Court
I'm surprised that I forgot to mark this. I recall struggling with what I wanted to say about it and guess I just didn't add it at all. I really like Yang and love that he built on the original story from the late 40's. I also appreciate that in his complex portrayal of the klansman's son. I also recall the Chinese mother being well constructed.
3.5?
I feel that this book was much better than My Sister's Keeper. However, I felt that there was this huge plot hole: In the beginning of the book Ruth says the baby is born ‘without a face...but where an ear should have been, there was a twist of lips and a single tooth. Instead of a face there was a swirling eddy of skin with no features.' Which I took to mean no nose and likely an under- or abnormally developed respiratory system. But then it never seems to come up again. It doesn't come up when they're going through medical evidence and Turk posts a picture of his son on the blog and I thought mentioned something about his nose. I am just so confused and annoyed, it seems contradictory and fairly major. And depending on Turk specific bent of white supremacy should also have then hated his son or demanded a plastic surgeon immediately. (Edit) So discussed this in book club and it seems Ruth was discussing a different baby that had died and it took the mother a little while to accept their death
Touched a little on colorism (Ruth and her sister have differing complexions and appear to be treated differently for it) but didn't call it by name. Also touched on (white) privilege, but again not by name and just referred to things as ‘racist' not even ‘systematic racism'. I am glad that the term ‘generational wealth' was used.
Something else that pissed me off, and not for the reason one might think: Turk spits on Ruth IN court. The only consequence is he leaves the court, where he then talks to the media. Spitting AT someone is assault, how come Kennedy doesn't mention this? I don't necessarily expect Ruth to know or be in the mindset to be aware of her full legal rights.
I still am processing how I feel about hearing Turk's side of things. I can't recall how I heard this form of argument, but it was something like when we teach about the moon landing, the shape of the Earth, or the Holocaust we don't give ‘equal time' to the “opposing view”. We might mention that some people thought the moon landing was a hoax but it wasn't and explain, some people think the Earth is flat but it's not and explain, some people are Holocaust deniers or think that things were greatly exaggerated but it happened and explain. Having Turk's narrative (which did contain conspiracy theories such as white genocide and thinking that the Holocaust was greatly exaggerated) feels like he was given almost equal time of Ruth's story. I understand that it was his baby that died, but I think of this as Ruth's story, how she was a scapegoat for the death of a child and how she handles the fallout. I understand Picoult wanting to expose the reader to Turk so we could understand how hate can manifest, how hate can have a human side, and also to have Turk change, a redemption.
And the twist Britt's mother is black. I'm fine with that. I under that complexion differences can WIDELY differ. I had just assumed that the twist was going to be revealed in court where due to cognitive dissonance Britt and/or Turk would say or do something to have the case be overturned, thrown out, or otherwise resolved in Ruth's favor. Additionally, having the reveal in court would have been safer for Britt as well as Adele. But instead Britt kills herself and the case ends as a hung jury. Also was it a little weird for Adele to abandon Britt? I understand that maybe she wanted to get away from potentially abusive Francis (and he did threaten to kill her) and start over with maybe the choir director (would have been so cool if that guy turned out to be Wallace). Would a ‘white passing' baby have fit into her life would she have had the energy, means, or ability to fight for custody of Britt?
Thought this was a great concept and loved how it sometimes showed the difference between the interviewees' actions and words. However It was a bit confusing for me and if felt disjointed.
Might try to watch the Kurosawa movie from the 1950's which I know is different, but I believe it also combines different Japanese stories.
Loved the (intended?) messages, but the delivery or maybe the details made me cringe. I think this is one of those “I read it wrong” or “know your kid when you read it to them”. Messages about self-care, you don't have to be perfect, and take care of yourself don't worry about others are great, however I really disliked after all those great themes seeing the main character then join in on sledding down the stairs. I felt that the book then shifted the message into “if you can't beat them join them” territory which isn't wrong, but you want only applied in harmless situations.
