Read This!: Gone Girl

By Gillian Flynn

Challenge: A "Who done it"

This book was all over the place in 2012 and since I love mysteries, I have really wanted to read it.  However, I was trying to wait out the hardback (I hate carrying them on my commute) and I never thought to just buy it on Kindle.  Then, in December, Amazon was selling it for $2.99 as a special.  I couldn't resist and figured I could get over the hardback issue for such a steal and so I bought it.

I am going to keep this synopsis short because, while I will have a more in depth commentary later on, I don't want to give too much away for those who haven't read the book but would like to....

On their fifth anniversary, Nick's wife Amy disappears.  Soon Nick (as expected) becomes the chief suspect and things are not looking good.  But is he really guilty?  And where is Amy?


Non-spoiler review   

I was hooked on this book.  In fact, at one point, Mr. was trying to talk to me when he got home from work and I might have yelled at him because I was trying to read.  Usually when he disturbs my reading, I just stare at him blankly without hearing anything he says because I am still thinking about my book, give a short laugh that could be a response for 99% of topics, and go back to my book.  So, this was big.

Gone Girl commences with Nick and Amy narrating chapters alternatively.  Nick tells us what is going on present day and Amy tells the history of their relationship through her diary.  From these chapters we gain insight into their marriage and how it has really taken a major nose dive.

I loved the character development throughout and how Flynn kept me on my toes.  I also loved some of Flynn's insights.  I found myself reading excerpts to Mr. because her observations were so dead-on.  Before I was done with the book, she managed to make me feel guilt over my love of 48 Hour Mysteries and Dateline and Investigation Discovery,  

Flynn is a skilled writer generally, writing things like how a lady's legs were crossed and tilted to the side like a slash mark.  I loved that analogy and thought I wish I could be that creative in writing.  There were many lines I read and thought "what a great description".

Bottom line: read this.


Spoiler review 

I am going to talk about the ending.  This is the last warning.


One of the things I really enjoyed about this book was how I was duped.  Diary Amy was kind of annoying and self-centered but I felt that she and Nick just never figured out where the other stood which led to their problems.  Throughout the first part, Nick seemed overly apathetic which didn't help him out.  I wasn't convinced he was guilty but I thought "Maybe? He does seem like a jerk."  Then we find out Amy is alive and she is just crazy vindictive, cold and calculating.  Flynn made me go from thinking Nick was the bad guy to thinking Amy was (classic!).  Then we hit Part 3.  I realized here they were both crazy.  Nick less crazy but still crazy in the end.  Neither Nick or Amy was very likeable which I think was Flynn's point.  Neither one was innocent.

Anyways, let's talk about the ending.  It made me mad in a way because we all want the bad guy caught but on the other hand, I liked it because it was unexpected and because it made me mad.  I thought the ending was kind of perfect because, even though I do feel bad for Nick, being trapped in this house with his murderer wife and I kept thinking "Who would want to live like this?  Constantly acting?", the fact that Amy was beloved by everyone (but those who really, truly knew her for what she was) when the book closed out just added to the darkness of the tale confirming that Gone Girl is an excellent study of how people believe what they want to believe and people present themselves (and are consequently viewed as) not as who they are, but who they pretend to be.  In the end, who does really know us?  

Side note: I want to take a moment to give a shout out to Gillian Flynn (whether she intended this or not) because the name of the third part reads: "Boy Gets Girl Back (Or Vice Versa)".  This can be interpreted as the literal being back in a physical sense or the figurative phrase for getting revenge.  Both apply here so that was pretty slick of title.

  

Downton Abbey 3: Episodes 1 and 2

SPOILERS!!!!

So as it turns out, even though Downton fever is raging across the world, the only people I know who watch the show are men: Mr., my Dad, and my BIL.  This leaves me with a lot of comments that I want to discuss but have no audience for.  Mr. tries but alas he just can’t get into these discussions.  So I am listing my thoughts here.

Before I get started, here are some things Mr. and I have discussed:

• Is Matthew the luckiest guy ever?  Two big inheritances.  Geez.  I would be happy to even be considered for a large inheritance.  Let alone actually receive one (or two).
• I was Team Mary on how to use this cash by the way.  Matthew needed to stop the whining and just take the dough.  Really. 

