Last Post

 What did you learn about yourself as a reader from creating and keeping up with your blog?

  Well, I ended up having to write up my ideas, so I ended up realizing I actually do have some sort of thought process as I read books. I usually just think of myself reading a book and just doing that, reading it. This blog kind of helped me think more in a way that I want to think instead of the way that would get me a good grade. It also helped me think more about my books and actually have an opinion instead of just sucking up information.

Is writing online different than in a notebook?  In what ways?

  It is definitely different blogging than writing in a notebook. For one, kids can't just do their blogs during the classes before ELA, they actually have to put in the effort to do the blog the night before or just not do it. Secondly, there's a whole new environment to it. I personally find writing long responses in a notebook more tedious, and since I prefer typing any old day, I very much enjoy typing up the responses instead. There's also the fact that their is an audience, as in others see your thoughts, not just your teachers, as it's easier to look online than to pass around a notebook.

 Do you think that people are more real online or do we create online personalities that project the best of ourselves? Or something else?
   
    I think it depends on the person. Some people just try to get themselves to be shown in the best light possible, so I doubt they wouldn't do the same online. Some people feel more free, and act differently than they would in real life because they feel as if the internet is some sort of place where they can be whoever they want and not have to deal with the real world. I personally am more cautious on the internet because, although my identity is hidden, so are others on the internet, and you never know how these online people may truly act.

Do you think that teenagers abuse the freedom that being online gives you on sites like Facebook? Do people type things they would never say to a person's face? Do you think this is a good or bad thing? Why?

    Yes. I absolutely think that teenagers abuse the online freedom they are given. Just look at sites like Deviantart, where lots of young teens are stealing art and getting caught for it. Some people think that because they do something on the internet, they won't get caught for it. And of course there are plenty of people who type up what they would never say in real life. I've had tons of online conversations that are a lot more "deep" and addressing towards problems than in real life. But people don't always just say good things, or solve problems online. There are always those people who say mean things and beat down others. I personally think this is a bad thing. People are hiding themselves when they talk online, and though it may be easier, it's better to be open and with someone in real life than online. You never truly know what another is thinking, and if you talk to them in person, you can get more emotions than what you get online.

Can you imagine yourself keeping up this blog or creating another one?  What would it be about?  What's your opinion of blogs in general and why?   

  I don't really know. Maybe I would. But if anything, it would just be about me, and my own personal thoughts and opinions and art and stuff. I think blogs are a good way to have intellectual conversations, and to meet people who have differing or the same opinions as yours. It's a broader way to have a meeting of minds.

Romeo and Juliet

Terri Thampan                                                                                                M.S.51 804                                                                                        English Language Arts

                                                            

                                           The Dangers of Love

   

    Love is usually portrayed as a good thing. It’s made out to be something that is needed in order to survive. But, not always is it portrayed in this positive view. In William Shakespeare’s play “Romeo and Juliet”, he portrays love as something that leads to depression and/or self-destruction. Shakespeare shows that platonic love, as well as romantic love, leads to tragedy.

   Shakespeare uses the romantic love between Romeo and Juliet to show love in a negative light. Romeo and Juliet’s love is the main plot of the story, but it is also the cause for them to face much grief. When Romeo is exiled from Verona, both are heartbroken and depressed by the news, thinking that they will never see each other again. Juliet voices her grief by saying, “O God, I have an ill-divining soul! / Methinks I see thee, now thou art so low, / As one dead in the bottom of a tomb. / Either my eyesight fails of thou lookest pale.” (Romeo and Juliet 3.5.54-57) and, “Wash they his wounds with tears? Mine shall be/ spent, / when theirs are dry, for Romeo’s banishment.” (Romeo and Juliet 3.2.141-143) Romeo also talks of his pain by saying, “Thou canst not speak of that thou dost not feel. / Wert thou as young as I, Juliet thy love, / An hour but married, Tybalt murdered, / Doting like me, and like me banished, / the mightiest thou tear thy/ hair/ and fall upon the ground as I do now.” (Romeo and Juliet 3.3.67-73) They are both very much affected negatively by the forced separation. This love for each other causes them to feel depressed, possibly mad (in Romeo’s case), and full of grief over the thought of never seeing each other again. The burden of knowing that she will never see her love again (and that she will be forced to marry another man) causes Juliet to desire for death. Friar Lawrence prevents Juliet from committing suicide by devising a plan to reunite the two lovers. This plan involves Juliet staging her own death and then having Romeo come and whisk her away from the tomb (as she is still alive and only pretending to be dead) so they can live a fulfilling life full of love and each other far from Verona. Unfortunately, the perpetration of this plan went disastrously, and ends with the untimely demise of both young lovers.

       Shakespeare also uses the one sided romantic love Romeo had for Rosaline to show how love can attribute to causing unhappiness, and one’s path in destroying themselves. Before Romeo had met his beloved Juliet, he was infatuated with a woman named Rosaline. Rosaline had dedicated her life to celibacy (which causes speculation on her becoming a nun), which meant she was not swayed by Romeo’s advances. Seeing that his love was not reciprocated caused Romeo to fall into a depression in which he would stay locked in his room in the dark and only goes outside to wander around idly. He tells his friend Benvolio, “In sadness, cousin, I do love a woman.” (Romeo and Juliet 1.1.212) and "She hath forsworn to love, and in that vow / Do I live dead that live to tell it now" (Romeo and Juliet 1.1.223-224) This negative change in demeanor causes Romeo’s friends to worry for him, and so they try to make him forget about Rosaline. “By giving liberty unto thin eyes. / Examine other beauties.” (Romeo and Juliet 1.1.235-236) says Benvolio. Benvolio tells Romeo to go to the feast where he will see someone far better than Rosaline, “But in that crystal scales let there be weighed/ Your lady’s love against some other maid/ That I will show you shining at the feast, / And she shall scant show well that now seems best.” (Romeo and Juliet 1.3.103-105) Romeo’s friends take him to Capulet ball where he falls for Juliet. Romeo’s failing love leads him not only to depression, but to the love that ends his life.

   Shakespeare also shows the sadness caused by platonic love through the mediums of Mercutio and Lady Montague. In the play, Mercutio is believed to be one of Romeo’s dearest friends. When Romeo’s honor is insulted, he gets into a brawl with Tybalt.  But I’ll be hanged, sir, if he wear your livery. / Marry, go before to field, he’ll be your follower. / Your worship in that sense may call him “man.” (Romeo and Juliet 3.1.58-60) His love for his friend caused him (Mercutio) to be slain. Lady Monatgue, the mother of Romeo, dies as well from love. In the play, she is said to have died from grief over the exile of her son. “Alas, my leige, my wife is dead tonight. / Grief of my son’s exile hath stopped her breath” (Romeo and Juliet 5.3.218-219) The platonic love both held for Romeo ended up being the reason for their demise.

   Romeo and Juliet is a story that shows the dangers of love. Love, which is often shown as something good, is instead portrayed as something destructive and harmful. But as human beings, we all crave for love at one point in our lives. Despite the devastating endings it causes, it’s a beautiful thing while it lasts. It might just be in our nature, the ability to love and to be loved might just be what makes us human. Love is important in all lives, no matter how positively or negatively it affects us.

