December 31, 2020
Year In Review: The Four Seasons Landscaping of My Discontent
December 17, 2020
The Meaning of Marylin
True story: Eons ago I had a roommate who decked our whole apartment living area in Marylin Monroe garb --- framed photos, decorative boxes, throw pillows and blankets --- and yet, when you asked her what her favorite Marylin movie* was, she'd draw a blank, blinking stare. Clueless, not conflicted: she had never seen a Marylin Monroe film. In fact, she didn't know much about Marylin beyond the superficial (pretty, white, blonde, and famous). This surface level adulation, the association with my roommate (who was terribleawful in other ways) and her decorative tackiness, along with the onslaught of Marylin's legendary image as THE pinnacle of glamour above all led to me being turned off by the idolization of Marylin Monroe, and even Marylin: The Person to some extent.
So why did I read a book about Marylin after all this judgement and pettiness? Well, because a) I love diving into a good Hollywood biography/memoir, b) Quarantine binge watching led me to view Lifetime's mini-series The Secret Life of Marylin Monroe, and I felt a lot was missing and wildly fictionalized (I mean, it was on Lifetime...), and c) I wanted to give Marylin --- the woman and the enigma --- a chance to re-introduce herself.
Let me clarify: I don't dislike Marylin Monroe. Even with the oversaturation of her image, it is without fallacy. She was a beautiful, captivating icon for the ages. Her cotton candied blonde bombshell image, white skirt blown up by hot subway air still haunts and arouses 58 years after her death, remaining a constant in replication, whether to push many a product, personify Hollywood hierarchy or is emulated to imitation from fashion editorials to drag shows. We feel that with Marylin's image around --- if we can slip into it someway --- we're closer to the star spangled fantasy of fame. That if a simple girl named Norma Jean Mortensen could make it, we can too if we just pout our lips, thrust out our busts, and talk breathlessly. Still, nobody has come close to replicating her aura, try as many have.
Her and James Dean share a similar mythos for their image and tragic short lives, and how they represented this sort of Americana image of youthful success and sexiness, and the tragic pitfalls of it. Unfortunately, Marylin being a woman is scrutinized to a greater degree than James Dean, whose rebellious persona is lauded as ideal masculinity, whilst Marylin is subjected to this "beautiful bimbo blonde" sex object stereotype. It's also why Marylin's misunderstandings are what intrigue me as well, considering how I had my own.
Marylin was more than just beauty marks, diamonds, mental illness, and the Kennedys, and I wanted to know more beyond the superficial and speculative. I wanted someone to really show me a side to Marylin that I might have overlooked, and misogynistically misunderstood.
Well, as with a legendary icon, there are lots of sides out there to explore. Zillions upon zillions of books about Marylin exist. Zillions upon zillions of stories, conspiracies and contradictions, observations and opinions about who and what she was also exist. It was difficult to weed through the inaccurate, exploitive, conspiracy riddled, fictitious, and outdated texts to find a book that eschewed such star biography hallmarks, but luckily for me, Charles Casillo's Marylin Monroe: The Private Life of a Public Icon won out as while being a fan, he doesn't stan to where he's skimping on facts and flaws. He offers several viewpoints, none not too flattering or too scathing, making for an informative balance.
Casillo also avoids framing Marylin's life as "Wikipedia page as a book", where even as linear it is, it's a surprisingly fresh take at her life. The writing is also vibrant and lyrical, never tedious, this even when Casillo is attempting to "armchair analyze" Marylin's thought processes, and give through behind-the-scenes accounts of Marylin's filmography. He places you into the spin of 1950s and 1960s Hollywood and its politics, its dazzle and its difficulties, and how Marylin navigates it to success and tragedy...and it's pretty riveting, thought-provoking stuff.
