Sunday, October 31, 2021





Watch the full movie on Youtube (if they haven't taken it down yet): https://youtu.be/PD453zyaidI
(Hopefully one of those two links will still work).

Looking for a more concise review?  Check out Cinemassacre's review of this same movie: https://youtu.be/Ywk70I_Wkpc

See also another review: Why House of Dracula is Criminally Underrated: https://youtu.be/L55wUoKsypg

I also previously wrote about this movie (and the whole franchise) in this blog post here.  



This is part of my "Thoughts after Re-Watching" movie review project, as explained about HERE.
Playlist HERE :

Thursday, October 28, 2021

Texas Just BANNED These "Uncomfortable" Books


From the Young Turks today.  This, unfortunately, connects to what I posted about yesterday, indicating that there's a trend going on here.  
I've got a lot of strong feelings about this, but the Young Turks do a pretty good job of articulating everything, so I'll just let them speak for me here.  (They reference the Dr. Seuss controversy from last year, and for the record, I was against those books being banned as well--although in the case of Dr. Seuss, it was the publisher itself that was pulling the plug on those books, not government censorship, so it was a completely different issue, as I wrote about at the time HERE.)

I logged into social media this morning to find that Beloved by Toni Morrison was in the news.  It's being reported on in several outlets, but see for example, from CNN: Toni Morrison's 'Beloved' becomes latest flashpoint in Virginia gubernatorial race

I read Beloved in 2017, and reviewed it on this blog.  So I can chime in with my 2 cents.

CNN says that the controversy all started when a mother campaigned to remove Beloved from her school because it gave her son nightmares.  And I can believe that.  To quote from my 2017 review
Before we started the book, Tom expressed the concern that this would just be another feel-bad novel about slavery.
But this book is so much more than this.  It's a ghost story, and Toni Morrison has succeeded at creating a very haunting atmosphere.
I'm reminded of the review that the AVclub gave to the movie: 12 Years a Slave:
If there was any doubt that this is a horror movie, Hans Zimmer’s score pounds and roars with dread—the appropriate soundtrack for the madness of history.
The idea of slavery as a horror story is probably a more accurate description of Beloved.
The story of the book is told mostly in flashback.  Right from the beginning of the book, we hear the names of the former slaves that the main characters (Sethe and Paul D) once knew, but their gruesome fates are only hinted at.
The mystery hooks the reader right in, and helps to add to the eerie atmosphere of the ghost story.
Gradually, the novel gives us more and more hints, until we finally have the full awful picture of what happened at Sweet Home.

According to The Daily Beast,  another problem was that the book was just too hard, and so the student stopped reading it.  And I can believe this second part as well.  To quote again from my 2017 review:  

I didn't like Toni Morrison's writing style.  It was too poetic for me, and I had to struggle to keep focused.
Granted, this is more reflective of me and my limitations as a reader than it is of the book.  If you're the kind of person who likes a lot of poetic description in your novels, then you'll love this book.
Getting frustrated with one of the more poetic passages, I wrote down "Ugh, typical" in the margins next to this paragraph:
Denver was seeing it now and feeling it--through Beloved.  Feeling how it must have felt to her mother. Seeing how it must have looked. And the more fine points she made, the more detail she provided, the more Beloved liked it.  so she anticipated the questions by giving blood to the scraps her mother and grandmother had told her--and a heartbeat.  The monologue became, in fact, a duet as they lay down together, Denver nursing Beloved's interest like a lover whose pleasure was to overfeed the loved. The dark quilt with two orange patches was there with them because Beloved wanted it near her when she slept. It was smelling like grass and feeling like hands--the unrested hands of busy women; dry, warm, prickly. Denver spoke, Beloved listened, and the two did the best they could to create what really happened, and how it was really was, something only Sethe knew because she alone had the mind for it and the time afterward to shape it: the quality of Amy's voice, her breath like burning wood.  The quick-change weather up in those hills--cool at night, hot in the day, sudden fog. How recklessly she behaved with this whitegirl--a recklessness born of desperation and encouraged by Amy's fugitive eyes and her tenderhearted mouth.
If you like that, there's plenty more where that came from. But I found this almost unreadable.  (To be perfectly honest, if this hadn't been a book club book, I think I would have given up on it.  But because we were doing it for bookclub, I struggled through out of a sense of obligation.)
Other articles mention that the mother was also upset about depictions of sex and bestiality.  Which, honestly, I don't remember.  I remember some sex scenes in the book, but I don't remember them being particularly graphic.  Perhaps I'm just not remembering clearly, I don't know. 
I also don't remember the bestiality parts.  I googled it just now, and sure enough, there is a brief reference to bestiality in the book.  I just didn't remember it for whatever reason.  
(I think I'm finding as I get older that I no longer remember the details from books as clearly as I did when I was younger.)