 

• Bates sucks.  We are over his story.

• I feel bad for Edith.  I am a middle child too so I know what it is like and yeah she can be mean but man, could Sir Anthony not have come to this decision BEFORE SHE WALKED DOWN THE AISLE.  Mr. suspected something was up before me so props to him.  I think she needs to go abroad and party.

• O’Brien’s new hair.  Hallelujah!

 

• We love Isis.

 

Things Mr. tries but can’t get into:

• How underwhelming was Mary’s wedding dress?  In Mr.’s defense, he tried to get into this by asking if I liked Edith’s or Mary’s better (I am Team Edith).  Here is a comparison from US Weekly.  And I know styles were different but eh, I was bored.  I did read that Mary’s was the most expensive dress ever made for the show but still, eh.  I loved its softness but I was not impressed.  I am hoping it was better in person.

• Lady Mary’s skin.  I think Michelle Dockery has the most fabulous skin I have ever seen.  I comment on it constantly when watching DA.  Mr. commented that you don’t know where her wedding dress ends and her skin begins and that he is sure she has make-up artists helping her along on this.  Of course, I was just as pale on the day I got married.  But seriously, her skin is so even and unblemished.  I think she should be the spokesperson for skin cancer groups about how pale can be lovely and tanning is blech.  Would that we all had her perfect complexion.  Sigh.

• Come on costume designers!  Your dresses are recycled from last season!  Putting sleeves on them doesn’t hide the fact!  Show me something new! And yes, I realize the Crawleys had some financial problems and maybe had to move into a smaller MANSION (LOL at Branson’s line related to that) but get a new frock.  Please.

Read This!: The Winter Palace

By Eva Stachniak

Book Challenge: Author with a Polish last name

Mr. surprised me with this book at Christmas.  Usually he doesn't venture into buying me random books but I guess he was desperate for holiday presents this year and gave in.  I have mentioned before that I would like to read a biography of Catherine the Great and so this must have been in the back of his head because this is a historical fiction using Catherine the Great.  As an additional bonus, the author is natively Polish so hooray!, I could use this for the book challenge.  Go Mr.!

I would also like to note that I am embarrassed that it is January 13 and I have only just finished my first book for 2013.  What is happening????  Stupid work for keeping me busy.

Varara (Russian for the Polish Barbara) is a Polish immigrant, a bookbinder's daughter, who finds herself a spy for the Empress Elizabeth of Russia.   Sophie, daughter of a German prince, is brought to Russia to marry the heir to the throne, Peter.  Sophie will become Catherine the Great.  Varvara soon becomes the confidante to Sophie and in her being her ally, is closely involved in her ascension to power.

I had not read any historical fiction around Catherine the Great before so this was a new area for me.  Mr. did well because I found the story to be engaging and fast-paced.  I was googling the people and places which were discussed in the book which is always a sign of interest from me.  I might have to explore other books with this same idea.  Since I am over the Tudors for now, I need a new monarch to read historical fiction about.

MLB Hall of Fame

We don’t write too much about sports on the blog.  This is in large measure because Mrs. is not a sports fan.  This leaves the sports arena to me, so I’m taking the liberty of posting a really long write-up about the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame candidates.  If, like Mrs., you have no interest in sports, feel free skip over this one.  Anyway, it’s almost time for the announcement of the next class for the HOF and here is what it would look like if I had a vote.

First, a quick word on PEDs – I think steroids are a terrible black mark on baseball and it sucks that so many players were “cheating” or whatever you want to call it.  But I’m also not a fan of revisionist history (taking away Heisman trophies, vacating wins, etc.) and the thing is, the home runs were hit and records were set.  We don’t know how many players used PEDs and we know that many who did, used before baseball tested (in essence they let the players cheat).  I don’t know what the right answer is, but for me I don’t have a problem with admitted steroid users in the HOF, although I might use PEDs as a sort of tiebreaker if I think it’s close.

Also, I used to consider myself a “small Hall” person, meaning just the best of the best (Lou Gehrig, Ted Williams, Willie Mays, etc.)  But in putting together my hypothetical ballot I realize I’m at least a “medium Hall” person if not a “big Hall” one.  In fact I’d use up all 10 spots on a ballot if I had one.  Oh well. 

