Life of Pi Part 1

The author's note at the beginning of Life of Pi was interesting to me because of how the author, Yann Martel, described his writing process.  He does thorough, extensive research on whatever he writes about. I like that he tries to make his work as close to reality as possible. I understand what he means when he described his book that had the perfect, most realistic characters, excellent sentences, and facts woven into the fiction to make it as realistic as possible, yet the story won't work. I feel that way about my essays sometimes.

I also liked the new perspective that Pi put on zoos.  I had never thought of freedom as being a negative thing for animals; I suppose I have always been the "well-meaning but misinformed" person when it came to the subject.  Pi has a good point though. Animals are not homesick for the wild while they are in zoos. We would not shout or dance for joy if someone "freed" us of our homes, so why would animals? Zoo life, with plenty of food every day, safety, luxury, and comfort, is definitely so much better for animals than the fight for survival of the fittest in the wild.  The author really does offer some interesting information and new perspectives to the reader, it just takes him forever time to say what he wants to say, which is why I think some people are turned off to the book.

One thing that I do not like about Pi is that he says he practices so many different religions.The fact that he says he belongs to all of them at once means that he really belongs to none of them, because all of their values and beliefs conflict with one another. Maybe this is a sign of inner conflict within Pi. Either way, he needs to pick one belief system that he agrees with and live his life accordingly.

Fahrenheit 451: Burning Bright

I feel like the third section of Fahrenheit 451 changed a lot from the first two sections, especially in its tone.  The tone of "Burning Bright" is more suspenseful and unpredictable than the tone of the other two parts.  As I read on, I found myself anxiously anticipating what would happen next--would Montag get caught while he was running away from the scene of the crime?  what would happen to him after he floated down the river?  I feel dissatisfied that the end of the book never expounds on what happened to Montag or Mildred or the city or Faber; instead, Mr. Bradbury leaves the rest of the story up to our imaginations, I suppose.  I wish I knew if Faber and Montag ever find each other again, or where Granger, Montag, and the band of hobos end up after they reach the city. I am also sad to say that Clarisse McClellan seems to actually be dead; I was wrong about her being kidnapped by Central Intelligence for knowing too much.

I found it interesting that at the beginning of part 3, Montag takes the flamethrower to his entire house, and he willingly torches everything because he wanted to "change everything."  But later when Montag finds Granger and the other hobo intellectuals in the woods, they are huddled around a fire, and for the first time, Montag realizes that fire is multifaceted in the sense that it can be used not only for clean, thorough destruction, but also for warmth and for light.  I believe that this realization is what the title "Burning Bright" refers to--when Montag sees fire used for good, he sees the men who believe as he does, and he develops a hope for the future.  There is a light at the end of his dismal tunnel, and it is burning bright.

Once again, Mildred is pretty much the worst.  She turns her own husband in for having books in his possession, has their house burned down, and leaves, probably forgetting about him as soon as she gets a short distance down the street.  Once Montag is out of town, he acknowledges that he does not miss her and would not feel sad if she died, yet he keeps bringing her up.  He knows that she feels the same way about him, but even so, he thinks about her during the war and imagines exactly how she dies.  He keeps repeating "Poor Millie, poor Millie."  This confused me, because if he really did not care about Mildred like he said, he probably would not be so concerned.  Why does he continue to waste time thinking about this slovenly, awful woman after all the things she has done to him?

As I said before, I do wish the ending of Fahrenheit 451 had been a little less up for interpretation, a little more clear, but I did enjoy this book.  Ray Bradbury is a brilliant man and I was surprised at how many similarities there are between his dystopia and our society today.  I have a new perspective on book censorship, the media, and books in general, all thanks to Fahrenheit 451.

Fahrenheit 451: The Sieve and the Sand

If The Hearth and the Salamander didn't disturb me about my generation's future then The Sieve and the Sand certainly did the trick.  I'm genuinely concerned because although Fahrenheit 451 may seem exaggerated and unrealistic, there are definitely some similarities between our world and this dystopian world.  I would be frightened to know how many people have not a clue how to use a library, dictionary, or spell the words 'library' or 'dictionary.'  "Just Google it. Duh."  There may actually exist a portion of our population, no matter how small it may be, that would not notice if the government burned all our books and outlawed reading.  Not that I read as avidly as I should.  But still, this is scary.

Anyway, I am really glad that since Clarisse died (although I am hoping she is still alive somewhere, not dead, but just being kept quiet for knowing/noticing too much), Montag has found someone else to share his burden with (the burden of Knowledge, that is).  Mr. Faber, although he does strike me as sort of a yellow-belly, does have some wisdom along with his ancientness and advises Montag what to do. 

