strange and random happenstance

If you follow me on social media you might have heard some rather declarative statements on November 14th when Netflix announced they were doing a new version of Rebecca starring Lily James and Armie Hammer. It's not that I object to their being a new Rebecca, I just happen to object to almost everything we know so far about this project. Let's start with Armie Hammer... um, he's not British. Not that I'll hold that against him... what I hold against him is that he's only three years older than Lily James. Maxim de Winter is about twenty-five years older than his twenty-one year old bride, not three! Lily could work, I honestly have liked her in everything she's been in, she just needs a different leading man. Because of all the actors out there, you need a certain something to BE Maxim de Winter, something indefinable. For example I was just watching The Addams Family last night and Raúl Juliá, he would have been an amazing Maxim. Armie, not so much.

Now let's break down the other aspects of the production. The book is being adapted by Jane Goldman, best known for two of the worst X-Men films and the Kingsman franchise, big budget superhero blockbusters don't exactly mesh well with Daphne Du Maurier unless you're keeping maybe two ideas and scrapping the rest of the story like Hitchcock did with The Birds. Yes, Goldman also adapted Stardust, which I liked, but she also did The Woman in Black, which I hated, making her hit-and-miss with adaptions. As for the director Ben Wheatley, having two episode of Doctor Who I disliked AND that horrid adaptation of High-Rise on his resume aren't endearing him to me in the least. Then I have questions for the team, is it going to be a jam-packed two hour production or a lavish four hour miniseries, because there's more chance in doing justice to the book if it's four hours. But with Netflix it could go either way... Here's hoping they salvage something good out of this star-crossed crew instead of making me hate it more than I hate the Charles Dance version.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 1 comments  

Labels: Armie Hammer, Charles Dance, Daphne Du Maurier, Doctor Who, Du Maurier December, High-Rise, Hitchcock, Lily James, Netflix, Raul Julia, Rebecca, Stardust, The Addams Family, The Birds, The Woman in Black, X-Men

Tales from Earthsea
Based on the book by Ursula K. Le Guin
Starring: Brian George, Susanne Blakeslee, Kat Cressida, Matt Levin, Timothy Dalton, Cheech Marin, Jess Harnell, Blaire Restaneo, Willem Dafoe, and Mariska Hargitay
Release Date: July 29th, 2006
Rating: ★★
To Buy

The balance of the world is out of order, even the majestic dragons are killing each other. Young Prince Arren, driven by some unknown force, kills his father the King. Taking his father's sword he flees. On his desperate journey he runs into the Archmage Sparrowhawk who is on his own journey. Sparrowhawk has felt the world going out of kilter and has gone in search of the source of this wrongness. Sparrowhawk invites young Arren to travel with him. They encounter village after village destroyed, farmhouses burned and crops gone to seed. In Hort Town they finally find some kind of life, people wasting theirs taking the drug Hazia and slavers scouring the town for merchandise. Arren rescues a young girl from the slavers, but he incurs their wrath and when they find him asleep on the shore they enslave him. After being rescued by Sparrowhawk the two journey to the farmstead of Tenar, an old friend of Sparrowhawk's. There Arren meets the girl he rescued, Therru is the ward of Tenar. On the farm Arren is given time to heal from his ordeal while helping Tenar with the chores. But Sparrowhawk's mission isn't completed and soon it becomes apparent that Arren's ordeals are connected to the chaos in the world which now has a name, thanks to the slavers who work for him. The wizard Cob is destabilizing Earthsea in his quest for eternal life. Will the young Prince be able to make amends for the wrongs he has committed by stopping Cob? Or is all Earthsea doomed?