So, those are my thoughts on the book.  I'll give my thoughts on the controversy below:

In my humble opinion, Beloved probably isn't the best book to have on the school curriculum.  Although granted this depends on what the curriculum objectives are.  I can think of 3 reasons for doing assigned reading in a literature class:
    (A) To develop a life-long love of reading by showing students how pleasurable reading can be
    (B) To increase cultural literacy by becoming familiar with the classics
    (C) To develop students ability to read a complicated text that is currently beyond their level.

In my opinion, Beloved does not do (A) very well.  It's a very difficult book to struggle through.  Some students might like it, but it's not going to be enjoyable for the majority of them.
And I think it's too recent to do (B)--the book was only just published in 1987, it's not old enough to be a classic.  
Arguably it could do (C) if it had a very good teacher who was guiding the students.  But let's face it, these kind of teachers are rare.  
So if I were on the schoolboard, I certainly wouldn't mandate that this book be in the curriculum.
I know that this book is popular in part because it portrays the African American experience, and I agree we need books on the curriculum that do narrate what the slavery experience was.  But there are many other books that would do that without being so challenging to read.

All that being said, these are decisions that should be made by educators, not politicians.  It should send chills down our spines when politicians are getting involved in this stuff.
And it should especially set off our alarm bells when they are campaigning on it.  I mean, it's one thing if they respond to public pressure once they're already in office.  But it's quite another thing when they are deliberately trying to create a controversy out of this by campaigning on the issue.
Without knowing anything else about Virginia Republican gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin, I already know all I need to know about him to decide that no civic minded American could possibly vote for him in good conscience.

It should also raise alarm bells that Glenn Youngkin has chosen this issue.  This is, according to the news articles, an issue that didn't have prominence before, and is a controversy that he largely created.  Are there no other problems in Virginia that he could focus his attention on?  Poverty? Homelessness? Healthcare?  Fixing the roads?  Climate change?
Whenever you see a politician trying to ignore the real problems in order to try to create a culture war, that's also an issue that they are ideologically bankrupt.



Final thought: Granted, this isn't just an issue with Republicans.  People on the left have been guilty of trying to get books out of schools as well--The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain being the most famous example.  We shouldn't tolerate this stuff from the left, and we shouldn't tolerate it from the right.

Monday, October 25, 2021

So, there's a new entry on the Revolutions Podcast feed, but it's not exactly an episode:

Episode 10.73 Episoded Delayed Until Next Week

You can click the link to listen to the audio explanation, or just see Mike Duncan on Twitter...



It's unfortunate, but it doesn't ruin my day.  I'll happily wait until next week.  In the mean time, I've got other listening material to keep me busy.  
A couple thoughts, though:
1) Like everyone else, I remember the bad old days when this stuff used to happen all the time.  (Everyone over 35 remembers losing a report because you forgot to hit "save", right?)  But these days, doesn't everything save automatically?  And isn't it much easier to go through the version history of documents?  I wonder what software he's using.
2) If it were me, the frustration of losing all that work would cause me to just give up and write something else.  I hope Mike Duncan doesn't do this.  I hope we still get something like the episode he had planned.  (By all indications, Mike Duncan is a much more focused and hard-working man than I am, so I imagine he won't do what I would've done, and he'll just get back to work on the episode.)

Some people on Twitter are giving Mike a hard time that he still hasn't gotten to the October Revolution.  (Apparently the episode planned for this week would still have been yet more set-up.) 