The Vampire Lestat

The Vampire Lestat
By: Anne Rice

 So I finished the second book in the Vampire Chronicles. I absolutely loved it. It's a very nicely paced book with some dragging bits, but even then that was just my impatience to get back to the main story line and the dragging bits were still interesting enough to read.
  This book really expanded on much of what was given in the last book. It expanded not only on the world it takes place in, but also upon the character Lestat. For some weird reason, I liked him in the first book. And as I read on, I started liking him even more. He's not a heartless, cruel character as Louis first perceives, in fact, he's a very rash and outgoing kind of guy, a very Gryffindor kind of guy who has this "King of the World" sort of attitude.
   What I really enjoyed about this book was that you did learn more about the Vampire World. Louis, he's simply trying to find a purpose for existence, proof of our meaning, and of vampire meaning. He actually doesn't find many answers. Lestat, now he's the guy bumbling around having fun. We learn of how he meets Armand, his relationship with Gabrielle, and his later search for the Ancient Vampire Marius.
    What I think I liked the most though was the relationship between Lestat and Gabrielle. Gabrielle is Lestat's mother, and he has always had a deep connection with her. He was the only one Gabrielle could relate to and love in a family full of a husband and children whom she couldn't connect with. She actually tells her son (Lestat) that she likes to think of him as her man self. I really love how Gabrielle and Lestat's relationship is strong not only because they are mother and son, but because they had only each other as like minded individuals when they were with their family. They ended up supporting each other and helping each other survive in a place they didn't belong. And when Lestat makes a decision that I won't reveal due to spoilers, their relationship only becomes stronger; and I feel it's a very beautiful portrayal of a Mother and Son as even though they drift apart, they still held each other strong before and they still love and care for one another.
  Gabrielle also shows the weakness that women were given in those time periods. They weren't considered strong, or independent. They were weak things to be ordered around. I hated to read about when Gabrielle would dress as a man and travel because I felt it was so anti-feminist. But then again, she was raised in such an anti-feminist culture, and so having the persona of a man can finally free her of her inhibitions.
    Though these books sort of make me wonder. Wasn't being gay just recently accepted? From the way most women are portrayed in this book (except for the few we see, they aren't strong or they're boring and predictable), it's easy to see that guys would most likely be attracted to another guy for an intellectual level, especially if women don't have any personality. Anyways, if being gay wasn't really accepted back then, wouldn't people be a bit more... disgusted towards the actions some of the guys do in public? Or was it just a common occurrence? Maybe they didn't think guys could be gay. Maybe they were all secretly gay... I don't know. Ah well. It will forever be one of the mysteries of life.

IWTV: LAST POST *most likely will contain SPOILERS*

Interview With the Vampire

by: Anne Rice

Terri Thampan 804

  I have finally finished Interview With the Vampire, and BOY, am I happy! It's kind of a depressing ending, but since I'm reading the second book in the series I don't care as much! So like, I know before I didn't really go into depth with the whole Lestat/Louis thing that I was TOTALLY shipping before, and maybe I'll go into it now.

  Well, anyways, Louis makes a new vampire who will be like Claudia's surrogate mother as she's totally obsessed with Claudia, cause he own kid who looked like Claudia died as a child, all because Claudia wanted someone to stay with her because she knew Louis would leave her for Armand (ugh). So then, they live together for a little while, and don't truly meet up with the coven of vampires "lead" by Armand, and so that coven gets all angry 'cause they never met Madeline or however you spell her name (same pronunciation), and they feel a bit threatened. This causes them to break into the shared hotel suit that the three live in and kidnap them. They end up killing Maddie and Claudia by trapping them outside in the sun. Lestat was there at some point, and though his part wasn't truly THAT important, it was nice to know he still loved Claudia as a daughter and didn't really want her dead (though she tried to murder him multiple times...). Louis loses his humanity through this and like he talks to Lestat who cries a lot. As in A LOT! And so, Lestat is suffering from old age in the mind, and Louis goes off with Armand in the sunset, only to soon find out things aren't truly roses and rainbow unicorn poop with Armand. He pretty much ends his little tale there and drinks the blood of the kid he's telling the story to, though not exactly killing him.

  WOW! Long summary there, sorry! But as I was reading the ending of this book and started reading the next book, my feelings for Louis started to change. I sort of found him a bit of a jerk, in some sense. Though I can't really explain it, I feel that as wise as he is, and how experienced, he doesn't truly try to understand the people he's labelled as good and bad, he's not really... a strong character. As I think of him, I feel like he's kind of weak, and as I read through the second book I, who was weirdly enough fond of Lestat despite the horrible things Louis described him as, I just started loving Lestat's character more and more. I feel like, once you start a different character's account of things, you just truly hear the story again in a new way, and the story doesn't seem like the same story. I mean, it shouldn't, but as a person who can't reread books that much, unless I truly enjoyed them, to reread someone's version of a tale I already heard means they have to be "fresh" with it. And as time goes on, I probably will like Lestat the most, even though people try to make themselves to be the best people ever, when you write a true account, you end up writing your true character, because if you still believe something is right, it doesn't matter what others might think, you think it's the right way to go, and people who disagree learn more about your flaws.

   Okay, enough about the next book which I love so much! The whole Louis/Lestat thing. I liked it because when you first see these characters, it's Lestat clearly having an interest with Louis. And Louis in turn is also interested in Lestat enough that he ended up becoming a vampire. But it's not just that, I feel like to Lestat, they were playing Husband and Wife, or living it that way. Louis, he was just bitter about everything, but to Lestat, he wanted Louis to be happy. Though Louis felt Lestat was only trying to use him to earn money, so that may be as to why he never truly seemed to realize Lestat wanted him happy. The whole turning Claudia scene, Louis felt like Lestat was mocking him, to me, it was Lestat trying to give Louis something he though Louis wanted. I feel like he thought Louis was lonely and wanted a child, which again made me think of the whole husband and wife thing as Lestat, "Husband", wants Louis, "The Wife", to be happy, with children. ;p 

   Then they freaking raise a child together! LOUIS/LESTAT is being screamed out! Husband and Wife have been turned to Father and Mother or Daddy and Daddy! They have this whole little family and it's so cute! I just sort of agree with Lestat that Claudia is a bit spoiled, and I loved how Lestat was saying she needed a brother... heheheheheheheehehehehe. Anyways, I really thought it was cute how whenever Lestat was happy, he would force Louis to go with him to see shows and go to dinners. It's like the husband taking the wife out for a nice treat... though Louis wasn't really appreciative. I guess I can also understand why Lestat was fascinated by the musician because of book two, but I'll say that in my next blog post. Anyways, I really do like the whole Lestat/Louis shipping, even if it appears to be onesided. :<

