be the inevitable conclusion: the restoration of the happy home, etc.

couple of really interesting things in the text: a fictional depiction of Czar NastyOwlFace which feels, to me, dead-on. dunno if Mitchell ever met Stanton, but he certainly agrees with all of his contemporaries as to the man's character. a brief scene with Lincoln is also interestingly in keeping with the characterization of the president. other famous people who traipse through: General Hancock and Dr. Askew. i was hoping for a glimpse of some more famous pennsylvanians (like Mr. Hanty?), but oh well.

the other interesting thing is a rather overt subplot that involves the rape of a woman, which i thought was shocking for the era in which this was printed. rather than having a tearful woman come forward claiming she had been "insulted" by so-and-so, Mitchell actually depicts the drunkard Lamb emerging from her house and her chasing after, accusing in language, Mitchell says, "to leave no mistake as to what had been done." Lamb is dealt with by the Union army by being tied to a tree with a note pinned to his breast stating his crime and inviting the Rebels to do with him as they see fit (love this scene!). unfortunately, Lamb escapes punishment because for some inscrutable reason, Penhallow takes pity on him (which is totally infuriating). but ultimately Lamb gets his.

all in all a fine read with some great small story arcs and some wonderfully drawn characters (Leila and John are particularly well-written in a very otherwise victorian novel where usually the couple in love is usually the most cardboard).

in film: yes, i watched Night at the Museum (call it palate cleanser for that wretched spartan movie). and yes, i thought it was funny (even if stupid). i can't hlep but be a fan of owen wilson, and the concept just appeals to me too much to dislike. among my favorite moments is the chaotic end battle where night watchman larry (ben stiller) is forced to try to reign in some control over the entire museum, which has gone berserk. the harangue could have been a lot funnier, but this part cracked me up well enough:



larry: civil war dudes: you guys are brothers for god sakes!
you've got to stop fighting. North wins, slavery is bad.
sorry. don't want to burst your bubble. but South:
you guys get the allman brothers and...Nascar.
so just chill!
i would just like to add that anyone who thinks i'm too harsh in my film reviews, this is a perfect example of something completely stupid to which i would joyfully give a thumbs up.

okay must go make pizza for breakfast, write a paper, and then work on my book ~ happy sunday all!

: D

i remember when i used to be able to write ~

this is just a necessary update on the whole pursuance thing:

the bad thing about saturating your brain with victorian writing is that you inadvertently start emulating it.

Mr. Hanty never settles easily into anything, being by nature vigilant and by experience knowledgeable in the myriad ways that fickle Fortune turns her face from the favored.

yeah, wow. i churned that buttery crumpet out with about a dozen others like pez this afternoon. i can't decide if it's bad writing or just really amusing.

the book is mostly a mess. i've lost confidence in doing it justice. the characters are more alive than ever for me, i feel like i have a solid handle on them, but now they're bopping around in my head, knocking into each other like little shorebirds puttering drunk in the surf.

spent i don't know how much time cutting Poppet's defense from 17 pages down to 11, but it still seems pretty dang long and even though i think i did a pretty brilliant job of preserving its integrity and tightening some of its very victorian rhetorical devices, i just don't know otherwise what to do with it.

i want to hire an artist and dispense with the narrative. the dialogue is all written, it's painting in the rest of the scenes that's making me crazy.

i am trying, so hard, not to get so frustrated that i throw this thing out the window. i want to finish it ~ at least so that it's complete beginning to end, even if that means i have to shove it in a drawer for a few months in order to get some perspective on it. at least then i can come back to it as a whole instead of scattershot as it is now. for having generated such an extensive and elaborate outline for this project, i sure have made an unsightly mess of keeping it all organized.

: o p

p.s. lj seems to having some strange notification lag going on ~ so i'm not ignoring anybody, i promise. if i haven't responded to something it's because i have no idea i was s'pose to.