But I don't mind.  The more details the better.  Why is everyone in a hurry to get this revolution over with?  Give me the long version, please!
Started: Ozma of Oz by L. Frank Baum  I'm reading this out of The Complete Stories of Oz.  As I mentioned before, this is actually my second attempt to read through The Complete Stories of Oz.  I tried to read it 5 years ago, and then abandoned it.  So I read Ozma of Oz once before on my first attempt to do The Complete Stories of Oz.  This is now my second reading.

Sunday, October 24, 2021

The Marvelous Land of Oz by L. Frank Baum

(Book Review--Land of OzClassicsFantasyChildren's Books)  

Started: October 10, 2021
Finished: October 19, 2021
(This review is written using my new format for book reviews.)

My History With This Book

Does anyone remember the 1985 Disney movie Return to Oz?  It bombed in the theaters, but it was shown a lot on the Disney Channel in the 1980s, which is where I saw it.  I believe it has a cult following among people who grew up in the 1980s and watched a lot of Disney Channel--if you fit that demographic.
Return to Oz was based partly on The Marvelous Land of Oz.  (And also partly on the next book, Ozma of Oz, but we'll talk about that book another day.)  If you've seen Return to Oz, and you remember the characters of Jack Pumpkinhead and the Gump--well, this is the book that they come from.  
This is the only book in the Land of Oz series that I actually read as a kid.  It was one of my aunt's old books, and I discovered it when spending time at my grandparents' house.  The cover art showed Jack Pumpkinhead and the Gump, both of whom I recognized from Return to Oz, so it got me interested, and I read the book.  (The cover pictured on the top of this blogpost was the same cover I saw as a kid.)  I hadn't read the original The Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a kid, but that didn't really matter because like everyone else in the world I know that story from the movie.
I also read this book 5 years ago.  (As I've mentioned before, 5 years ago I attempted to read through The Complete Stories of Oz as one giant book review project, before abandoning it and then re-starting it as a series of separate book reviews.)  So this is now my 3rd time through this story.

Plot Summary (SPOILERS)

The plot of this book is really all over the place.
Our hero starts out in the countryside.  He then journeys to the Emerald City to meet the Scarecrow. Then there's a rebellion in the Emerald City, and our hero and the Scarecrow have to escapes from the Emerald City, and go to meet the Tin Woodman.  Then they go back to the Emerald City.  Then they need to escape from the Emerald City again.  Then they find the good witch Glinda, and go back to the Emerald City.  So it's a lot of back and forth and back and forth.  But the main story is story all the friends they meet and all the adventures they have along the way--which is typical of these Oz stories--go on a journey, and meet new friends and have adventures along the way, that seems to be the template. 

The Reading Experience

As I started reading this book for the 3rd time, I thought to myself, "It's funny, I've read this book twice before now, and I still can't remember the plot."  It came back to me as I read it, naturally, but I think the reason I have such a hard time remembering the plot is that the plot is all over the place.  But then, that's part of the fun.
Like the original The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, this book is very easy to read.  And actually, it held my attention much better than The Wonderful Wizard of Oz--partly, I think it held my attention because of the wild plot, and also partly because the dialogue in this second book is a lot snappier.  (L. Frank Baum was planning on turning this into a stage play when he wrote it, so he included a lot of vaudeville style humor in the dialogue.)

Evaluation

Characters will often do things in this book that make no logical sense whatsoever.  For example, the witch Mombi tells Tip she will turn him into a statue in the morning, but then just goes to bed and doesn't attempt to prevent Tip from running away in the night.  At first I thought it was just lazy writing, but then I decided these kind of things were all part of the joke--part of L. Frank Baum's satire of fairy tales.  

But moving onto talk about the gender politics of this book.  
The gender politics of this book are... a mixed bag.  The main conflict in the story is created by an army of girls who take over the Emerald City because men have been ruling for long enough, (okay, fair enough I guess), and also because the Emerald City has lots of emeralds in it, and girls like shiny things (oh, this part hasn't aged well!).  
On the one hand, there is some attempt to show that the girls are stronger than the men of the Emerald City think they are.  But on the other hand, when portraying the girl army, L. Frank Baum indulges in so many dated stereotypes (the girls talk to much, they're afraid of mice, they like lazing about and eating sweets, etc.)
So, taken all together, that part about the girl army really hasn't aged well.

