Juhi

Jane Eyre is the story of an orphan girl, a supposedly feminist character, trying to find love, independence, and self identity. Throughout her childhood, Jane endures struggles, humiliation, and loneliness through sheer will power and strength. As an adult, she faces moral dilemmas, and continues to make difficult choices.

Whether Jane is a feminist heroine or not is debatable. The independent spirit, indomitable character, and courage to speak her mind, coupled with her strong moral compass that helps her make “morally upright” decisions without being influenced by societal circumstances or expectations would make her an arguably strong classic feminist icon in the 19th century. However, her lack of ambition, happiness in confining to gender roles, lack of anger against the injustices of the male protagonist, and ultimate decisions - which inevitably lead her to live a very conventional life would go against the very principles of what modern feminists view as women empowerment.

I, for one, think Jane is a feminist heroine for her times. Afterall, what is feminism but the freedom and the ability to make your own choices in life? Throughout the book, Jane chooses what she wants without being influenced by the people, particularly the males around her. Whether we accept her choices as feminist or not can be debatable, but the mere fact that she makes those choices is what makes her a true feminist.

In terms of morality, the book poses interesting questions. The most important question is the morality of choosing what you love and desire versus what is actually right or wrong as per your principles. This moral dilemma often presents itself in every individual's life at some point or the other, and the way you deal with it decides your morality. Another important question is the role of society in determining your morals. How does social class and societal expectations determine what is moral or immoral for you? Lastly, does an act which was initially immoral become moral due to mere change in circumstances? I think the book beautifully explores these questions.

Ultimately, I think Jane Eyre is a beautifully written book with moral dilemmas, a complex array of questionable characters, an unpredictable storyline, gothic elements, and Jane's indomitable and free spirit. The only turn off was that the book was excessively religious at places, and sometimes morally preachy. However, it doesn't take away from the otherwise enjoyable experience of reading it!

2.5 stars

This book is a collection of short stories from Sudha Murthy's life. Some of them are inspirational, while some are downright boring and dry; some are humbling, while towards the end it becomes quite braggy. All in all I have mixed feelings about this book. I don't hate it but I don't love it either.

3.5 stars

“...when you cannot force the world to come to its senses, you must settle only for wiping away some of the small evils in front of you.”

This was a pretty cozy and warm read in this gloomy, dark, and rainy weather. The writing was decent, and the characters were likable. There was a certain cuteness in the exchanges between the main characters, which was quite enjoyable to read. From the starting of the book, I was hooked by the story, and flipped through the pages with a rapidity that would put the fastest locomotives to shame. I came to love Dora and Elias and their adorable banter, and kept craving for more of it. As expected, everything works out at the end in this warm, feel-good, heart touching romantic fantasy set in the regency era. Unlike most of fantasy romances, the book goes above and beyond to shed light into the English society of that period, and the plight of the poor, orphaned, and homeless. In fact, the obsession of the protagonists with the conditions of the people in the workhouses forms a central part of the novel.

If not for certain things, I am sure to have rated the book 4 or even 4.5 stars.

The entire premise revolves around the fact that Dora, the protagonist only has half a soul, and as a result cannot feel certain emotions like fear, surprise, embarrassment, etc in a way a human being with a full soul may feel them. Despite this, I felt there was a certain contradiction to this basic premise as the writing progresses. For example, initially it is explained how Dora does not feel startled even when someone addresses her from behind suddenly. However, later in the book, at some point she is startled by something similar. Also, the whole thing about her not being able to feel properly, and yet at places feeling things leave the entire premise sort of hazy and ill thought. Personally, the ending also felt slightly disappointing. I don't know exactly what I was expecting, but it was not what it turned out to be. At the very least, I expected more clarification on the background about how Dora came to lose half of her soul, or even how her belated mother came into contact with the faerie lord who took her soul. Lastly, at times it feels like the author is overdoing the anger the protagonists feel towards poverty and injustice in the society.

At any rate, keeping aside the things mentioned above, there is no denying that overall the book was enjoyable to read, and I do not regret reading it even a bit. In fact, I may even venture to try the other two novels in the trilogy at some point in my life!

“If my view of the world disappears, then everything I see disappears too”

It is brutal living in a world that values you only for your usefulness to the society. But what about those who are forced by circumstances to lead an existence that is not inherently useful to the society? The author executes the idea beautifully through the lens of an ex-convict, an elderly woman with a troubled life, and a lonely teenage girl. Just like Sentaro never imagined he would work in a dorayaki shop; how many of us are not stuck doing things we never thought we would because of circumstances we did not forsee? Amongst the all the ups, and downs in life, there is always a point where we wonder whether our live has any meaning or whether it is worth living at all. The book tells us - it is. Just our existence makes the world what it is. If we never existed, the world as we see it would not exist. I think it's a beautiful idea. And I loved the way the author delivered the message through the story.

The writing is simple and lucid, yet powerful in invoking sentiments that are generally deep buried. It makes you think, and question, and forces you to evaluate the merit in notions the society has about certain people, or categories of people; the prejudices that we blindly hold, or the social stigmas that make life difficult for the people against whom they are held. As sweet as the name is, the book is even sweeter. It makes for a perfect breezy read, and definitely helped me out of my reading slump!

This book is different from the other Hercule Poirot mysteries I've read so far due to 3 reasons:
1. There is no Hastings
2. Hercule Poirot does not properly come into the picture until well after 100 pages
3. The bulk of the investigation or questioning suspects falls on the other 3 characters instead of Poirot

Initially, I felt pretty bored in the first half of the book since the other characters did not possess the method with which Poirot investigates and questions. Also, I terribly missed Hasting's narration style and remarks throughout the story. But as it progressed, and as Poirot took the centre stage again, my interest piqued. Of course, the ending was nothing short of what you would expect out of a Agatha Christie book! Absolute thrillfest; and indeed an interesting motive this time.