From the title of this movie I assumed that the plot would be taken from Le Guin's fifth Earthsea book, Tales from Earthsea. Well, you know what they saying about assuming things... because I was very wrong. Instead this is a weird amalgamation of the third and forth books in the Earthsea cycle, The Farthest Shore and Tehanu, without really ever being either of those books or it's own story. It doesn't really have it's own identity, feeling so piecemealed that a cohesive whole is hoping for way more than this film has to offer. I seriously don't understand what it is about Le Guin's Earthsea cycle that leaves it so hard to adapt. Each of the two adaptations has gotten key elements wrong, mainly whitewashing all the characters, which seriously baffles me in this instance because this wasn't made by white males this time around. But at least the Sci-Fi channel's adaptation was able to stand on it's own, being so different as to embrace those differences and create it's own mythology. Here there's so much actual mythology from Earthsea jammed incoherently into the story that I just can't even. I mean sometimes the dialogue doesn't actually make any sense. And as for Disney releasing it... I was raised on early eighties "children's" films, so I know violence, but OMG, the violence in this is so random and brutal and I don't think they ever really addressed the whole "slavery is evil" issue. Apparently it's the first and only PG-13 animated film Disney has ever distributed. Tales from Earthsea, the film, is just wrong on almost too many levels to count.

But apparently this production was plagued from the beginning. My brother informed me that while this is a Studio Ghibli film it wasn't done by Hayao Miyazaki, but his son Gorō and thus did the drama begin. Hayao had for years and years been wanting to adapt Le Guin's Earthsea cycle and had always been denied. Only after winning an Oscar for Spirited Away did Le Guin give her permission. Permission given which I think she later regretted despite claiming to like the end product though admitting that it wasn't in the least like her book. I'm not surprised in her being disappointed. Hayao, being too busy working on Howl's Moving Castle, the studio decided to let his son Gorō direct this as his first film. A move which his father not only disapproved of but actively argued against. So whether it was this tension or his inexperience, Le Guin's world didn't get the treatment it deserved and instead we are left wondering what might have been. As for the American release... I never really envisioned Sparrowhawk as say Timothy Dalton, because, you know, whitewashing, and his voice is almost too regal, he doesn't sound like he's ever shepherded goats. As for Willem Dafoe, yes, he's the perfect voice actor for villains, but the lackluster feeling of the film seeped into his performance. It felt like he read the lines in one take and that's all she wrote. In fact by the end of the film it's like all people involved had given up any hope for it, what with the closing theme song not being redone in English or even subtitled. I don't think they expected anyone to make it to the end.

What I hoped would redeem any lack in plot would be visual splendor. Because there's one thing that is "usually" a given with Studio Ghibli films and that's impactful imagery that will be on shirts and dorm rooms for years to come. The problem is that it's just not. The imagery is never it's own, it always feels so referential to specific things that all I did was think over and over again about those specific references while realizing how much better they were. The look was literally Legend meets Labyrinth meets The Addams Family meets Gummi Bears. You might laugh a bit at the Gummi Bears one while admitting the validity of the others, but seriously, the entrance to the castle is completely the entrance to Castle Dunwyn. Especially as depicted in my Colorforms play set. And also I REALLY need to watch Legend again, it's been too long. Aside from these specific filmic references the overall look the film went for is Persian. Which baffles me. You whitewash the characters and strip any racial identity that is in the books and give them a new one? What!?! And the thing is, I'm a really harsh judge when it comes to this because of my love of Kaoru Mori's meticulous and magnificent Manga series A Bride's Story. So if you're looking for racial confusion and memories of better films, you can't go wrong with this here film.