What is interesting, though, is the final reveal that the boy Tip has actually been a girl all along.  And that reveal at the end seems to be ahead of its time in terms of the acknowledgement that gender identity isn't always purely biological.

External Links

* So, once again I'm going to link to the Tor.com review:  Oz Revolts! – The Marvelous Land of Oz by Mari Ness.  Mari Ness mentions that L. Frank Baum's mother-in-law was a suffragette, and speculates that the whole plot about girls wanting to control the Emerald City was mocking the suffragette movement.  But Mari Ness also makes the point that in spite of all the problematic gender issues in this book, at the end we are left with two good women ruling Oz, and this will remain the status quo throughout the rest of the series.

There is a lot of interesting behind the scenes information about this book from Wikipedia.  
You see, it turns out that after the original The Wonderful Wizard of Oz was published in 1900, it became a successful stage musical in 1902.  The stage musical was also written by L. Frank Baum, but was a different take on the same material, with several differences from the novel and the musical.  
In the original novel, the Wizard of Oz is portrayed much the same as he was in the 1939 movie--a bit of a con artist, but not a bad person.  But in the stage play, he was a usurper who dethroned the original King of the Emerald City-- Pastoria.  So, in keeping with the stage play, that's why the Wizard of Oz is depicted as a villain in The Marvelous Land of Oz.
Also, in the stage play, the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman were the breakout characters.  Which is why both of them figure so prominently in the sequel (even though Dorothy and the Cowardly Lion do not.)  L. Frank Baum also intended to turn The Marvelous Land of Oz into a stage play, which accounts for a lot of the features of the book. (A lot of the snappy dialogue was intended to be performed on the stage.  Also, the army of girls was intended to be chorus girls.  Also it was common to have women portraying boys on stage, which would aid with the gender reveal at the end.)
In order to promote this book, L. Frank Baum created a newspaper comic strip featuring the characters fromm this book called Queer Visitors from the Marvelous Land of Oz.  The breakout character ended up being the Woggle-Bug, who was spun off into his own book and then stage-play, according to Wikipedia
Baum's Woggle-Bug was a popular character at the time; he "became something of a national fad and icon...."[4] There were Woggle-Bug postcards and buttons, a Woggle-Bug song, and a Woggle-Bug board game from Parker Brothers.[5] Baum and Morgan's picture book was published in January 1905, to help publicize a new musical play, The Woggle-Bug, that was being mounted that year. (The play flopped.)
I found all of this fascinating--first of all for the long forgotten memories of American fads.  And secondly, because it shows that my collection of The Complete Stories of Oz isn't really complete at all.  Even if we limited ourselves to the stories by the original author L. Frank Baum, there's a whole Land of Oz extended universe that goes well beyond the 15 books collected in this volume.

* I'm doing this series as a buddy read with Dane Reads on Booktube.  See his video review HERE and his written review HERE.  

Odds and Ends

* So, the fact that the boy Tip was really the girl Ozma all along seems like it's ahead of its time in terms of gender identity, but...  I feel like once Tip turns into Ozma, it's not like he's the same person as before only now in a girl's body.  As she's portrayed in the subsequent books, the wise and benevolent Ozma is essentially a different character from the childish and mischievous Tip, right?  Or am I remember the subsequent books wrong?

* The Tin Woodman has a name now--Nick Chopper.  This is apparently also a legacy from the stage play.

* The Wizard of Oz is portrayed as a bad guy in this book, but don't worry.  He's going to come back again in book number 4, Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz.  And then he'll be back to his original portrayal.  

* I mentioned above the "Oz Extended Universe" which goes well beyond the 15 books collected in The Complete Stories of OzThis will also be a theme in the future books, as there will be more crossovers with L. Frank Baum's other books coming up in the Oz series.

Extended Quotation

They soon discovered that the Saw-Horse limped, for his new leg was a trifle too long. So they were obliged to halt while the Tin Woodman chopped it down with his axe, after which the wooden steed paced along more comfortably. But the Saw-Horse was not entirely satisfied, even yet.

"It was a shame that I broke my other leg!" it growled.

"On the contrary," airily remarked the Woggle-Bug, who was walking alongside, "you should consider the accident most fortunate. For a horse is never of much use until he has been broken."