December 14, 2020
Lolita's Ghost Speaks
November 30, 2020
Novella November: Ghachar Ghochar + Aura
Interest lies in the narration, this done by the loafer son. He's neither hero or voice of reason, and it's a quiet, bold choice for Shanbhag as this unnamed manchild (what is with me reading books with nameless characters this year?) isn't likeable in the slightest, and yes, that must be the point. He is observant in how his family has devolved, but nonchalant and self-victimizing in the tell. He wanders and lays about, has a "job" in the family's spice business but it's only a baseless title, as he never works for the hefty paycheck he receives like clockwork in his bank account. His sister is a selfish temperamental snob. His mother a blind loyalist to the shift of dynamics, with fears she'll be encroached upon by whatever woman her son or brother-in-law bring into the home. His father morphs from a hard-working provider to a standby mute. As they become shells of themselves, they all orbit around the ambitious, borderline autocratic uncle whose questionable business practices have gifted them this lush life --- and they dare not question it for fear of losing their newfound wealth. <--- The characters are there, but they don't evolve beyond this and feel predictable. Happy and supportive when poor, apathetic and amoral when rich. No shading, no surprises. Honestly, the family didn't seem that wholesome and devoted even while poor, so the impact of their greed wasn't jarring to me.
There's an additional whiff of sexism that wafts in the text that didn't sit right with me. The intrusion of our narrator's wife, Anita, a liberated woman disrupts the family dynamic with her "quaint" middle-class ideals, and headstrong, yet empathetic personality. While she's painted as an disagreeable outsider by our narrator, she's actually the character I agreed with the most (#nastywomenunite). Not sure if Shanbhag is flexing realism within the fictitious or making himself a stand-in for his narrator (I always expect the latter when the character is mysteriously ~unnamed~), but there are some cringing dialogue that volleys between the family that is quite chauvinistic and bizarre, especially a really weird conversation about justifying men murdering their wives. Yeah... I'm not well-versed on the treatment of women in Indian culture, but since shitty men come in all colors, creeds and nationalities, I can deduce within the book's world, women are considered second class and a nuisance, especially to our pissbaby narrator.
Flipping that argument is how Shanbhag ascribes a double standard when it comes to our narrator's marriage to Anita. First it's a little...funny our narrator disparages strong women, this while he chooses Anita for a wife, this as she seems to be of independent mind and purpose, traits and drive he lacks. His interest in marriage is also...funny, as he's much more eager to get married to Anita than she is to him, which is quite the switch of gender dynamics. In a way, our narrator is emasculated from both sides, by his 'feminist' wife and by his moneyed uncle, and that's why this book is almost a lengthy complaint of this realization. <---Fascinating sketch there, but for how slim this book is, it doesn't feel satisfying or harbors much depth. And that ending? Oof. So unfulfilled.
All while reading I kept thinking that there was something missing, and that maybe this would be one of the few times I felt a novella needed more pages, more subplots, more depth. This book just lacks a point, or rather a unique outlook. Sure money corrupts, sure money is the root of all evil, sure mo' money breeds mo' problems...and what? This book is too flimsy to be a morality tale, as it ends up being no more than an elaborate synopsis. Disappointing.
////
I'm wondering that still after reading. What is Aura, Carlos Fuentes' most well-known, celebrated story expecting of me? What does it want? --- and maybe the questions lingering is the point. 1962 knocked back this quick drink of Gothic horror that broke ground for its warped magical realist imagery and just plain weirdness. Some decades and even weirder horror stories and films later, it has lost its luster a touch. Just a touch...
For Fuentes' aromatic and engaging writing, Aura is disjointed --- appropriately so. It has the feel of entering an opaque, congested nightmare, where it strips the fear to its naked core and breeds doubt and confusion. Told in the second person --- to where I got the nostalgic feels of it being a Choose Your Own Adventure tale --- but "we" are supposed to be Felipe Montero, a young historian who is lured by an job advertisement that seems destined for him. The advertisement leads him to the doorstep of Consuelo Llorente, a spectral, aging widow who wants Montero to organize, transcribe, and publish the memoirs of her deceased husband, General Llorente, this before she dies. Montero has some apprehension about the job till his eyes meet the magnetic green ones of Aura, Consuelo's niece, whom becomes Montero's focus of desire as much as the catalyst for his destiny. To say more would ruin the twisted trip this short novel draws one into.