IWTV: Shippings Y'all *Spoilers*

Interview With the Vampire
By: Anne Rice
Terri Thampan 804

  So, recently a lot of stuff happened in my book. Like the attempted Murders of Lestat! We still don't know if he's survived the last murder "attempt" as in he hasn't made another appearance yet to say that he's still alive. Claudia and Louis go around looking for other vampires; find some that are absolutely barbaric (as in they just attack and kill and don't even seem to be capable of thought); go back to France, this time Paris, and meet some vampires that can actually think!
   So as I read on, I started to realize that my suspicions about the book were slowly being answered. This book is about gay vampires. I thought so. I was sort of rooting for Lestat and Louis as like they had a kid together (A.k.a Claudia)! Also, Louis is starting to take back his harsh judgments about Lestat. Then, the whole Armand (the oldest vampire in the vampire group that can think) is in love with Louis made me think one thing; Louis is a player. He is capturing hearts left and right! And he's not even trying! Plus, he actually is a very thoughtful character, as he is a very human vampire.
  What I really wanted to talk about was Claudia. Claudia was turned at a very young age. She will forever remain a child because of that. And though her body stays the same, her mind is starting to grow. She grows enough to try and kill one of her father figures, and that's when we first find out that Claudia isn't truly a little girl. She's intelligent and is on a quest for knowledge about her kind. And then, when her hopes are crushed by the barbarians she finds in Europe, and the mindless socialites (mindless in the sense as they don't truly think deeply, they aren't that intelligent, they're just like nobles who think themselves better than everyone else) apart from Armand who apparently just wants her dead, and that causes her to grow too in a sense. She starts acting different, and she starts displaying maturity in a different way.
  I find it a saddening thing, what has happened to Claudia. It would come eventually, but she soon becomes a woman. And the sad thing is, she is a woman in a child's body. She has never experienced life, for she was dead before she could truly live. She is stuck as a child, and longs for what she cannot have. What she sees are women who are much younger than her (She's been a vampire for quite a while) who have bodies that she herself wants and longs for. She wants to look like an adult so that people stop treating her as a child. It's really easy to relate to her, as in most kids want to be treated equally with adults, especially teenagers. This is a woman who is older than most adults alive, but because she is in the body of a child, she is treated as a child, and no one truly takes her seriously. I myself feel for Claudia because she finds that her state is fragile and needs to be protected and somewhat useless as it can't truly fight, for she has such tiny appendages (I think she was turned at the age around 6 years). This longing for a better, more mature body is what drives her to hate Louis as much as she loves him. It's a very sad thing, and a very unhappy ending. I guess for vampires, long lives can make one unhappy, and then unhappy endings arise from an ever growing and maturing mind.

Interview with the Vampire AGAIN

Interview with the Vampire
By: Anne Rice
Terri Thampan 804

 So like, I'm back to reading this book! Yay me! Now that I've begun rereading it (I've started off a bit before the part where I left off before so I could get back into the book)I started to realize things I didn't realize before. During my many adventures on youtube, I learned that the very idea of what a vampire does is considered sexual and dark. Apparently one of the first vampires pretty much turned away from God and the church because his wife committed suicide and they couldn't bury her there because she died by suicide or something like that. The person also explained about how sexual the very concept of elongating fangs piercing flesh and bodily liquids being swapped was a very sexual thing. The person also recommended the Anne Rice series and so, knowing that I had enjoyed it before (before the gore-ishness got to me, I can probably cope now) I decided to read it again. Well, I wasn't so naive as I was before.
   As I started reading the book, I suddenly got a taste of how erotic, as the back cover would say, the book is. After reading "Pride and Prejudice" I found the book much easier to read and more fun to enjoy, as it had a very beautiful writing style that I hope one day to also obtain. Though, reading this one line made me want to burst out laughing, as it was describing Lestat drinking the blood from a human boy. Now, it's not that the scene is funny, but it was written in such an erotic way, I being a teenager was helpless from the giggles. Showing the line to my fellows/classmates, I got pretty, let's say "Loud", responses. Most of them took the whole sentence the wrong way and completely thought I was reading... porn.
  Well, despite my embarrassment, it really brings up a valid point. Anne Rice had a very good reason to write the drinking of blood in such an erotic way. It was to show how intimate it was to take the blood of another. It brought up how intimate vampires as creatures are. They live off the very liquid life essence of a human. In taking the human's blood, or even an animal's blood, they sort of become one with that creature, they take that creature into themselves, and it's as if that creature becomes a part of them. It reminds me of the anime/manga Bleach where when a hollow tries to become stronger, it has to eat other souls and hollows to survive, to take that Hollow's power and make it their own by eating it and making it become a part of itself.
   Though with a hollow, all they have to do in their time is kill or be killed. They can't really do anything besides that for entertainment and it makes me wonder what would happen if a hollow finally killed and absorbed the last remaining hollow by itself. What would it do then? There would be nothing left to fight, and then would it die without a reason for existence? Though, it probably wouldn't happen, as hollows are made from spirits of humans who stay too long in the human world or something like that, Bleach got very confusing after a while and wasn't truly planned out, making many of the points made earlier in the show not make sense as new info keeps popping up. But the same sort of applies to vampires. They live off seducing, as most of the time they do seduce their victims, humans, and getting intimate with them before stealing the life out of the human. One there are no more humans or things with blood, what will they do next? They do live eternally... according to Lestat. The same question could be asked to humans, what are we going to do when we run out of food, but we humans also die pretty easily, and then there aren't as many people eating... unlike with vampires who can't really die.
    I feel like something that's brought up a lot in the book is also another reason why the very act of drinking blood is so intimate. Vampires are supposed to be solitary creatures yet, Lestat was apparently lonely. Lestat, Claudia, and Louis, they needed company. I feel like this really goes into the human nature, we humans are social creatures. Though Vampires are given new natures, they can't really always shake off their human nature, even when they are turned at a young age with no human nature to experience. They want companionship. This longing for companionship might be why vampires have to drink blood. Somewhere deep inside them, though they think they're happy, they want to become a human again. So they drink blood, because it is such an intimate act, especially with a human. They know everything about a human when they drink that human's blood. They aren't as alone as they were a minute ago. It's a temporary fix for what they truly long for.

