Mostly for Lisa.

But who do I know that can't relate to this? =)

Books.

I sometimes think about how weird it is that I've missed reading, but it isn't, really. Until recently I hadn't picked up a book in ages, and hadn't finished one in far, far longer. As a card-carrying bookworm, it should come as no surprise that I missed books like one misses a limb. (or maybe just a finger or two.)

During high school there was no shortage of reading, obviously, what with textbooks and paper-writing (when I actually engaged in such things). Also taking English taught me a lot about how to get more out of  "literature" by forcing it down my throat, so maybe that's why I barely noticed the absence of book stacks and staggering library fines. Putting a book in front of me would simply have been like chucking Evian at a drowning woman. 

Now, though, that I'm without the constant stimuli of school, the lack of books is thrown into sharp relief. There's only so much internet I care to see, and only so much Jersey Shore one person can watch before the real world becomes kind of tedious. (I mean, really. Who keeps thinking it's a good idea to bring in Angelina?! Fools.) Soon I'll get another job and finish my goddamnfuckingmath coursework and lack the time/energy to read, so I'm doing it now. This part of my life is the sweet spot for book-devouring in a recreational manner. 

I'm reading every YA book I can lay hands on, tearing through them while they're still relevant. Or at least before I turn 18 and become a legit adult who is no longer really allowed to read fun teen books and must move into the uncharted and potentially boring waters of adult books.

May as well admit right now that I love teen books. A lot. Yes, there are some godawful ones that I wouldn't force on an illiterate donkey, but there are some that are really good. I like to read about kids looking for something and figuring things out. They're relatable, and nobody tries to tell me about the difficulties of being an accountant. Also it doesn't hurt that 90% of the heroes are of the perfect attractive-to-wounded ratio.

For those uninitiated, the Golden Ratio of Heroes is a theoretical ratio I have proposed to explain why every male lead seems to be, at root, the same. From my observation, it looks like the ideal (at least if he is to be in any way romantic) male  lead must hit a perfect balance of wounded by his traumatic past, and determined to be a good person despite it. Of course in movies and tv this is accompanied by being physically quite attractive.

For example: I just now finished The Outsiders which is genuinely good, but clearly written by a teenage girl similar to myself. Pretty much every character is an example of the ratio, which is bit much. I mean, I appreciate the themes and everything, but she lays it on a bit thick at times. maybe S.E. Hinton just has more of a flair for drama than I. Or it could be that Ponyboy is the one with a dramatic edge, and the author is just really skilled at bringing that out in his narration? I dunno. I shouldn't review books.
(OH HEY LISA, GUESS WHO IS IN THE MOVIE VERSION? THAT'S RIGHT. FUCKIN' SWAYZE. WE'RE WATCHING IT.)
Unrelated: How the hell has everyone in the world read this except me? Seriously, it's like I'm the only person on Earth who didn't know Ponyboy was a name. 

A thought just occurred to me. What if the ratio is not a real thing? What if it's just what I consistently fall for? But if that were true, why is the ratio SO PREVALENT?! 

If anyone has thoughts, please share. 

If anyone needs to contact me, I'll be reading... I dunno. Judy Blume or some shit.

Everything is Illuminated

Stemming from my love of Eugene Hutz, lead in Gogol Bordello, is a curiosity regarding everything he's produced. It turns out he's in a movie version of Everything is Illuminated, which led me to read it.

It's a good book, but I can't really put a finger on how I feel about it overall. Reviews of it talk about how the author is a new, fresh form of genius on the literary scene and blah blah da da da, but one can never be sure what that actually means. I always feel like being a book critic would be a matter of creating soundbites memorable and catchy enough to go on book covers, which would probably not be too hard.

The protagonist/writer is meant to be an interpretation of the author-Jonathan, with the skeleton of the story being a basic recreation of his own family-learning journey. To me, though, the real main character is Alex, his amateur translator. The novel's setup includes chapters of the main character's book, with some chapters written by Jonathan, some by Alex, and some chapters are composed of letters written to Jonathan from Alex after their adventures.

Chapters written by character-Jonathan don't interest me nearly as much as those written by Alex; they  just seem to go on and on (although in a beautifully-phrased way) about character-Jonathan's ancestors, for whom  I felt little to no affection. The stories include events which should be extremely personal, but the characters within them feel unsympathetic and a wee bit sociopathic at times. Maybe it's on purpose or maybe it's just me, but character-Jonathan's writing just doesn't grab me like the voice the author gave to Alex. 

One of the passages written by Jonathan was really memorable to me, though, and I've re-typed it here:

Brod's life was a slow realization that the world was not for her, and that for whatever reason, she would never be happy and honest at the same time. She felt as if she were brimming, always producing and hoarding more love inside her. But there was no release. Table, ivory elephant charm, rainbow, onion, hairdo, mollusk, Shabbos, violence, cuticle, melodrama, ditch, honey, doily... None of it moved her. She addressed her world honestly, searching for something deserving of the volumes of love she knew she had within her, but to each she would have to say, I don't love you. Bark-brown fence post: I don't love you. Poem too long: I don't love you. Lunch in a bowl:I don't love you. Physics, the idea of you, the laws of you: I don't love you. Nothing felt like anything more than what it actually was. Everything was just a thing, mired completely in its thingness.

I like this description of Brod's mindset, but I was disappointed in the way she can't seem to develop past it before I lose interest in her. (Again, this might be the point but it's not to my taste right now.) It could be that I lacked the inclination to really look into ancestor-based characters. I am quite lazy

But Alex! I love everything about Alex. From his thesaurus marred/enhanced English to his love of his family to his somewhat-altered accounts of their journey, he is easily the most likable character, and certainly more emotionally available. He adds levity to a lot of the book, but when he gets serious it doesn't feel forced to me.
Also, he is Eugene Hutz in the movie. =D

If you read it, tell me what you think.