Unless you like strong women. Because, this is seriously a deal breaker. The strong, independent, and frankly amazing characters of Tenar and Therru her become nothing more than characters that have one purpose, to serve in advancing the stories of the men. Because obviously the only purpose of having women be in a film or story is to prop up the male narratives. Can you hear that growling? Oh wait, that's me. And it's not my stomach. It might partially be my teeth grinding, but there are other reasons too. The women get captured and get endangered and need men to rescue them. Tenar didn't escape from the Tombs on her own, rescuing Sparrowhawk whom she help prisoner. Oh no, she was the prisoner rescued, who must AGAIN be rescued as she has become a lure for Cob to trap Sparrowhawk. Oh, poor women. The scene when Sparrowhawk and Arren do all the work at the farm because the poor womenfolk wouldn't have gotten along unless they showed up!?! WTF!?! How are they running this farm then without the help of these men the rest of the year? I'm surprised that at this point Le Guin didn't ask for all association with the film to be severed. First the whitewashing and now the sexism! If there's any sexism in her books it's to show the plight of these strong and independent women! Who can run farms on their own! But the scene that made me want to spit fire? When Therru finally turns into a dragon the moment of majestic beauty is take away from her as it's given to Arren who rides her. HE FREAKIN' RIDES HER!

And buried, somewhere within the film, they tried to comment on the duality of humans with Therru and Arren. But instead of focusing on the more obvious with Therru being a freakin' dragon as well as a little girl, they go this weird ambiguous route that I'm still not sure I grasp. Somehow Arren was split in half either by killing his father or by the evil that plagues Earthsea. He now has a "light" and a "dark" side. The dark is all, well, it's the Arren we see most of, broody and boring. The light side appears to be trying to kill Arren, which makes no sense because it's the light side. Good should be trying to help evil not kill it, right? Or you know, integrate it somehow? Bring the two halves into one whole? The sloppily handled duality is just there and baffling. I really don't get what it's point is, was, or will be. It's like they were searching for some higher meaning and instead of taking meaning from the books they made their own half-assed mythology about splitting a human into light and dark and seriously, if it's beyond me I'm thinking a kid wouldn't get it either. But then Tales from Earthsea is continually taking these little bits and pieces from the books that in the context of the books make sense, but here are just baffling. Why does Therru knowing Arren's real name supersede the power of Cob knowing it? Why do they just explain the whole people can be dragons as quick backstory to a mural? Why is Therru made into a whiny stomp your feet girl? I guess I'll forever be wondering why.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: A Bride's Story, Anime, Gummi Bears, Hayao Muyazaki, It's a Kind of Magic, Kaoru Mori, Labyrinth, Legend, Studio Ghibli, Tales from Earthsea, Tehanu, The Addams Family, The Farthest Shore, Ursula K. Le Guin

The Mysterious Howling (The Incorrigible Children of Ashton Place Book 1) by Leigh Bardugo
Published by: Balzer + Bray
Publication Date: March 1st, 2010
Format: Hardcover, 272 Pages
Rating: ★★★★★
To Buy

Miss Penelope Lumley is eager to embrace her first job as a governess. She has just graduated from the Swanburne Academy for Poor Bright Females and is ready to put the sayings of the school's founder, the redoubtable Agatha Swanburne, into action. Though her plans to teach her pupils Latin declensions might have to be put on hold for awhile at least. The thing is, when she arrives at Ashton Place she learns the truth, her three charges were found in the woods where it is presumed they were raised by wolves. Alexander, Beowulf, and Cassiopeia Incorrigible were discovered by Lord Fredrick Ashton when he was out hunting, and as everyone knows, finders keepers! Miss Lumley first encounters her charges out in the barn quite literally howling. Now she sees why the advertisement for the job requested "experience with animals." But growing up at the Swanburne Academy Penelope's favorite books were the Giddy-Yap, Rainbow! books about the adventures of a pony named Rainbow and her young mistress, Edith-Anne Pevington. The volume Silky Mischief, wherein Rainbow saved an ill-tempered pony, left an indelible mark on Penelope and she knows that if Rainbow could save Silky she can save these three young children. It isn't long before she has them indoors and properly attired, though squirrels continue to be a problem. Miss Lumley is confident and bold with her unique lessons, but she worries about an ultimatum laid down that the children be ready to be presented at Lord Fredrick's new wife's holiday soiree. Could it undo all the progress she has made? And what if a squirrel were to appear?