If I could go back, I'd have carved out time in my insomniac hours to read this straight through, as this story demands that you're about as delirious and woozy as the prose itself. Reading a chapter daily, I suppressed a lot of dread and suspense, leading me to feel a bit lukewarm about the whole ordeal. Still there was a lot of weirdness to go around to unmoor me during my readings: There is a red-eyed rabbit named Saga, scuttling rats and screeching unseen cats, thick, heady foliage that shrouds the perception and senses --- you have no exact grounding of where you're at that is unsettling.
Consuelo has a Miss Havisham vibe about her, her lounging in her bed, drifting around her home, and dancing with her dead husband's military uniform was some chilling character imagery. The collision course of the past intruding into the present, blurring the distinction of the two is a special kind of terror that I particular enjoy. For all its talks of it being 'magic realism', Aura has more in common with the crumbling mansions by the moors in 19th Century Gothic romances and Lovecraftian grotesque theater, than the usual surrealistic pillows Latin literature offers, but that's just me.
Still, for me, there was *too much* going on. Cats, goats, rodents, a Voodoo doll even shows up under a dinner plate...its a exhaustive mosaic of people, animals, plants, hallways, rooms, lights, colors, objects --- of course all colliding together to stoke the eeriness --- but it lent things to become too abstract in a way that left me questioning where Fuentes was going with this and if he had made an oops by overstuffing his narrative with every horror trope known.
...then again (and once again) that's probably the point, to be unsettled, disoriented and confined in this batshit macabre nightmare, and nothing more. Not sure if I really enjoyed the journey Aura took me on, but the writing and the weirdness made this still a worthwhile read.
November 16, 2020
The Memory Police
"My memories don't feel as though they’ve been pulled up by the root. Even if they fade, something remains. Like tiny seeds that might germinate again if the rain falls. And even if a memory disappears completely, the heart retains something. A slight tremor or pain, some bit of joy, a tear."
Imagine waking up and discovering your loved ones, the necessities, and freedoms of day-to-day living have vanished, one by one. Where sustenance becomes scarce, the conditions of living have devolved into a frigid, hollowed squalor, and where the protesting of such vanishings proves impossible due to your lack of remembrance of them ever existing. It in itself is difficult to fathom, but it's the life on an unnamed island where an oppressive regime has held its occupants and their memories hostage. Yoko Ogawa has created this barren totalitarian alter-verse in The Memory Police, where a young writer copes with a vacant livelihood and loved ones she can't recollect, this all as the world slips away.
While attempting to regain a sense of herself within her writings, out unnamed narrator lives life in a limbo of fear and indifference. Fear is in the form of the shadowy Memory Police, a militarized force that dictates what is to be disposed, and erased from conscious in order to maintain control of the island's citizens. Those that thwart the disposal of, or resist to fall in line with the memory erasure are whisked away to never be seen again --- this a fate our nameless narrator's parents have endured. Indifference follows once these particular items --- whether its roses, birds, photographs or perfume --- are disposed or destroyed. Our narrator is aware of the absences of particular items, and can "feel" their absences upon waking up, but once the disposal or disappearance of such is gone, her concern, and sympathies about the losses ceases.
With haunting and understated pacing, The Memory Police draws a fascinating premise, as its world mirrors the real-life autocratic police-state regimes in North Korea and Russia, as much as arouses thoughtful 'cautionary' dialogue for Westerners about the preciousness of memory, and the dangers of censorship and corrupt surveillance operations. With these kinds of books we're always wondering how individuals can become ensnared in such a suppressive environment, and The Memory Police provides a horrible world that teeters away from fiction into reality, but somewhere down the line it becomes tangled up in its own philosophy and leaves with more questions than answers.
October 30, 2020
The Collector
But the record scratch of reality comes in the middle as the narrative switches gears and we become privy of Miranda's thoughts through a secret diary she keeps between the mattress. At first this transition was jarring, and since she recounts most of everything you have read for the last 100 pages it all seems like a bad literary decision, but it's not, in fact it's a brilliant turn of character building. Miranda is now not bound and gagged by her captor, she is 'free' to speak her mind in her secret diary and we begin to understand the claustrophobic nightmare she is desperately trying to claw out of. From these pages, we learn that Miranda is quite intelligent and resourceful as she tries to figure out ways to best Fredrick, submitting to and resisting him all for the sake of survival. It's devastating to read how she slowly realizes just how insane Fredrick is and how day-by-day she becomes less of a human in his eyes, but more of an inanimate object that is only to be admired, likened to his framed butterflies.