Post Mortem

Post Mortem
by: Patricia Cornwell
Terri Thampan 804

   So, I'm currently reading a new book! I don't usually like posting a post without finishing a book, but ah well. This book is told from the perspective of a- I think it's a medical forensic examiner (I'm not really good at telling which job is whose when the book has a ton of different people and jobs) named Kay Scarpetta. The grounds of Richmond, Virginia are suddenly not as safe as they used to be. Women are getting brutally raped and murdered inside their very own homes! It's up to the police to find the serial rapist murderer and stop the crimes.
   Now, what I really like is that this book is written by a woman who was in the police force, well something to do with crime investigation and stuff. She knows what she's talking about- hopefully- or at least I think she does. Because she's lived the life of a policewoman, or something  like that, she knows how it would typically be, and all those little details are what makes it important. I like Kay's character as it's a character that's not very sun-shine-y, but very passionate in her views, but smart enough not to act out on her feelings or views in bad situations. That is a real character to me. If someone was truly in such a dreary job such as this one of course they might be a little bit wiser, death is a very solemn thing after all, or at least not so happy-go-lucky. If anything they would be kinda quirky, sarcastic, have a dry sense of humor or something, but I may just be stereotyping. Truth is, having such a depressing job like that really changes people, and it sort of makes you want to appreciate the people who are really out there doing those jobs.
    I like how there's a variety of people. And in the case or a serial rapist murderer, a variety of people is exactly what needs to be brought up. There are a variety of people in this world, and many people we don't know who live in our very own city or neighborhood. When we go through this kind of mass affecting crime, it really puts into perspective how many people there are in the world and that anyone could be a victim, anyone could get attacked, and it's happening all around the world. It's actually very scary...
Anyways, I really like how the case is developed.
    Mostly, at the moment there is but one suspect, and he's pretty much having all this evidence pinned against him. Kay doesn't really think it's him though. What makes this case so special is that the rapist doesn't have to worry about getting caught by leaving- uhh... seminal fluid/sperm. He's a non-secreter which means the DNA in his sperm doesn't match with the DNA within his other bodily fluids... or something like that. That makes it really hard to tell who the rapist is. Non-secreters can be either gender- I think, most likely.
   But what really sort of goes through my head is how do we truly know who's the criminal. The book talks about how many read the stories in the news and then think they did the crime though they did nothing. It can be psychological  and mostly is. Someone who did the crime is "different" in the head, and then there are people who may not have done the crime but take the blame because they think they did the crime. It makes you wonder. Sometimes crime doers don't get caught unless there's a stroke of luck evidence. It makes you wonder what kind of criminals are still loose because the evidence pointed towards an innocent. It's quite a scary thought. But the story also has a lot to do with back stories. Everyone has them, it's what makes us humans. And mostly, what causes a criminal to be "messed up" in the head is because of back stories. Abused children are most likely to become child abuses, it's all psychological, and it's all kind of scary. Humans interact with other humans, we help form the other, and form ourselves. Who we are, what we become, it is all because of others and our interactions with them.

Flowers in the Attic

Flowers in the Attic
By: V.C Andrews
Terri Thampan 804

   I have recently read, "Flowers in the Attic". Now, I went into the book with fairly lukewarm expectations and the knowledge that the book contained incest. Incest, for those who don't know, is when family members love each other, but not in a family way. As in, the want to date their brother, sister, uncle, aunt, cousin, maybe even their mother or father, you get my point. Now kiddies, incest is kind of frowned upon in some places, but there are also places that think it is in the right to marry your own cousin (as in, social standing and stuff).
    The book's basically about these four kids: Christopher, Catherine, Cory, and Carrie, the last two are twins (Chris 14, Cathy 12, Cory and Carrie, 5). Now, there daddy died, and that's when their whole live goes to heck. The mom has too much debt piled up, so she is forced to ask for help from her parents, which means returning back from the exile she was given when she was pretty much "Disinherited" for doing something B-A-D. To get back into her Father's good graces (she was his favorite, and he had a fortune) she had to hide her kids up in the attic room until he died and gave her and her kids the money.  
    The book isn't so bad. If anything, it just has some boring parts in the beginning where I just don't care. I didn't get to reading the second book because I was content with the first one, and the second one, in my opinion, was pretty much over doing it a bit; plus it was kind of boring.
     In my opinion, the only reason why I didn't truly dislike the main character was that she grows up. She grows up from being a bit obnoxious and spoiled into a more mothering type of person. If anything, the only reason I didn't hate her in the beginning is because she was such a cynical character. She was so suspicious and always thought of the worst case scenarios. That's what I liked about her, as messed up as it sounds.
     As the story goes on, you can't help but get impatient with the mother, and then just go on to hating her. I feel like she was sort of too in love with the Dad to really let her true colors show, as she wanted to always make him happy (which doesn't sound like real love if she can't act like herself). But then, when he dies, it's revealed: she's never truly grow up. She had such a childish reaction when her kids asked her when they were going to get out, and stared at her with anything less than love. She freaking buried her self into the bed, and started bawling her eyes out while saying how her kids were so mean to her and she flailed her arms around pounding the bed. That was the most annoying thing to read. She's a grown woman, and needs to act like one, not some spoiled little baby. But it was like she was freaking decreasing in age, and getting more self-centered. That really annoyed me, because I would prefer a story where the mother's love would keep them going on, because in the beginning she at least had some motherly instincts. I don't thing hanging out with your dad (the mom's dad not the Daddy who died /kids' dad) will make you stop having those instincts.
     Now the grandmother is a more likable character if anything. I think the author was trying to make it show from how the kids see it, but inadvertently made the mother into someone who doesn't seem like a true character; but this doesn't seem the case with the grandmother. The grandmother is strict and seems to look down on males. If I were to guess, she probably got forced into the marriage with the Grandfather (mother's dad) and most likely just wanted to be a nun- albeit a man hating nun. It makes me wonder what happened to make this woman into such a man hater. I mean, it says her favorite kids were her boys, but she pretty much disses all men and seems to hate the Grandfather. I wonder if she got raped or something, if it was a man who caused her great trauma. More likely, a guy caused her great trauma to make her hate them so. Is it weird to say that I want to know more about the Grandmother's story. I actually think that would be an interesting concept, hearing the tale of an old person with much life experience, as they live life. Anyways, I'm getting off topic, the book overall is pretty good. It got interesting near the end. It's a good read, but not quite up to Room's standard though. ;D

Room

Room
By Emma Donoghue
Terri Thampan 804

   I have recently read an amazing book called "Room". It was so good, I literally didn't stop- couldn't stop- reading until I had finished the last page, having read the whole book in one day. It's told from the perspective of a little boy named Jack who has just turned five years old. His world is turned upside down as his mom decides it's time to tell him the truth; there was a world outside of Room. To Jack, Room is his entire world; this small 11-by-11 foot is all he has ever known, and he doesn't know how to act now that his mom wants to break free.
   First of all, this book is a very emotional book. It deals with the overwhelming feelings of a little boy who has finally came out into the world, and doesn't know what to expect. I think it was beautifully well written, especially with how confused it makes Jack, as well as scared as he doesn't truly know what's real or isn't real.
   I really sympathize with the Mother because she is a woman who is trying to get the most for her son. She had to try and teach him as best as she could in such a small environment. I feel bad for her as she has such an overwhelming task, but not even a friend to comfort her, or at least somebody. She is completely shut off and doesn't know how else to deal with this situation and is stressed out. I think this is why sometimes she tells Jack things that  parents wouldn't normally tell their children. She hasn't really got anyone to talk to so she's just dying to have a normal age level talk with someone else, to talk about what she thinks about things and current events that she hears about.
    I also really like how Jack changes. He starts to open up to new ideas. He starts to realize that there is a world beyond Room. I like how in the beginning when he just turns five he feels so big and important. I think it shows a huge contrast as he soon wishes to wait until he is six for something I shall not spoil. I think we all sort of feel like Jack, once we get even a year older we feel like we can do whatever, that we are on top of the world. But that's just the thing, most of the time, once we actually realize how much responsibility is given the us as we grow up, we start to get scared. So that leaves us to the question, what do we do when we become adults and the responsibility is seemingly endless? We can't hide forever, and once we take the responsibility we start to mature, which is what happened to Jack.
  Overall, I really love this book. I think it was well written and has excellent character growth. I like the second part more than the first though, but if you plan on reading it it's u to you to decide. Here's a little teaser: The ending made me want to cry; but whether that's a good thing or not, you find out.