While a series of books written about a group of children raised by wolves sounds almost too gimmicky to be enjoyable, there is something so endearing about the Incorrigibles that you can't help but fall in love with them. In fact there's many things about this book that in any other book I would have been annoyed and aggravated with, but somehow I just found it all so charming. For example, anachronisms usually drive me batty, yet for a book set around 1850, these interruptions from a modern narrator which introduce the anachronisms somehow work. Like Lemony Snicket explaining words within his narrative, this gimmick becomes stylistically part of the story and just works. And yes, I know saying something "just works" is a very imprecise way of describing something and seems as if I'm trying to get out of more explanation, but knowing when something works and when something doesn't work is an ineffable quality. It's easier to describe something when it doesn't work. You can point to a specific passage or event and go, there it is, that's where it failed. To point at something and go, now that's where it works, well, that's harder. The book is a cohesive whole, it flows and doesn't jar or annoy. Everything follows in a logical and well written pattern and at the end there's nothing that displeased you except coming to the end. I had an ineffably good time with a smile on my face the entire time I read this book, and if you need more convincing, I'm not sure how I could convince you. But let me give it a good old Swanburne try!

One aspect of the book that would normally be a stumbling block for me was Miss Lumely's love of the Giddy-Yap, Rainbow! books. See, the thing is, I'm not a horse girl. I wasn't the girl at school longing for the weekend when they could go visit their pony or go ride somewhere for lessons, and yes, I did know a few. I think the fact that I was never the girl screaming for a pony for her birthday pleased my mother, who grew up on a farm surrounded by horse girls. Yet, unlike other authors who would play to this horse loving crowd, Wood doesn't write just for them, thus alienating her non-horse readers. Yes, the horse lovers might get something more out of The Mysterious Howling, but the book lovers who can't pass up a good series, and the animal lovers are also part of this book's audience. In fact, the Giddy-Yap, Rainbow! books reminded me of the Serendipity book series by Stephen Cosgrove and Robin James. When I was growing up these kitschy illustrated books about all kids of animals from cats to unicorns were all the rage. Sure there was a moral to the tale, but it was the love of animals and the illustrations that drew me to these books. So while I can't relate to the horse aspect here, I can relate to the animal aspect and in extension the animal book series aspect. I can relate to the love and care that animals show humans and vice-versa and how this love for all living creatures helped Miss Lumley forge a bond with her charges that other governesses wouldn't have been able to do.

Going further into the "animal" nature of the children, I think what makes this series stand out is the children's use of language. Everyone who has ever loved or cared for animals knows that they speak in their own language. Cats have a certain way of speaking, as do dogs, and as do the aforementioned horses. Therefore it makes sense that these three Incorrigibles being raised as they were would have their own language as well. Now this is a very fine line that Wood is walking. Like books that use vernacular there's the danger of being incomprehensible on one end of the spectrum, and on the other is the danger of being too cutesy. But the truth is, their language usage isn't precocious or twee, it's simply enchanting and addictive. From Lumawoo, their affectionate name for Miss Lumley, to various ahwoos punctuated with barks and growls, their language is adorable and you instantly want to adopt it as your own. Much like how little children sometimes can't quite say certain words or letters growing up and nicknames for people and things develop, so does the Incorrigible language form. Yet you aren't on the outside looking in like someone mildly revolted by a couples overly cutesy nicknames for each other, you're on the inside, instantly seeing how cute it all is. You're in on the joke, so that makes all the difference. Your perspective is key.