September 28, 2020
Misery Business With Pickles On Top
September 14, 2020
Home Sweet (Sinister) Home: Haunted Quarantines
September 10, 2020
Disappearing Acts
August 17, 2020
Devil's In The Details
August 12, 2020
Out of the Mouths of Babes...
June 6, 2020
Reading Is Protest
June 3, 2020
Language of the Unheard
And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? ... It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity.
January 21, 2020
Secondhand Gold Dust Woman
"I had absolutely no interest in being somebody else's muse. I am not a muse. I am the somebody. End of fucking story."
Side One
Track One: "Intrigue"
I wasn't drawn to Daisy Jones & The Six by hype. I enjoyed what Taylor Jenkins-Reid did with 2016's The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo as it was smarter than the beach read label it was stamped with. It began as a frothy, fictionalized champagne swig of 1950s Hollywood, but unfurled into a layered and sensitive narrative of women and men navigating the rigid sexual and social expectations of the film industry, and the era at large, all of this entertaining, keeping me turning pages. For Daisy Jones & The Six, Reid takes a detour to the 1970s California rock music scene to focus on the quick rise and crashing fall of a fictional rock group, and with that synopsis alone I was expecting such a tale to be in capable hands.
As a music fan, I'm also a fool who believes writing about music isn't akin to "dancing about architecture". That there is more to music, its impact on our culture than just an infectious melody and it should be written as so. Still, so few can capture the pulse and flow of music in text, and so few do it within fiction, so whenever I see a book associated to music on such a level, I'm a moth to a flame, hoping that someone will get it 'right'.
Track Two: "The Shape Of You"
Instead of a straight shot of a biography, Daisy Jones is akin to reading the transcript of a (disjointed) Behind The Music episode. Nestling into a documentary series binge session is how I spend my dross weekends, so this wasn't a deal breaker, in fact, I found it a rather interesting way to set up a story and it fit realistically with the usual payoff of interviewing of a rock band: how everyone would view a person or a situation differently, adding to band lore. As I read thorough Daisy Jones, I began to notice that such a structure lent to some prose limitations.
A cardinal sin of telling instead of showing leaves this book in a limbo of character development. We don't feel these characters, we're told how to feel about them. Motivations for particular actions with our central characters aren't clear, as external characters are just named dropped without much explanation as to who they are. Each voice tends to blend together, they could all be the same person if we weren't told. Without exposition or sensory details, we speed through the band's formation and their rise to fame, all without feeling the struggle. One day they're playing at weddings, the next they have a hit album. The whole thing feels like an thin outline of an idea, a gimmick. None of it feels natural.
Oh, and that weird 'twist' to discover who the interviewer is? Unnecessary.
Track Three: "You're The Inspiration"
Daisy Jones is a captain obvious veiled ode to the turbulent ride of the band Fleetwood Mac with numerous characters that resemble choice band members. Stevie Nicks' drug-addled wild child sprite is reincarnated in Daisy Jones. Lindsey Buckingham begat Billy Dunne as a disgruntled visionary artist who's in an emotional tug-of-war with its enigmatic lead singer. Christine McVie will see herself in Karen Karen, the frustrated keyboardist who has pulled back her femininity to exist in the man's world known as rock n' roll. The easy-going drummer that is Warren Rhodes is Mick Fleetwood. All well and good, but it's lazy as TJR isn't bringing anything of interest to the table with these characters to where we can excuse the striking resemblances.
Not to say one can't be entertained when following the follies of a fictional band. Almost Famous (what this book wants to be) didn't just follow a fictional '70s rock band and its groupies, but had a young man's coming of age nestled in its story. Bette Midler growls, gripes, and guzzles booze and pills to give off Janis Joplin vibes in an Oscar-nominated performance in The Rose. Eddie and the Cruisers follows a pub band whose moody lead singer goes MIA, and its wrapped up in an intriguing mystery about lost master tapes, and the transition of rock n' roll from the '60s into the '70s. The Five Heartbeats recall the Motown era with a band that echoes the harmonies and hardships of The Temptations. All these films had a neat twist, a change-up that made them familiar, yet different. In short, Daisy Jones is just pure Fleetwood Mac fan fiction that feels more like wish-fulfillment than an actual nuance approach to anatomy of a band.