"I beg your pardon," said Tip, rather provoked, for he felt a warm interest in both the Saw-Horse and his man Jack; "but permit me to say that your joke is a poor one, and as old as it is poor."

"Still, it is a Joke," declared the Woggle-Bug; firmly, "and a Joke derived from a play upon words is considered among educated people to be eminently proper."

"What does that mean?" enquired the Pumpkinhead, stupidly.

"It means, my dear friend," explained the Woggle-Bug, "that our language contains many words having a double meaning; and that to pronounce a joke that allows both meanings of a certain word, proves the joker a person of culture and refinement, who has, moreover, a thorough command of the language."

"I don't believe that," said Tip, plainly; "anybody can make a pun."

"Not so," rejoined the Woggle-Bug, stiffly. "It requires education of a high order. Are you educated, young sir?"

"Not especially," admitted Tip.

"Then you cannot judge the matter. I myself am Thoroughly Educated, and I say that puns display genius. For instance, were I to ride upon this Saw-Horse, he would not only be an animal he would become an equipage. For he would then be a horse-and-buggy."

At this the Scarecrow gave a gasp and the Tin Woodman stopped short and looked reproachfully at the Woggle-Bug. At the same time the Saw-Horse loudly snorted his derision; and even the Pumpkinhead put up his hand to hide the smile which, because it was carved upon his face, he could not change to a frown.

But the Woggle-Bug strutted along as if he had made some brilliant remark, and the Scarecrow was obliged to say:

"I have heard, my dear friend, that a person can become over-educated; and although I have a high respect for brains, no matter how they may be arranged or classified, I begin to suspect that yours are slightly tangled. In any event, I must beg you to restrain your superior education while in our society."

"We are not very particular," added the Tin Woodman; "and we are exceedingly kind hearted. But if your superior culture gets leaky again—" He did not complete the sentence, but he twirled his gleaming axe so carelessly that the Woggle-Bug looked frightened, and shrank away to a safe distance.

The others marched on in silence, and the Highly Magnified one, after a period of deep thought, said in an humble voice:

"I will endeavor to restrain myself."

"That is all we can expect," returned the Scarecrow pleasantly; and good nature being thus happily restored to the party, they proceeded upon their way.

***********End Quote.  The beginning of chapter 14, pages 150-151 in my edition ***** 
This quote does a good job of illustrating the back-and-forth verbal sparring that is in a lot of scenes in this book, apparently because L. Frank Baum was planning to do this as vaudeville on the stage.

6 out of 10 Stars.  A bit more entertaining than its predecessor.  But then, also a bit more problematic then its predecessor.

October 17, 2021 The Marvelous Land of Oz by L. Frank Baum p.98-134
October 24, 2021 The Marvelous Land of Oz by L. Frank Baum p.134-196

Video Review (Playlist HERE)


Saturday, October 23, 2021

Started: The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien--I'm reading this out of The Hobbit / The Lord of the Rings Box Set This is actually a re-read for me.  I read it once before in early 2001




Video HERE

Started: The Hobbit / The Lord of the Rings Box Set by J.R.R. Tolkien


Video HERE

Friday, October 22, 2021

New episode of Revolutions Podcast out.  (It actually came out a couple days ago, but I'm playing catch-up).
It's been a long ride with this podcast, but it looks like we are finally on the eve of the October Revolution now.  This episode feels like it's just getting all the pieces finally in place.
A few thoughts:
* Interesting that Kerensky is now just as isolated and clueless as the Romanovs were.  Mike Duncan spent so many episodes portraying the Romanovs as idiots that I assumed they were a special kind of stupid, but maybe it's just something about the job that encourages delusion and myopia.  

* Mike Duncan emphasizes that all historians point to Lenin's decision as one of those moments where one individual man really does change the course of history.  (This, of course, is relevant to my post on this same subject earlier this week.)   At the same time, however, the impression I get from Mike Duncan's narrative is that the Kerensky government was headed for collapse one way or the other.  If the Bolsheviks hadn't have seized power, I get the impression that another socialist group would have. 