I can't tell you how shocked I was that Mildred Montag has friends.  Didn't see that coming.  Her friends, Mrs. Phelps and Mrs. Bowles, almost seem to be even worse wives than she is.  It is sad but I actually know of parents that are like Mrs. Bowles, who treat the TV like a babysitter for their kids and would just rather not be bothered by the little rascals.  Why do people like that reproduce?  Where is the love?  I was surprised that the women didn't turn hostile when Guy unplugged the TV wall during their clown-slasher show.  Also, another similarity I found between our society and the Fahrenheit 451 society: the women's political reasoning.  They choose the candidates they vote for according to their name, how they look, dress, smell, whatever.  We've actually been talking about this in my AP US History class--how completely oblivious some voters are to what is going on in our government.  I wish people would fulfill their civil duties and get informed.  Maybe we could avoid ending up like these poor folks.

I was a little confused at the way Captain Beatty was acting toward Montag at the fire station.  I know he knew that Montag had more than one book, but I could not quite tell why he was trying to provoke him.  I suppose Beatty just felt powerful because he knew he was scaring Montag. Also, the way the was throwing quotes around made me think that he was quite the avid reader/hypocrite.  After all, could he really have memorized all those quotes if he had not read the literature they came from several times?

The end of this section leaves you hanging.  Somehow in the back of my mind I did predict that Montag's house would end up an intellectual inferno.  Bradbury knows how to make the reader not want to put the book down.  I love the way he writes; I can tell that he is an extremely intelligent man.  His book is really making me think.  I need to start reading more.

Fahrenheit 451: The Hearth and the Salamander

When I found out that we were reading Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury and that it is a dystopian novel, I must admit I was a little underenthused. My experience with dystopian movies has been less than wonderful...I have watched The Road, Gattaca, Daybreakers, and Harrison Bergeron to name a few, and The Road, frankly, was the most bleak, dismal, morbid film I have seen.  So the idea of reading a novel about the world's dark, hopeless future did not seem so fun to me.  However, reading part 1 of Fahrenheit 451 certainly has proved my expectations wrong.  This book is great.

One of the first things that captured my attention in this book is Bradbury's use of vivid imagery. I have developed in my mind's eye my own crystal-clear pictures of what the characters look like, their facial expressions, the Montags' house, and the fire station where Guy works.  Being able to 'see' what is going on helps me pay attention and interpret some of what is going on in my own way.

My favorite character so far, as I am sure is most everyone else's, is Clarisse McClellan.  In the midst of all the uniformity and unquestioning obedience of this futuristic society, Clarisse stands out because she wants to know not only how things work, but why they work. She thinks in an unusual way, and she has something that no one else has: curiosity.  Everyone else is complacent and dull and cluelessly content with mindlessly watching giant TV walls or wrecking cars and smashing windows on purpose.  Ignorant.  I like Clarisse because she is interested in life and the world, and therefore she is an interesting person.

Guy's wife Mildred annoys me though. To me she is the epitome of one of those mindless complacent societal robots who don't know or care to know how to do anything but what they are told.  Why doesn't she get a job? or take up a hobby? or do something that does not involve her being in an unmoving horizontal position? One part of the book that bothered me was the part where she tried to kill herself with sleeping pills (or forgot and kept on taking them until she overdosed, whichever) and the medics came to pump her stomach.  They didn't seem to care at all what they were doing, they were just caught up in the routine.  Instead of being bent over the bed with concern, Bradbury writes, they are standing straight up smoking their cigarettes like it is no big deal that the woman they are aiding is dying.  The lack of value of human life and disposableness of it in this book bothers me.

I enjoyed Part 1: The Hearth and the Salamander so much that I didn't just stop at page 68 where the required first reading ended. I wanted to know what happened, so I read ahead to part 2.  This is such a well-written book, I really enjoy the quality of it and cannot wait to find out what will happen next.

On Writing Essay

Most people would agree that Stephen King is one of the most talented, prolific, original, and successful writers of our time. Although he says some are born better equipped for writing than others, he accredits his success as an author not to sheer raw talent like some people would assume, but to reading and writing avidly, which he reiterates throughout On Writing are essential to being an effective writer.

Stephen King showed a passion for writing even from an early age, all the way back to when he would copy the words and pictures out of comic books to show his mother, who began to encourage him to create his own stories.  As he grew older, he submitted story after story to science fiction magazines and got rejection letter after rejection letter. But the rejections always had the same messages attached to them: "This is good, but not for us. You have talent. Keep writing. Submit again." And the young Mr. King did just that, posting the letters on his wall not to constantly remind himself of his failures, but to motivate himself to keep improving as a writer. The fact that he pushed through his failures in writing until he broke through and finally had his first story published in one of those magazines proves that he would not give up on his dedication and fervent love for writing just because he was not successful at first.

From writing for his brother's community newspaper Dave's Rag, to being editor of the Village Vomit, a satirical anti-school-newspaper that he created in high school, to submitting fiction to numerous magazines including Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine, King's young life reflected his own advice in On Writing: write continuously.  Even when he was sent to the principal and suspended for his slanderous articles in the Village Vomit, he did not let a little trouble stop him.  He just learned that satire writing was not his forte and went off of that.  If King had stopped writing after the first hint of rejection or discouragement hit him, he would never have become one of the most renowned and well-known writers of his generation.