"A Child Called It" By Susana Rojas

   Link to Susana's Blog Post: http://susanarojas808.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-child-called-it-by-dave-pelzer.html

    I have decided to review Susana's review on the book "A Child Called It," because I thought it was well written in the way that she truly showed off her ideas. She starts off the post talking about the author and main character of the book, Dave Pelzer, and his situation. She described some of the ways his mother used to torture him, and about how he was so confused about his mother's sudden change in her attitude towards him.
     I like how Susana sort of shows her sympathy for the author and the ordeals he had to go through. I also like how she states her opinion on the dad. How she thinks that the dad was the sort of man who cared for his son the most.  That he cared for his son and did all he could for Dave. That he ended up having no choice.
      But this opinion is also the reason why I wanted to write this blogpost. I felt like this was one blogpost I could share my opinions that differ as I have already read the book and realized how sad it was. I have to disagree with Susana's idea that the father truly cared for the son and was a good father but simply had no choice in the whole thing. I feel like she is putting him (the dad) in a very sympathetic light which I can't help but completely disagree with.
    I agree with Susana that the father does sort of seem like the good guy, but that image doesn't really last long for me. I mean, I feel bad for the dad as he obviously never realized what was going to happen with his marriage, or else I think he would of married someone else. I think it was a very valiant deed he did, staying with his wife for so long even though he knew how she was, and trying to protect Dave, but at the same time I find him a very cowardly person.
   If I remember correctly, I think Dave pretty much feels betrayed when his father leaves. I think that's when I started to strongly dislike the dad, when he left the family, but didn't take Dave with him. It was the thing that enraged me the most. He knew how his son was treated, yet he didn't save him! Why not? What kind of father is he?!
   This is the point where many would argue that the father was also suffering. But here's where I explain more. You can tell a lot about a person by their actions. By simply his actions, I can tell that the father is cowardly, weak willed, and probably blamed his son for his ruined marriage.
   Why is the dad so weak willed? Well, his wife has been bossing him around. I think in a healthy relationship, the partners have to think of each other as equals, meaning no one bossing the other. He let her boss him around, but he could have been more aggressive. Not hitting aggressive, but less passive, as in sticking up for himself and not letting his wife mistreat him and his son! We usually hear about Wives getting abused by their husbands, but this is one of those cases where the husband is pretty much getting pushed around by the wife. Now, in concerns to physical strength, I think the Dad would be able to take on the mom, as men are built to be stronger, and the mom wasn't really fit. But that doesn't mean he should abuse her, just not to let her push him around, especially when it came to the well-being of his family.
   I think the Father is a coward because he doesn't ever tell anyone about what his wife is doing, or tell his wife off for mistreating her child. I mean, he could have gotten his wife in jail and had to raise the kids, but he could also worry about the way they would be affected having their mother gone. But may kids don't have mothers and turn out fine. I think he might have been scared of having to take care of so many kids (which is why he should have stopped having kids with the woman!) and didn't even think about how his kids could be negatively affected by having their mother abuse one of their brothers.
   If anything, I'm still annoyed he never took Dave with him. I think he does blame the arguments with his wife on Dave, as he was usually the one who caused the fights (his treatment). But if anything, I think I dislike him because he chose himself over a child, his own child. I find that the biggest act of cowardice and it disgusts me. To abandon the child who hopes you will save him. It disgusts me, and shows a lot about a person.
    Over all, I think Susana had a very nice blogpost which I could easily talk back to and share opinions with, and if anything I think she can add a bit more content by putting in more of her thoughts about the text.

Pride and Prejudice

Pride and Prejudice
by: Jane Austen
Terri Thampan 804

   I have recently read the book "Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen. It's one of the classics, and I only read it because I heard it was one of the best romances ever, and since young females such as myself are pretty much "fangirling" over famous, not well written romances, ahem Twilight, I decided to read a supposedly well written romance.
   I absolutely love this book! The main character is a girl, well woman, name Elizabeth Bennet, and she is of the age where getting married should soon happen before she becomes a "old maid", so like, in her early twenties. She is a very smart, witty, polite, and humorous woman. The book itself is about how she and Mr. Darcy fall in love. I think the romance in the book was very well written as right from the beginning Elizabeth sort of hates Mr. Darcy, but over time and the course of the book learns to love and respect him. This really does show off love to me as most of the time, isn't love kind of unexpected? Love doesn't happen so quickly like what happens it today's romance novels, and it takes time to be a strong bond. Most books today are very fast paced, and the events usually happen very quickly, but in this book it went like how time usually can go, it goes by quickly yet slowly, and not everything has to do with the love interest. This passage of time made the love grow more gradual, and seem very, very realistic.
   I also liked the character of Mr. Bennet, Elizabeth''s father. He is the one whom Elizabeth takes after in personality. I think this is why she (Elizabeth) is his favorite daughter. I found his character amusing, as I think he's the type of man who thinks of others as purely something for entertainment. He is entertained by them, and so he doesn't truly care about anything else. But that also makes me think of his marriage. It was said in the book that the mother's idiocy was what caused the little sense of affection he had for her (the mother) to disappear early in their marriage. I think he really sort of stayed with the mother as she made him amused with her stupidity, and maybe he liked her beauty. I think that the marriage was really bad, both to Mr. Bennet and his daughters. At one point, Elizabeth is pretty much humiliated at the fact that her Father just lets her mother and 3 other sisters besides her oldest sister, Jane, run amok and not really discipline them in the ways to behave, thus reflecting badly on her (Elizabeth) and her family.
   

The Tail of Emily Windsnap

The Tail of Emily Windsnap
By: Liz Kessler
Terri Thampan 804

   I have recently read the book "The Tail of Emily Windsnap". It's about a girl, Emily, who finds out that she can become a mermaid when she is submerged in water. The rest of the story is all about her great adventure in finding out about her father, and her being a mermaid, and the mermaid society.
   I think, as this is a children's book, it's not the best, but it's okay. It's a pretty simple plot, and the only thing that kept me going was that it was written in such a simple way, it just didn't let you go, but if anything, I usually can get through simple books, even if the plot is not bad. I just am going to say this: besides it being a bit of a boring cliche, with an easy plot, it wasn't constantly dull enough to get me to put it down.
   I find Emily's personality sort of like Tess' in the book about Algebra and stuff. She's really plain, and if anything, was made that way so that girls or whoever read the book could fit in with the character (so basically girls, as the character is a female herself). I find the main character quite, to say it politely, I found the main character as a not bright person. She's not really good at being stealthy, I mean she literally gave it away to her little nemesis that she was doing something she wasn't supposed to, which caused her to get caught. Also, I'd like to think that if an a creepy man, who is somehow giving your mother drugs, gave her donuts every week, would cause normal kids to think he's drugged the donuts. If anything, I find that man's character so... Cliched it's not even funny. Creepy, old, "lonely" dude, who visits your mom for company. He gives you the creeps, he's obviously a suspicious character. I mean, that's the type of guy most kids would not feel comfortable around, or feel comfortable having their mother around. At sixth grade, or whatever grade she's in that is in middle school, I would probably think this man creepy and warn my mom. I think, if to make him less suspicious, make it so that she grew used to him because her mom has always seen this man, and he has attempted to be friendly and she has seen him as a confidant. I think that would make his whole "revealing" part seem a lot more tragic, as this was someone she trusted, and not some creepy old guy who stalked her at times.
   I find so many disappointing things done to the old creepy guy, who I will now refer to his as his name, Mr Beeston. I think, it would be so much better if the author worked with his character. I think it would be amazing if he actually was Emily's father who somehow found a way to watch over his wife and daughter even though he couldn't. I think that the fact that he wasn't handsome, but in fact was a really creepy looking old guy would show so much about how a loving, kind person can be found within the hearts of a person whose outward features don't show off their heart's true beauty. I also think, that if it was going to stay the original way, to improve his acting, like I said before, and make him seem like a trustworthy guy. Though I do think that if he was going after someone in a murderous rage, he wouldn't suddenly be all touchy-feely back-story on them about his own childhood. It makes him seem like a desperate character, which may have been the intention, but it seems not so thought out as well. If you like simple stories though, here's a good one!