* In my review of Karl Marx: His Life and Environment by Isaiah Berlin, I wrote:
One thing Berlin does which I thought was very interesting was that he emphasized the paradoxes in Marx’s legend. For example... how the German and Austrian communists, who followed Marx’s advice about organizing from the bottom up, were eventually overwhelmed by the fascists, where as the Bolsheviks, who committed the most un-Marxist act of a revolutionary coup, was the first (and for a time the only) successful Marxist revolution.

However, from this episode, I learned that the Bolsheviks were on their way to gaining control over the Soviet even before the coup.  So it sounds like they were still on their way to gaining power one way or the other.

* Final note: There's some brief mention about the sailor's revolt in Germany, and how Lenin believed they were on the eve of a European wide-socialist revolution.  Mike Duncan doesn't say anything more about what was happening in Germany at the time, but I hope in later episodes he is able to circle back around and talk about the revolution in Germany that was happening at this same time--because it's interesting, firstly, and secondly because my understanding is that it really did influence Lenin's thinking at the time.

Thursday, October 21, 2021

Through the Looking-Glass by Lewis Carroll

Full Title: Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There 

(Book Review--FantasyClassicsChildren's Literature)

Started: October 15, 2021
Finished: October 20, 2021
(This review is written using my new format for book reviews.)

My History With this Book

 This is my first time reading this book, but of course like everyone else I'm familiar with it through cultural osmosis.  When I was in school, we were taken to see a local play based on Through the Looking Glass.  
Also, whenever a studio is making a movie about Alice in Wonderland, it's quite common to include elements from Through the Looking.  For example, the famous 1951 Disney movie contained some elements (the scene with the flowers, Tweedledee and Tweedledum, The Walrus and the Carpenter) that are actually from Through the Looking Glass.

Why I Read This Book

To be honest, the main reason I read this book was just to check another classic off of my list.  I had read the original Alice's Adventures in Wonderland  back in 2011, but never got around to the sequel.  
A couple years ago, I had a friend who was leaving Vietnam, and trying to get rid of his book collection before he left.  He had a copy of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll.  "Do you want this?" he asked.
"Well," I said.  "I've already read Alice's Adventures in Wonderland.  But I never read Through the Looking Glass."  
"Just take it," he said.
So I did.  It sat on my shelf for a couple years, but now I've finally gotten around to it.
I re-read Alice's Adventures in Wonderland last week (just to get it fresh in my memory again) and then continued on to Through the Looking Glass.  

Side note: in my original review of Alices Adventures in Wonderland, I noted that a lot of the references and jokes went right over my head until I later checked Wikipedia, and I said:
I was in the bookstore once, and I saw a book called "The Annotated Alice" (W), which has extensive margin notes explaining everything. I regret to say I didn't buy it. But if I ever read this book again, I think I should get the annotated version.

...but, I've since decided that when you live abroad, you can't be picky about which edition you read--you just have to grab the books in whatever form you find them.  But maybe someday in the future, I'll re-read both of these books with annotations, if I can find a suitable edition. 

Plot Summary (Spoilers)

This is much the same style of story as the first book.  Alice enters a magical land in which nothing makes sense, and all the creatures talk in riddles.
There are a few differences.  Since Alice has gone "through the looking glass", there are some references to everything being backwards in looking-glass-land.
There's also a chess theme going on in this book.  Alice has to get across a giant chessboard in order to become a queen.  The chessboard is actually the countryside, which has been divided up into a grid by rivers and hedges.
John Tenniel's original illustration--page 133 in my edition

 Various chess pieces (kings, queens, knights, pawns) figure as characters.  
There's also a nursery rhyme theme going on throughout this book.  Alice encounters characters and situations from nursery rhymes: Tweedledee and Tweedledum, Humpty Dumpty, The Lion and the Unicorn.  In each situation, Alice knows what is going to happen to the characters because she already knows the nursery rhyme, so she watches in wonder as the illogical events of the rhyme are enacted out right in front of her.
[Sidenote: I hadn't actually realized Tweedledee and Tweedledum come from an old nursery rhyme.  I had thought they were a Lewis Carroll invention, but they actually do come from a nursery rhyme (W).  The Lion and the Unicorn is, I think, much more well-known in England than in the United States.  At any rate, I never heard of it until I became an adult.  Perhaps the Tweedledee and Tweedledum nursery rhyme is also better known in England?]