Thanks Hoopla.Seeing Spider-Man made me think of the Mr. Boop comics. Also recently read [b:No Straight Lines: Four Decades of Queer Comics 11871319 No Straight Lines Four Decades of Queer Comics Justin Hall https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1343083032l/11871319.SX50.jpg 16828870]I really liked Skelly's colorful art and line style. I'm unsure if I'll read more of her work as I did want more...narrative? maybe, something like that.
This is fantastic. I think that graphic novelization of classic works can make them more accessible. Picked this up because had read [b:The Song of Achilles 13623848 The Song of Achilles Madeline Miller https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1357177533l/13623848.SY75.jpg 16176791] for book club and wanted to reread The Illiad, but before the meeting.
This has such a “classic” feeling to it. Also loved the end section of the book that discussed some of the elements of the story such as whale hunting and galley ships. I wish I had started with the book that came first in what is apparently a series, but this was still a fun read even without having read the other book(s).
This is such a fun, light hearted read. Makes me smile, laugh, feel lucky with the one I'm with, and also makes me think; I'm curious where it goes. Glad I picked up the next two volumes. I was undecided wether or not to put this on my ‘LBGT friendly' shelf as so far it's unclear if any of the characters are oriented other than straight I'm curious if Kira is Ace but since the general attitudes seem to be friendly, open to LBGT (although a little cringy are times) I'll put it there for now.
I've been wanting to read this for a while and then Roe was overturned. I cried. I wanted to educate myself. This helped me feel a little better. Abortion is healthcare. I've known people who have had an abortion. A relative had an ectopic pregnancy and might have needed one. When I was a tween I was in a summer debate class at Sac State, one of the topics (the only one I remember) was abortion. I was pro-choice then, but it felt odd because I felt that I had to hide that as I have a VERY Catholic grandmother and many of my middle school and then high school peers were not or were only pro-choice in certain situations. I am pro-choice now, just more so.
I don't mind ridiculousness or raunchiness if there's cleverness. I'm amused that there's a wiki page for it.
Also enjoyed reading Free Sex Free Beer Free Speech Mr. Boop and the Problem of Desire https://solrad.co/free-sex-free-beer-free-speech-mr-boop-and-the-problem-of-desire
Additionally, I have been enjoying the Cuphead DLC and had been thinking about Betty Boop due to the art.
I listened to this book so I didn't mind the “slow burn” and found it lovely to listen to. I rather liked that Patroclus was a potential suitor of Helen and was part of the oath sworn to go to her aide. I appreciated the intensity of Thetis and found Chiron to be interesting. I had hoped for the part where Thetis dips him in the river Styx, but there is no such part or even any allusion to it or the (in)famous heel in this book.
I was very confused and put off by the sex scene between Patroclus and Deidamia. I could understand Deidamia's motive, but not Patroclus'; if he was curious I wished that Miller had stated or alluded to that...maybe I missed something but it is because of that (and some bullshit about Briseis being a better swimmer than Achilles) that the book is three rather than four stars.
The scene where Odysseus tells a story about Cleopatra that is a parallel to their situation and Patroclus says that his name is Cleopatra's with the syllables in a different order is fantastic.
Due to the Orange Award it inspired me to read some of Daphne du Maurier's stories and to read a graphic novelization of The Illiad, both of which I enjoyed.
3.5
Parts of this are great while other parts feel less authentic.
This is a story told as Gaby receiving texts from an unknown message, they give their name, however it is redacted, which I thought was a good style choice. However I also thought it was an odd choice for Gaby to use the redacted name several times, she mentions that it feels weird for herself, but why keep bringing up as it is an aspect of dysphoria for the other person? It seems like it would have been more compassionate to use other forms of address, like Gaby does say ‘babe' but after the redacted name. She mentions at one point living in Georgia, to me it would reasonable to also address Redacted as hon or honey. And then at the end Gaby calls ‘Redacted' Gaby. I understand this is probably her way of encouraging/affirming Redacted and one could argue her own self, but I think Gaby should let Redacted find their own name, maybe April. This whole conversation is supposed to have happened over the course of 2hrs and 18 minutes, even though Gaby asks for ‘some time' during part of it, which is somewhere around 15 minutes. Other little nitpicks take away from its authenticity. The time stamps and battery power indicator was a nice detail though.