Here’s a look at the 37 candidates on the ballot.  The “no’s” can be divided into four categories:

Perfectly fine ballplayers, but ummm . . . no:

Sandy Alomar, Jr., Jeff Cirillo, Royce Clayton, Jeff Conine, Steve Finley, Julio Franco (although he gets bonus points for playing until he was around 60!) Shawn Green, Roberto Hernandez, Ryan Klesko, Jose Mesa, Reggie Sanders, Aaron Sele, Mike Stanton, Todd Walker, Rondell White, and Woody Williams

They might (repeat: might) have the numbers, but still a no for me:

Lee Smith – the all-time leader in saves when he retired, but only a special closer (think Mariano Rivera) would get a yes vote from me.

Sammy Sosa – Yes the 600+ homers would probably get him in without the PED issue.  But look at two players:

Player A:  2,354 games, 2,408 hits, 234 stolen bases, .273/.344/.534 slash line

Player B:  2,583 games, 2,548 hits, 320 stolen bases, .271/.332/.442 slash line

Sosa is player A, and all the home runs help out the slugging percentage.  But player B is Steve Finley, who’s numbers aren’t that different (obviously minus the home runs) and we certainly aren’t electing him. Anyway, home runs or not, a no on Sosa.

Rafael Palmeiro – Yes, he’s got the 3000+ hits and 500+ homers (PED assisted or not), but he also has the lying about steroids and the Viagra commercials.  I never thought of him as one of the best at his position when he was playing.  I remember lots of talk of how he would be a test case for the Hall once he reached those lofty numbers.  And for me that’s a no.

80’s stars who were really good, but not quite hall of famers:

Jack Morris – really good pitcher, but not quite a Hall of Famer for me.  He’s been on the ballot for a long time though, so obviously there are lots that disagree with me.

Don Mattingly – the prime of my baseball fandom was probably 1984-1996 when I was between the ages of 6 and 18.  And Donny Baseball was a pretty great player in the mid-to late 80’s.  In fact, I’m sure in 1987 I would certainly have designated him as a future Hall of Famer.  But then he just fell off a cliff and couldn’t stay healthy.  A nostalgic player, yes, but not quite a Hall of Famer.

Dale Murphy – another 80’s star who reminds me of being young.  Like Mattingly, Murph had some terrific years, and then came the injuries and he just lost it.  A reluctant no.

Alan Trammell – I don’t remember him as a huge star, but I admit I was probably a tad too young in his absolute prime.  He was also overshadowed by Cal Ripken and Ozzie Smith during his best years.

90’s stars who were really good, but not quite hall of famers:

Bernie Williams – another guy I never remember considering a Hall of Famer during his playing days, but his numbers are more impressive than I would have thought.  Still falls short for me.

David Wells – he was definitely a star for a few years, but I remember him more for being fat than for being a potential Hall of Famer.

Larry Walker – how much were his numbers helped by playing so long in Coors Field?  I don’t know the answer, but even though he was really good (and his numbers are actually quite a bit better than I remember), he still falls short for me.

Fred McGriff – I really wanted to vote for the Crime Dog, but I’m not sure he was ever considered the best at his position and he falls a bit short on some of the numbers.  Real close for me, but not quite.

So that’s the “no” votes, and if you’re still with me, I would use all available spots on my hypothetical ballot and vote for 10 players for the Hall of Fame.  The “yes” votes can be divided into three categories:

The no brainers:

Barry Bonds

Roger Clemens

PEDs or not, two of the best of their generation.  Enough said.

Jeff Bagwell – lacking some of the nice numbers (short of 500 home runs/3000 hits), but I do remember him as an absolute star, possibly one of the top 4 players of the 90’s (off the top of my head – Bonds, Ken Griffey Jr., Frank Thomas, Bagwell . . . who would be ahead of them?)

Mike Piazza – the two best catchers of the 90’s were Ivan Rodriguez and Piazza, and he’s most likely the best offensive catcher in history (even if he fought the position to a draw at best defensively).  That’s enough for a yes vote from me.

Yes for me, but I can see why a “small Hall” voter would say no:

Craig Biggio – it’s possible he’s more of a compiler (see Palmeiro above), but I do think he was a really great player for a long time and that puts him over the edge for me. 