Like the original Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, this second adventure is also only a dream.  But Through the Looking-Glass leans much heavier into the surrealism of dreams.  Alice will suddenly change locations and surroundings with no clue as to how she got there.  (One moment she's in a field, then the next moment she's on a train, then she's suddenly in the forest).  And characters will suddenly morph into different characters in front of her.  (A queen will suddenly change into a sheep, etc).  So there's not much of a coherent narrative in this book, but there are a lot of little episodes that can be fun.

 The Reading Experience

Okay, confession time.  I've never really liked the "It's all a crazy dream and nothing makes sense" elements of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass.  (As I mentioned in - both of my reviews of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland.)  Perhaps I'm just not the ideal reader for these books.
But in spite of this, I found Through the Looking Glass to be a very quick and painless read.  Because the story jumps randomly from one situation to another, it's perfect for those of us with short attention spans.  (It actually seems quite modern in that regard--almost like a TV sketch show which keeps cutting from one situation to another.)  
The original illustrations by John Tenniel also help a lot.  They really help to make the scenes jump out at the reader.

From page 193 in my edition.  There's a picture like this every couple of pages, which really makes the story come alive.

I'm not sure this book is my favorite thing ever, but on the whole I found it a painless reading experience.    
Also, reading Lewis Carroll is like reading Shakespeare, in the sense that you're constantly like, "Oh, so that's where that quote comes from!"

Connections with Other Books I've Read

In my 2011 review of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, I mentioned that linguists like Steven Pinker were fond of referencing Alice's Adventures in Wonderland.  This is also true of Through the Looking-Glass.  
Many of the books on linguistics that I've read over the years have referenced Through the Looking-Glass.  The two parts that always come up are:
1) the poem Jabberwocky (W), which is nowadays considered a famous poem in its own right, but is originally part of Through the Looking-Glass.  Linguistic textbooks are fond of using this poem as an example of how English syntax can be used with completely meaningless words.
2) Humpty Dumpty, when talking to Alice, asserts that when he speaks, the words he uses mean whatever he wants them to mean.  This is frequently quoted in linguistic textbooks when discussing semantics

Extended Quotation

“Then I hope your finger is better now?” Alice said very politely, as she crossed the little brook after the Queen.

“Oh, much better!” cried the Queen, her voice rising to a squeak as she went on. “Much be-etter! Be-etter! Be-e-e-etter! Be-e-ehh!” The last word ended in a long bleat, so like a sheep that Alice quite started.

She looked at the Queen, who seemed to have suddenly wrapped herself up in wool. Alice rubbed her eyes, and looked again. She couldn’t make out what had happened at all. Was she in a shop? And was that really—was it really a sheep that was sitting on the other side of the counter? Rub as she could, she could make nothing more of it: she was in a little dark shop, leaning with her elbows on the counter, and opposite to her was an old Sheep, sitting in an arm-chair knitting, and every now and then leaving off to look at her through a great pair of spectacles.

“What is it you want to buy?” the Sheep said at last, looking up for a moment from her knitting.

“I don’t quite know yet,” Alice said, very gently. “I should like to look all round me first, if I might.”

“You may look in front of you, and on both sides, if you like,” said the Sheep: “but you can’t look all round you—unless you’ve got eyes at the back of your head.”

But these, as it happened, Alice had not got: so she contented herself with turning round, looking at the shelves as she came to them.

The shop seemed to be full of all manner of curious things—but the oddest part of it all was, that whenever she looked hard at any shelf, to make out exactly what it had on it, that particular shelf was always quite empty: though the others round it were crowded as full as they could hold.

“Things flow about so here!” she said at last in a plaintive tone, after she had spent a minute or so in vainly pursuing a large bright thing, that looked sometimes like a doll and sometimes like a work-box, and was always in the shelf next above the one she was looking at. “And this one is the most provoking of all—but I’ll tell you what—” she added, as a sudden thought struck her, “I’ll follow it up to the very top shelf of all. It’ll puzzle it to go through the ceiling, I expect!”

But even this plan failed: the “thing” went through the ceiling as quietly as possible, as if it were quite used to it.