Track Four: "Message In The Music"
I admit it's a nice touch that at the end of the book we're treated to the full lyrical layout of Aurora, the fictional 'seminal' album of the band that causes them much artistic and personal grief, but big problem: we don't know how these songs are supposed to sound. As someone who has listened to their fair share of 1970s era rock and owns a few of the albums Reid was inspired by, I know of the sound and vibe of the time, but for someone who hasn't a clue the way the music is described would be confusing. Once again a limitation towards writing a book such as this. Music is something you have to hear, feel. These are just words on a page.
Of course, the sound of silence may be resolved when Daisy Jones is given the screen time it was warbled to be from jump since Reese Witherspoon has taken the reigns of an upcoming Amazon Prime streaming project (of course, she wrote the praising cover blurb...🙄), but while Reid does takes great pains to tell us how taxing the album was to create, it's just dead air. At the end, who cares about Aurora when you have Rumours?
Turn me over...
January 13, 2020
March On
I couldn't help but roll my eyes when I saw the trailer. Another Little Women adaptation? Groundbreaking.
From operas to television miniseries, there are a lot of Little Women adaptations, seven film treatments alone --- this including two lost silent films and anime adaptations. Lousia May Alcott with one book penned an ode to sisterhood that can be crowned the OG of reboots, predating the reboot craze of today. A craze that far too often in its eagerness to cash in on nostalgic comfort, disappoints at renovating its source anew for richer thought.
Little Women, in all of its 151 years of shelf life, has endured as a classic text as it's not just a product of its era, but can be read as a timeless portrait of family dynamics and coming of age during uncertain times. Is it a universal tale? Somewhat. Verdict is out on that as one could argue that for all the times that Little Women has been adapted for a new generation a tale of girlhood from a diverse voice isn't given the chance to speak, but the question of relevancy rises more so when it's brought to life on screen. When each generation gets a re-introduction to the March sisters I do tend to wonder: Do we really need another film about four sisters who are growing up in the midst of the Civil War, this in 2020, this when there has been so much social upheaval for women's rights, and this when there are other stories and novels worthy to be told about the turmoil and wonder of growing up girl?
Be Kind Rewind --- one of my favorite YouTube channels --- answered my question, and then some as it not only nudged me into giving the 2019 Greta Gerwig-directed version a shot after being indifferent about it initially, but to see Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy come alive for the umpteenth time isn't as stale or redundant at first glance.
BKR focuses on the 1939, 1949 and 1994 versions (skipping the 2018 Hallmark-y modernized one --- yeah, there's a modernized Little Women), giving ample discussion on how each film is approached by its prospective release era, and what it meant for the social climate of the time. Being raised on, and showing some bias with the 1994 Winona Ryder-led version, it was interesting to understand that the tone of the film, though being set in the 1860s, echoed the '90s being in the throes of the 2nd wave of women's movements, as it emphasized more on the March sisters career choices and desires to be seen equal to men much more than previous adaptations.
Whatever the opinion on reboots and refashions (please...STOP!), it is fascinating how one story --- written over two centuries ago --- can be told with such variance, and yet never once lose its message and its literary achievement.
January 9, 2020
I Capture The Blue Castle
Um, let me dial down that sweeping statement just a bit...
This is a romance story, straight up. There is passion, flushes of cheeks, silent stares, dinners that look out on a enchanting lakeside landscape, the archetypal brooding, enigmatic mountain man that can blow a back out and chop a tree with ease (and who in my mind looked liked a rugged Henry Cavill...rowr). It's riddled with all the romance book clichés that conjure up wistful, windswept cover women, promises of a love affair to end all love affairs, and "heaving bosoms". Still, even sainted with these hallmarks, The Blue Castle is the type of romance story that doesn't fuss in the proverbial as it not only deals with matters of the heart, but also concerns itself with how the heroine finds love within.