There's a Boy in the Girl's Bathroom

There's a Boy in the Girl's Bathroom
By: Louis Sachar
Terri Thampan 804

  I read this book in 6th grade (as a read aloud) and I thought it was wonderful. But reading it yourself gives a better experiencing somehow. As I read it, I realized how well developed the characters are. I also loved how well Mr. Sachar used the terms "show not tell".
  In the book, you can tell Bradley has a problem. I love how you realize how alone Bradley is. He's so alone that the only friends he has are the plastic figurine animals that live in his bedroom. When I realized that, I felt so bad for Bradley. If anything, the whole fact that he was in the third grade made it even more sad for me as it was something that was close to me personally.
   I used to get bullied in the third grade and felt so terribly lonely. To read about Bradley's loneliness made me empathize with him so much. It also shows how much Bradley cares for his figurines. They were his only friends, the things that helped him out. They told him he was right when everyone else said he was wrong.
   I love how you can see Carla cares for Bradley. She gets tears in her eyes when she finds out why he "can't" do his homework, and seems to genuinely like him. It's she who gives him a chance. And I love how realistically Bradley depends on her so much, because in reality, if we were to meet someone who finally treated you nicely and then good things started to happen, you would think it's all because of them. You would have a dependence on them.
  I think this is an amazingly well written story, and I love it so very much. I have always like stories written by Louis Sachar because his amazing works and I hope others read this book as well.

Matilda *Spoilers

Matilda
By: Roald Dahl

Terri Thampan 804

 I read this book, "Matilda", to kind of analyze the book that inspired the movie that I watched so many times as a child. As I read it, I sort of got more of Roald Dahl's style, something I never really recognized when I was reading this story back as a kid (I read the book only because of the movie). Though, I feel the movie was a bit better in developing the characters like Mrs. Wormwood and Ms. Trunchbull, I think the book was better in developing Matilda's powers.
  One thing I realized was different from the book and the movie was the Mother, Mrs.Wormwood. In the book, she's a plump lady while, in the movie she's a skinny woman. Also, I like how the movie makes her character seem more caring towards her daughter Matilda, because to me it shows that the lady has at least some maternal instincts.
   I think that the brother, Michael, was portrayed as the more liked child in both the book and the movie. Only I feel like in the movie it's more pronounced that he is the favorite child.
   Something that really struck me in the book were the quotes. At first, it seems pretty innocent like, "Little girls should be seen and not heard," but then you- or maybe it was just me- read the quote "You chose books and I chose looks", in which Mrs.Wormwood says she has a better life because she's pretty and not book smart and that a woman will get nowhere in life with books, and realize the thinking people of that time had. It was fairly modern-ish, probably the early 1990s the date, but you see how women are limited to being like decoration and pretty things to "be seen and not heard". At first, I though it was Roald Dahl putting in his own views, and then I realized, he's not putting down women, he's sending a message for women to break through those social norms of women being decoration. I realized this just by looking at the characters. Matilda is a bright GIRL, who saves the people of her school by getting rid of the horrible Ms. Trunchbull. She is bright, and smart, witty, humble, kind, and clever, and she is a girl. Ms. Trunchbull, who although is the antagonist or villain of the story, is physically and emotionally very overbearing and strong. She instills fear into many adults and children, even though she might not be mentally stable. She is a strong character, who might be a bit of a feminist as she seems to not like that all the women in the poem "Mrs. D, Mrs. I, Mrs. F-f-i, Mrs. C, Mrs. U, Mrs. L-t-y," are all married. But she is strong and overbearing, cruel and vile, and she is a woman. She doesn't have to be a man to be cruel, and Matilda doesn't have to be a boy to be smart.
   Ms. Honey is also a character who helps promote the strength of women. She is said to be a bit meek and mild woman who fears Ms. Trunchbull, but she was raised by the woman in fear. Ms. Honey is a character who is strong because she ran away, albeit no that far away, but she does live peacefully by herself. She found a way, even though she was given very little money, to get a house and get away from her Aunt at home at least. That is bravery, as she didn't stay a meek little girl, she had enough as a human and got away, and she wasn't a boy either, she wasn't stronger than the Trunchbull, but she had her courage which is why I like her so much. I think movie kind of does her little justice as in the movie she lives in a nice house, and in the book you see, Ms. Honey is poor, she lives a life that is so restricted, with boxes as chairs, a portable heater, no tap (having to use a well), and a cramped in a small house, but she is free. I guess I understand that they didn't want small children to learn about poverty, so they didn't make her as poor, but it felt like they took away the strength of the character Ms. Honey had deep inside her.
   And lastly, I want to talk about Mrs. Wormwood again. She is a character that is also female, but doesn't show strength in the slightest. She lays bingo, and lets her husband bring in the money. At one point, she thinks (in the book) that her husband wasn't truly the "Dream man". I like how the book makes her seem a bit dissatisfied with her marriage, but I also like how the movie makes her seem to actually love her husband. In the book, it fits in with the whole women power message going on, as she lives by looks, and is not truly independent as she depends on her husband. It makes it seem like she only married Mr. Wormwood for his money and the promise of a life full of her material desires, and not truly out of love, and sort of regrets it. But I love how in the movie she seems to love him, because it fits the movie's whole "trying to deepen Mrs. Wormwood as a character" thing. It makes it seem like even though Mr. Wormwood is a horrible man (He is made a bit worse in the movie than in the book) to her daughter and to people in general, she still loves him, and he in his own way loves her, which gives the movie the more family appeal of a loving wife and husband. Though to say which I like more, the movie or the book, I can't decide. The the movie is very good, and quickens the events and sort of adds depth to some characters and certain parts, I like the book because of its secret message. Overall, this is a really great book and movie!