The fact that Stephen King wrote On Writing at all proves his devotion to the craft.  The book is packed with wonderful information and technique-sharpening advice for aspiring authors.  Truly the man is dedicated to his profession, and new writers would be wise to follow the advice and learn from his experiences that he shares in On Writing.

Stephen King | On Writing: What Writing Is / Toolbox / On Writing

Even though this second 100-page section of On Writing was not as full of stories and humor and attention-captivation goodness as the first, King presents a wealth of great writing advice and certainly taught me a thing or two I did not know before.  What Writing Is, a brief 5-page-long section of the book, brought up a line of thought I had never considered before: writing is like telepathy.  That idea kind of weirded me out at first, but as I kept reading, it made perfect sense.  I thought it was awesome to consider that we can read a message that was written anytime in the past and still understand it- like communicating through time travel.  Also, I thought King's 'experiment' when he describes a scene and the reader imagines it in their mind was crazy...transferring a thought or picture from one person's mind to another, through time and distance? Crazy.

As I read on into the Toolbox portion of On Writing, I found the extended metaphor of the 'writer's toolbox' that King used to be both clever and helpful. The first level, King says, should be a solid vocabulary. I fully agree with this- I love words and vocabulary and spelling and the way a tiny change in diction can change the whole meaning of a piece of writing.  I like how Mr. King reminds us, though, that it is "not how much you have, but how you use it," regarding vocabulary.  He means to say that writers do not necessarily have to try to impress their readers by utilizing eloquent, grandiose, extravagant idioms;  simple, plain, straightforward language gets the point across just fine. Grammar is also in the top level of the toolbox, which means that a solid grip is a necessity for good and effective writing. I LOVE grammar. No really, I do. I'm one of THOSE people. I've never heard that adverbs are bad though, but I guess it makes sense now that I consider it. Sometimes they just get annoying.

The second level of the 'writer's toolbox' is elements of style. King does mention on page 131 that "Teachers assign [essays] when they can't think of any other way to waste your time." Whoa! Rude. Anyway, I like how he says that fiction writing focuses on the beat of the reading.  All the rules about 'dialogue attribution,' 'phonetically rendered language,' and the uses of commas and apostrophes could get pretty confusing in fiction writing, though.  All in all, the Toolbox is very instrumental in helping the reader becoming a stronger writer.  Probably some of the most helpful advice that Mr. King offers is to write about what we know and like, which makes sense because it's definitely easier to write about something I actually care about as opposed to, I don't know, the agricultural endeavors of ancient inhabitants of Northeastern Latin America. Right?

Overall, the midsection of On Writing has given me useful advice to become both a better reader and writer as well as prompted me to work to sharpen my skills .

Stephen King | On Writing: Curriculum vitae

On Writing is definitely different from any other book I have been required to read for school.  It has actually kept my attention for longer than the first five or so pages.  Stephen King knows how to write in a way that is not only simply worded, easy to read, and keeps the reader's attention, but also gets his point across, I think, exactly as he means it, without being ridiculously, excessively verbose.  King uses metaphors, similes, humor, stories, and real life examples to make a point so well that sometimes the reader is so entertained that they don't even realize they are being taught a lesson.  I liked that while reading On Writing, without even realizing, I was learning about how a writer is "formed" (not made; as King says, "the equipment comes with the original package"--people are either born with a talent or they aren't), the writing process, where ideas come from, and how rejection (in anything, not just writing) can lead to success eventually.  For example, in the middle of one of King's stories about writing sports columns for the Lisbon Weekly Enterprise, he remembers how his boss John Gould edited his first story and taught him something that he still remembers to this day: leave out all the things that aren't the story.  Here the reader learns this valuable lesson as well.  And we thought we were just being entertained.

I love reading about people.  I enjoy learning about people's childhoods, pasts, what experiences have happened to them that led them to where they are today.  Perhaps this is one of the reasons On Writing was so interesting to me.  Stephen King's childhood was very unstable, with a single mother struggling to meet her children's day-to-day needs as well as her own.  I think it is intriguing, though, that even though he had such a rough beginning, he still finds ways to look back on his past with a sense of humor.  Most people who come from similar situations like that I think would be feeling sorry for themselves.

I found it fascinating how King explains where his story ideas come from.  Out of nowhere.  While doing a tedious everyday job like cleaning the girls' locker room.  It's neat to me that such a mundane task eventually led to his initial success as a real author.  Also, I wasn't expecting that King is a Catholic.

On Writing so far has been pretty enjoyable for me, and after I finish it I'd like to check out some more of Stephen King's books.  He is a brilliant author, very smart, and I think I could be becoming a fan.