Curt Schilling – he was one of the top pitchers of his generation and has huge strikeout numbers.  No question a Hall of Famer in my mind.

Edgar Martinez – the argument against him is the designated hitter thing, but that’s not a problem for me if you’re one of the best hitters of a generation and I definitely remember Martinez as just that.

Tim Raines – I remember Raines as a huge star in the 80’s and then a really good player for many more years.  Great leadoff hitter – got on base and stole lots of bases.  Is probably hurt by having played so long and being mediocre towards the end.

The toughest yes decisions:

Kenny Lofton – he’s really on the cusp for me, but I can vote for 10 and I’m going to include Lofton because although I might remember him more fondly then others, I definitely remember him as a fantastic leadoff hitter, centerfielder and baserunner for those 90’s Cleveland Indians.  And I can remember thinking he’d be a Hall of Famer back in those days.

Mark McGwire – surprisingly the toughest choice.  I was amazed at his low hit totals (it seems he just couldn’t stay healthy – PEDs or no).  But he was definitely a star and a terrific home run hitter.  If I had a vote I would agonize over McGwire, but on this ballot which means absolutely nothing I’ll give him the yes.

The Last of the Mohicans

The Last of the Mohicans is one of Mrs.’ top 10 movies of all-time and a film that I also really enjoy.  Because of this I’d always wanted to read the book by James Fennimore Cooper.  The novel tells the story of Chingachgook, his son Uncas (the last of the Mohican tribe) and their friend, the frontiersman Hawkeye, as they attempt to rescue Cora and Alice Munro, the daughters of a British commander in French and Indian War.  The sisters first encounter the Mohicans and Hawkeye while being escorted to their father’s fort by Duncan, a major in Munro’s army and the trio helps guide them all safely.  The action takes the reader from the fort where the French defeat the British to a Huron village where Cora and Alice are held captive after being abducted by Magua, a Huran chief, and all throughout the mountains and woods of upstate New York.

The Good:  My first observation is that the book differs in many ways from the movie, but this isn’t a bad thing at all.  In fact, I think a movie more faithful to the novel would be incredibly interesting and suspenseful in its own right.  The main differences are that the novel focuses more on the Indian tribes, where a large portion of the action takes place, and that the novel doesn’t have the same romantic relationships that the movie presents (oh, Hollywood).  The story really moves once the sisters are kidnapped and the rescue begins.  It was also really interesting to see the plight of the Indians as the Europeans are slowly taking over their country and their ways and traditions begin to die (symbolically with the last of the Mohican tribe).

The Bad:  The book is a tad long and a little slow at the beginning.  There’s lots of description of the settings, the mountains, the rivers, etc., and while well written, as a modern reader I could do with a little less.  My only other critique is that I don’t like when writers talk to the reader, such as “now reader this or now reader that”.  For example Cooper begins a chapter with “. . . we use an author’s privilege, and shift the scene a few miles to the west . . .”, and writes similarly several times.  Just tell the story, don’t tell me that you’re telling the story.  Just a small pet peeve, but maybe this was a popular writing device 200 years ago.

The Verdict:  I’m glad I finally picked up The Last of the Mohicans to read, and overall I would definitely recommend the novel.

Next up:  Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell

Read This!: Merry Ex-Mas

By Sheila Roberts

Spontaneous Christmas book purchase!

In the town of Icicle Falls, WA, Christmas is near.  Cass is planning her daughter's Christmas wedding only to have her ex and his new wife want to stay at her house.  Newly divorced Ella is sharing her house (until it sells) with her ex.  Charley's ex just popped back into town unexpectedly.  Between all of these ladies and their exes, it will be a crazy holiday season!

I enjoyed this book a lot more than I thought I would.  It was chick lit for sure but it kept me amused and was definitely Christmas centric.

This was my final read of 2012 and not a bad one to exit on!

2013 Book Challenge

Happy New Year  Everyone!

With the success of last year's book challenge , we have decided to do one for 2013.

Last year, we were challenged to read a total of 20 books.  Out of the 6 participants, three of us completed the challenged.  All of the participants read a total of 75 books.

This year, we decided to take it to another level and have 25 books.  Same rules as last year.  Greeney chose the categories for this year.  If you would like to participate, let me know.

Here is a link to the 2013 BC.

Let's start reading!