The Graveyard Book *Some spoilers*

The Graveyard Book
By: Neil Gaiman
Terri Thampan 804

  I am currently reading "The Graveyard Book", by Neil Gaiman and I am loving it.
  The main character is this kid Bod (short for Nobody) Owens, who is raised by ghosts in a graveyard. Why is he in a graveyard? Well, it's a close call actually because he pretty much escaped from his house before he could be murdered.
   What I think is a pretty symbolic is the Gray Lady. She is like this figure of Death, but not out right saying it. I like that this figure is a woman because it seems to symbolize even more. I am being a bit feminist-ic (not a word, but I don't know how to say that any other way) because I myself like FEMALE POWER, but when things are in the form of a woman or a man, it's to take on certain qualities or traits that associated with that come with that kind of persona. I feel like the Gray Lady is supposed to be shown as wise as a mother of grandmother teaching the children how to grow, a mysterious kind of seductress, one that we will always meet, but who ultimately is kind. I feel like her white horse was sort of taken from the bible to show she is the bringer of death and moving on to a new plane of existence, like in the bible Jesus is supposed to ride in on a white horse to bring onto the humans an age full of prosperity in heaven during the end times.
   What I read during the Macabre Chapter gave the whole story some more depth. In the beginning of the book, many of the ghosts did not think that Bod should be raised in the Graveyard as he was still alive. I get that the Gray Lady made them change their minds, but I felt it was kind of fast that they accepted Bod. The Macabre chapter sort of showed the deeper part of this whole relationship Bod has with the ghosts. Even if he was raised with them, he wasn't truly one of them as he was alive and they weren't. It made me feel like though they tried to be nice to Bod, the fact that he was alive was what always stayed on their minds. He wasn't like them, and so there was a sort of segregation of living and dead. It truly shows in this chapter as not even his Mother (Mrs. Owens who adopted him) would tell him what was going on, and how he ended up at the Graveyard truly alone, and how he danced as one of the living.
     The Last person who I really want to address is Silas. I think Silas is a really cool, really mysterious character. I mean, that's how he's supposed to be portrayed, but like I think he's cool as in he has taken Bod in even though he never even knew Bod. I also think he's hiding a sadness as he is different. I think it's not that he hates himself for being different, but he's sad and wants to do things that those who are living or dead can do. This really makes me feel bad for his character and want to read more to find out about the mysterious Silas.

Fallen #2 *Spoilers

Fallen
By Lauren Kate
Terri Thampan 804

   I have just finished reading "Fallen", and I have to say, it's okay. I mean, I see the appeal as it is a supernatural love story and all that, but I'm at least glad the writing didn't bore me.
    I think that Cam falling in love is unrealistic. Unless of course, the reason is explained in some other book, I think Cam is just thrown in to put int a pointless love triangle. Which brings me to an even bigger topic. Throughout the book Cam seemed like the nice guy, the guy who would be good to a girl. Then at the ed, he gets a random change of personality that completely threw me off the loop. Apparently, Cam is the type of guy who likes violence and the like. Now, I never saw a hint of this inside the book and if anything, I would think Daniel would be the more violent character. Which if that happened, I think it would make their love (Daniel's and Luce's) so much more likable because she loves him despite the fact he isn't perfect, because he's a jerk, and is quite violent, but has a good side. Sadly, she just instantly falls in love with him even though he is a jerk, then he reveals this whole thing that would be a spoiler and starts to act kind.
   Now, I think the whole thing would be better if Daniel and Luce had like moments where he was nice, like more than the one time AFTER he got jealous of Cam and Luce.
   Overall I don't think it's that great of a book, but it's something that other people might enjoy.

Fallen #1

Fallen
by: Lauren Kate
Terri Thampan 804

   I haven't so much as given up on reading "Eclipse", it's just that I grew rather bored with it, ad wanted something fresh for a while. So I'm going to kind of juggle these two books at the same time.
   Today is the first day I have started "Fallen", by Lauren Kate, and I'm 108 pages in. I checked the pages, then thought I had enough reading time to actually write a blogpost about it.
    Now I usually read books pretty fast, maybe I get like 200 pages a day (on a good day) or more. On bad days, I ca pretty much get 1 page by. This is what happened with Eclipse, there were a lot of boring parts which I would rather not read. Now, back to Fallen.
   "Fallen", has a very familiar plot. A teenage girl has to go to a new place and a new school. Lucinda Price, has been sent to reform school, and it is about the worst place ever. On her first day, she gets into a "Fight" at school; I put quotes around fight because it's more like she knocked into a girl's (Molly's) tray, and then Molly gets frustrated and shoves the food all over Luce's hair, and so Arriane (Luce's new sort-of-friend) punches Molly. There's also this really gorgeous guy who acts like a jerk to Luce even though she does nothing but blush when looking at him. Maybe he hates girls who look at him and blush.
    Right off the bat, I can relate this to Stephenie Meyer's "Twilight", albeit, a bit better. I really like Arriane, and sort of wonder about her past with Cam, as in, why does she dislike him so? I find her personality really sort of say adorable. As in, I might be as psychotic as her. Okay, enough with the as ins, but I find her bubbly like in the way that she acts. Almost a bit cutesy really. But it's more like it's a mask that she wears, a mask that she might enjoy wearing, as she seems to have fun in her own insanity. I find that really cool, as I have a weird like for slightly insane characters (Like Luna Lovegood, she is so adorable), and pretty much find them adorable, while others think she's just plain crazy. To me, it's usually the more insane people, the people who sort of act insane, and super happy, and energetic, are the more sad people. It feels like they use the Happy, Slightly insane (not like actually insane, insane, like killing people insane, but like weirdo insane) to hide their pain, and maybe distract them from it. This makes me want to really learn more about her past.
     I also feel like there's a little chemistry going on between Arriane and Cam. She seems to hate him, but I wonder if itt truly is her way of coping with her feelings of maybe liking him. She is unstable enough to get landed into a reform school, so she might not have the emotional capacity to truly come to grips with herself liking him. Or she might feel as if it would ruin things between them. Or, I could be totally wrong, and She knows that Cam is some evil dude, and is trying to protect Luce from him. But I'd rather think she would be jealous if he hung out with Luce, as he obviously likes her. I mean, what better way to hide jealousy then saying you want the other person, not the one you actually like. Note: I don't know if Cam is actually evil, it's just a theory.
   While I was reading this book, it was painfully obvious that Luce is going to end up with Daniel (the guy who acts like a jerk to her). What kind of really annoys me is when romance novels totally give away the romance on the back cover/blurb. I think it would have been better for people to make assumptions as to who the characters end up with, then just telling us in the blurb. In fact, it just gets me more angry at the whole Daniel/Luce thing because, not only does he treat her like a jerk, she still flocks to him. I get it, hormones make people attractive, but really, do you have to always stare at him Luce? It's pretty creepy as a person who would rather be a bystander and watch love unfold. I mean, I guess I understand her wanting to know why she has this feeling of deja vu near him, but couldn't she just be like, angry instead that when she first glanced at him, he flipped her off, and has continually been rude to her. Couldn't she have just marched over there angrily and asked what his problem was?
    That's why, I would prefer Cam/Luce. He's a total gentleman. He seems like a really nice guy, and he definitely shows that he likes he as well.
    I guess, if the romance wasn't given in the back, and if the author slowly starts building up the relationship between Luce/Daniel, I would really love that. In one of my favorite Anime series, Princess Tutu (The anime was made originally, then the manga, and the anime is way better, even though it does sound girly), the main character is Ahiru. That in English literally translates to duck. The anime, though it sounds very girly, is really complex in its story line, as it's about characters who discover that they are actually the characters in a famous book written by a famous and brilliant (but horrible) man who loved tragedies (and could make his stories come to life) and how they try to defy the fate of the tragic ending they are supposed to live through. The first season is not as complex, but it builds up to the complexity of the second season. Pretty much, in the first season, you really want Ahiru to get with the main character Mytho. Mytho is the prince from before mentioned story titled "The Prince and the Raven". In the book, in order to defeat the raven, he breaks his own heart (like emotions, not actual heart). Ahiru, then transforms as the magical Prima Donna princess, Princess Tutu, and collects the heart shards (which are scattered, and posses other people, and make them feel extreme emotion/the emotion the heart shard is)and then returns them back to Mytho. She does this out of her love for Mytho, and you can clearly see how much she loves him, because throughout the whole anime, she tries to vie for his love. Then in the second anime, you start to see her love life take a turn. I mean, I have nothing against girls falling in love with guys who were jerks to them, or vice-versa, but it has to be written or made nicely. In season 2, Ahiru is forced to team up with Fakir, a boy who has been "friends" (more like he's taken care of Mytho because Mytho does stupid things as he has no heart) with Mytho since he was younger (Because Mytho never ages, literally, when his heart is broken, literally as well). He acts like a straight out jerk to Ahiru. But when they are forced to work together, they start to learn how to tolerate each other, and then appreciate each other, then get to know about each other, and then they start to give each other strength, and it is so obviously hinted that they have fallen in love, or that Fakir has anyways, but it seems pretty mutual. But, the way it was so gradual, and not forced or rushed, it just made me love the pairing even more, and I truly treasured that it made me scream, "Get together already!", when before I would never think of those two getting together. That shows amazing story telling, and now, I just seem to be reading stories where the love is being rushed.
   Not to say this story is bad, I do think it's pretty good, writing wise; but I'm not loving the romance. I will keep reading as it is more interesting than Eclipse.