For a book written in 1926, set in a time before World War I, it was a pretty bold choice to have a heroine who is 29 years old, unmarried, and loathing it. Women aren't supposed to show this on their face, no, they're supposed to grin and bear the spinsterhood, be the subservient shut-in. Valancy Stirling is a archetype character that doesn't want to accept such complacency, and I already love her for this.
Blue Castle was Montgomery's first novel written for adults, and its obvious that Valancy Stirling is no Anne Shirley, L.M. Montgomery's most iconic literary creation. She's jaded and cynical, bereft of hope and just plain miserable, relegated to being the spinster of her family and seeing no prospects for her future. She lives with an overbearing mother, and whiny elder cousin who hover over her like an infantile invalid, and dictate her daily existence. tl;dr: they are insufferable. Her other family members are equally insufferable, with one creepy uncle (isn't always there always that one creepy uncle?) who makes her the butt of his sexist and lame jokes, all while holding the rest of the Stirlings hostage with his ample will if they dare so challenge his opinions. Oh, and to add to the #firstworldproblems, Valancy is often compared to her beautiful (but dingbat) cousin, Olive whose simple existence frustrates Valancy because why is always about Marsha, Marsha, Marsha?!?
For this, Valancy is truly living in a private, socially claustrophobic hell, as she has resigned herself to never living for herself and living out her days unloved and untouched by a man, even though she desires such. Her only escapes are the nature books of a John Foster whose prose Valancy knows by heart --- this to the chagrin of her mother who finds them "racy reads" (cause oak trees make one horny?) --- and in dreams of a "blue castle", a fictitious place where she can be free to be the woman she wishes to be.
"They never knew that Valancy had two homes–the ugly red brick box of a home, on Elm Street, and the Blue Castle in Spain. Valancy had lived spiritually in the Blue Castle ever since she could remember. She had been a very tiny child when she found herself possessed of it. Always, when she shut her eyes, she could see it plainly, with its turrets and banners on the pine-clad mountain height, wrapped in its faint, blue loveliness, against the sunset skies of a fair and unknown land. Everything wonderful and beautiful was in that castle. Jewels that queens might have worn; robes of moonlight and fire; couches of roses and gold; long flights of shallow marble steps, with great, white urns, and with slender, mist-clad maidens going up and down them; courts, marble-pillared, where shimmering fountains fell and nightingales sang among the myrtles; halls of mirrors that reflected only handsome knights and lovely women–herself the loveliest of all, for whose glance men died. All that supported her through the boredom of her days was the hope of going on a dream spree at night. Most, if not all, of the Stirlings would have died of horror if they had known half the things Valancy did in her Blue Castle."These escapes to this imagined "blue castle" bring some ease to Valancy in her lonely hours, but once departed from them Valancy begins to feel chest pains and becomes worrisome to their cause. Not wanting to involve her family, she take matters into her own hands to visit in secret Dr. Trent, a noted heart specialist, who lives in the same (fictional) Ontario town of Deerwood as the Stirlings, and who has been denounced by her family as a no-nothing "quack". Seeing Dr. Trent only provides a devastating blow of news for Valancy, but such news allows her to shed her conventional constraints and truly live life for herself, and well, "do crazy shit".
January 8, 2020
Year In Review: Where'd You Go, Belle?
![]() |
Alexandra Reading by Laura Lacambra Shubert |
Yes, I'm still here.
I could make numerous excuses why I haven't graced this space since the spring, but excuses just waste time. I got lost in my reading and didn't blog, it is just that.
So why even keep this blog up, you say? Out of habit, out of nostalgia for what was blogging in its infancy, mostly. Though blogging has been subjected to an 'ok boomer' practice at decade's end and seeing a slow funeral march toward corporate takeover and personal disenchantment, it's still a lifeline in some regard, a environment that appeals to my camera shy self (the brave ones can do BookTube), a place where I can put megaphone to mouth and holler. Blogs can survive in the roarin' 2020s, and it starts here and now in this space.
With all this newfound gusto, first thing's first: Febreze the fuck out of the 2010s (which was a terrible decade for me) and give 2019 a proper sendoff (because it wore out it's welcome too)...