“Are you a child or a teetotum?” the Sheep said, as she took up another pair of needles. “You’ll make me giddy soon, if you go on turning round like that.” She was now working with fourteen pairs at once, and Alice couldn’t help looking at her in great astonishment.
*********ENDQUOTE  From Chapter 5, pages 167-168 in my edition****
This is a good example of how the book has a surreal dream-like quality.  If you like this kind of stuff, there's lots more.  If you don't like this kind of stuff, consider yourself warned ahead of time.

External Links

After reading this book, I checked the Wikipedia page.  From which I learned: 
The White Queen offers to hire Alice as her lady's maid and to pay her "twopence a week, and jam every other day." Alice says that she doesn't want any jam today, to which the Queen replies, "you couldn't have it if you did want it. The rule is, jam tomorrow and jam yesterday—but never jam to-day." This is a reference to the rule in Latin that the word iam or jam—which means now, in the sense of already or at that time—cannot be used to describe now in the present, which is nunc in Latin. Therefore, "jam" is never available today.[7] This exchange is also a demonstration of the logical fallacy of equivocation.[8]

Well, that went right over my head.  (I obviously don't remember my schoolboy Latin very well).   There are probably a lot of references like that in this book that went right over my head.  I really need to read "The Annotated Alice" one of these days.

6 out of 10 stars   I'm giving it a low rating because I'm a philistine.  Someone who loves all the wordplay and whimsy in this book would no doubt rate it higher.  But It was easy and painless to read, and funny at parts, so it easily gets a 6 from me.

October 17, 2021 Through the Looking-Glass by Lewis Carroll p.106-122

Video Review (Playlist HERE)


Wednesday, October 20, 2021

Finished: Through the Looking-Glass by Lewis Carroll


and also, with this, I've also finished the compilation volume
Finished: Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll

I saw these things online today, and wanted to try to connect a few dots.
First, we have the capability to drastically mitigate this climate crisis:

But... we the oil and coal companies don't want to let us. From Reuters.com: Big fossil fuel producers' plans far exceed climate targets, U.N. says

And, the oil and coal companies are controlling politics:

West Virginians Getting Crushed By Energy Prices While Politicians Get Rich Off Price Gauging


Tuesday, October 19, 2021

Finished: The Marvelous Land of Oz by L. Frank Baum --As with last time, the schedule I worked  out with Dane Reads is to review these on Monday, so I think I'll hold off on publishing my review until then.


Monday, October 18, 2021

Another Steve Donoghue Q & A.  As always, I put a question in.
War and Peace: This book has come up a lot on these Q & As, but I don't recall ever hearing your opinion on Tolstoy's view of history.  (Apologies if I missed it.)  Do great men shape history?
As luck would have it, my question was the first one answered on the video.  So just start from the beginning, and my question will be there:

 

Steve didn't do what I was hoping that he would do, which was to engage more with War and Peace and talk about why he thinks Leo Tolstoy is wrong.  (In War and Peace, Leo Tolstoy spends a lot of pages arguing that individual people don't make history.  Certain events, like the war between Russia and France, are bound to happen no matter who is in charge, and world leaders are nothing more than puppets of historical forces.)  But oh well, win some, lose some.
I should perhaps make explicit that part of the reason I enjoy these Steve Donoghue Q&As so much is because they're a bit of a game.  If you watch the whole Q&A, you'll quickly discover that all of the people asking questions want to get Steve to expand on their pet subject, but Steve's objective is to get through all the questions as quickly as possibly. But if you ask him a question that's too complex, then he gets upset and says that it's not appropriate for a rapid fire Q&A.  (In his defense, he's got about 100 questions to work through, and his Q&As usually end up being 2 to 3 hours long, so you can't blame the guy.)  But then, 1 out of every 5 questions or so will catch his interest, and you can get him talking for maybe 2 or 3 minutes.  So the game is to try to pick a question that could be answered briefly, but also has the potential to engage him.  It's very touch and go, but it's fun to try.  I'm going to go away now and think about my next question for the next Q&A.  
My previous forays into Steve Donoghue's Q&A are HERE, HERE and HEREMy review of War and Peace is HERE.