Eclipse #2

Eclipse
By: Stephenie Meyer
Terri Thampan 804

  So I'm back with the epic love story of. . . EDWARD AND BELLA! Well, it's not really that fun. The story thus far is that Eddie-kins and Bell-bells are like super in "wuv" and Jacob's jealous and then Victoria (the evil vampire) comes back again.
   So basically, let me start off with the antagonists of the story. The main villain of this story is Victoria. She's a vampire who as I said before, wants revenge against Edward for killing her mate. I think it goes to show how loyal she is that she tries to get revenge for her mate, and it seems to make her seem like a strong character, as she never seems to get caught by the big burly "men" vampires or werewolves. It makes her a pretty respectable character. From what little she is actually mentioned, she's made out to be quite cunning and swift, being able to move around so freely and get away for her pursers. While Bella on the other hand, just stays at home all worried and doesn't really do anything.
   So another thing I read about in this book is something called "imprinting". And frankly, the whole Idea makes me sick. It's the most messed up thing EVER. So, first off, what is Imprinting? I would say something sick and twisted but that doesn't really help out, not to mention it's quite repetitive. Imprinting happens to werewolves; it's when they see someone and they automatically fall in love forever. Though, it's kind of like the creepy stalker kind of love. Like, the person always wants to be with you, is always trying to protect you, makes you feel all fragile and delicate. I have to admit, having someone who loves you and is there for you and is always loyal is really cool. But then, doesn't it get tiring to have to deal with their constant over protectiveness? Don't you start to lose your own traits of self because they try to protect you? Doesn't it start to feel a bit. . . cramped?
    Another thing I don't like about this whole imprinting business is that, you can't chose who you imprint on! I mean, Jared is a fine example. He ends up imprinting on this girl in his school. But, before that, he never really cared about her. See! He pretty much ended up MAGICALLY LIKING HER! That is so bad! It makes it seem like the girl, Kim, who liked him, couldn't get a guy to like her because of who she is. And then, you never really get a guy to like you for who you are. Also, if they act all lovey-dovey with you (the person being imprinted on), how can you learn to love the person? Do you really, really know them? It pretty much seems that you're getting a fake mask of love, and not the genuine article. I mean, does this Kim girl ever really hang out with Jared enough to know she thinks he's a good guy. I don't think so, not before the imprinting happened. This is pretty much a cheap way to get a "Happily ever after".
   I also want to relate the whole Imprinting deal to the world of "Uglies" and "Flowers for Algernon". Because basically, like in Stephenie Meyer's other book "The Host", the entire mindset is being dealt with here. In "Uglies", the surgery to be pretty changes how you think and your personality. In "Flowers for Algernon", the thinking gradually changes, increasing in complexity, to finally deteriorating. In this book, Imprinting is a cool, amazing thing. In those books, the mindset is pretty sad (As Charlie starts to lose his intelligence) or really horrible (Changing the way we think about things, and who we are). But like, to make someone change all who they are, just like that. They could have not cared about the person, and then suddenly magic makes it so they do. What happened to their free will? The ability to choose who we love and like and who we dislike and hate? In "The Host", they pretty much just give up their bodies (the humans), because the aliens are so special and amazing and perfect.
   Anyways, Jacob Black also doesn't want to imprint. Why is that important? Because he loves Bella Swan for whatever reason there is. But I know for a fact, that he imprints on someone in "Breaking Dawn" (It's really messed up, the person he imprints on, but you can go wiki it if you care). That really makes me sad for him because his mindset is so drastically changed to love the imprinting.
   Imprinting is also gross. Like, Embry, ended up imprinting on a THREE YEAR OLD GIRL! How messed up is that?!!! Oh, here's a hint for Jacob, he imprints on someone younger than that! But really!? That's messed up! Especially when Jacob's like 'oh, he only acts like what she wants him to be, a brother or father or protector!' Well what if she doesn't want to marry big bro? Also, ever heard of child grooming? It's when you make a little kid trust you so they end up doing "dirty" things with you. Really messed up.
   But then, there are other victims in this whole thing. The exes. Poor Leah, her man got stolen away by her own cousin. They were in a relationship for years! I bet she thought he was going to propose, oh no, it's instead, "Wanna go to my wedding with your cousin?". That's just awful. Not to mention the fact that "No one can deny the werewolf imprinting on them" kind of stuff being thrown around. I mean, no one can deny all that love, affection, and awe? Really? I mean, if it were me, I would be creep-ed out. I bet you, if the guys who imprinted on them were ugly, they would be calling the cops. Because that's basically what's going on. They can't deny the surface, the fake love. 'Oh, a hot guy is like stalking me! I love it! It's so great!" (Reminds me of Bella and Edward), but if it was some ugly, or a regular looking teenage boy (like a plain dude), the girls would be like "Oh EWW! He is soooo creepy!!!! Why can't he like stop being so possessive and protective? I need my space!"
    So pretty much, Smeyer's world is pretty shallow, and never really dips into true love, which this does not pass off as. I mean, I doubt there is any true love in here, which is kind of sad for a romance novel. I mean, isn't love getting to know each other, without magic forcing you to like someone first, and then learning to love someone?