Where I took the greatest joy though was in all the literary allusions and references that add a level for the adult readers. There is no doubt that Miss Lumley is of the Jane Eyre type, a sensible governess in early Victorian times. Therefore there is all that Gothic goodness to sink your teeth into. But what I took most fun with was trying to pinpoint the year the book takes place. With all the modern references peaking in, you'd think the book might be slightly timeless, but you'd be wrong. I mentioned earlier 1850, and that wasn't arbitrary, in fact, to be more specific, let's say 1851. Leaving aside the fact that at the author talk I went to Maryrose Wood also said 1851. Because while in the audience I did a little hope of joy because I had already reached that conclusion by the allusions in the text. The two key pieces of evidence for the literary sleuths are the publication of Moby Dick, and the reference to the new fashion of "the cage" which Elizabeth Gaskell wrote a short story about. These two mentions place the book firmly in 1851. I love to think of kids years from now going back to these books, which have hopefully become favorites, and seeing all that they missed before. Not the cutesy Rainbow books, that are the type of books we love as children, but other, more adult things, like the tableaux of Longfellow's work. These are books that you can read on many levels and grow into, and that makes them so good.

But the literary allusions, while all well and good, bring me to the fact that, for me, it's the time period that makes The Mysterious Howling. Yes, because of the time period, the literary allusions add to it, but it's the time period itself that I love. I love the mid 19th century. Dickens, the Brontes, Gaskell, Eliot, all these amazing writers creating a sense of place. If I had to describe this book in one sentence it would be Victorian Addams Family with a Lemony Snicket vibe. And really, there couldn't be higher praise from me than this. I devoured the A Series of Unfortunate Event books, and as for the Addams Family, they are a way of life for me. Combining the two around a Gothic center, well, I felt like these books were written just for me. In fact the second I finished The Mysterious Howling I wanted to dive right into The Hidden Gallery. But I didn't. I didn't because I knew that I'd then have to read them all right away and there's nothing that hurts a review more than getting muddled in a series and not being able to do each individual book justice. Plus I had some Sherlock Holmes to read... But you can be confident that now that I have finally written this review that the next volume by Maryrose Wood will quickly be making it's way to the top of my to be read pile, because I literally can't wait.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Elizabeth Gaskell, Jane Eyre, Lemony Snicket, Maryrose Wood, Moby Dick, Raised by Wolves, Serendipity Books, The Addams Family, The Incorrigible Children of Ashton Place, The Mysterious Howling

Charles Addams might be an odd inclusion for literary New York, but I ask you this, have any of the authors profiled so far been able to so completely tell a story with just a line or two of text and an image? I should think not. Also, if we want to get technical, his work was complied into many books and he was given an honorary Edgar Award for his body of work, so there. Charles Addams was America's premiere cartoonist for all things dark and macabre. His unique sense of humor was able to tap into some deeply shared hive mind bleakness that made his work relatable to everyone. With his comics making the leap to television his name became famous overnight with The Addams Family. Because that kooky family literally couldn't be thought of as anything else then his own creations, hence his family.

Chas Addams published his first cartoon on January 13th, 1940. He would go on to draw more then 1,300 in his lifetime, many of which were published by The New Yorker. As I have previously mentioned, The New Yorker eventually moved from Hell's Kitchen to right across the street from The Algonquin, making it easier for many of the writers to slip out for "board meetings." Their new location was at 28 West 44th Street, between 5th and 6th Avenue.

The facade of the building was changed a little when new owners took over in the early nineties, but the trace of the offices that Addams would exclusively visit and was "often present on the premises" of remains with this lovely "Literary Landmark" plaque. Don't expect to find it hunting on google maps trying to make your imaginary visit as real as possible. Sadly you'll have to actually visit New York because this plaque is located in the building's vestibule. And if you look closely, a certain "Cartoonist" Charles Addams is mentioned on the plaque! Eat your heart out Dorothy Parker!

Because Chas's literature is a visual type of storytelling, he gets a few more pictures then the other authors profiled this month... and also because I seriously can't choose a favorite with his work.  Each and everyone one of his covers for The New Yorker could be framed and have pride of place on your wall. But what I think most interesting to point out here is that his work fit well with The New Yorker because there was something so specific about it that made you feel as if these comics could only happen in that thriving metropolis. A combination of the macabre and the urban that captured New York City's zeitgeist.

Addams also captured the fringes of society, the weirdness that is on the outskirts, right out of view, right at the transition from urban to suburban, he captured it with such deftness. If you look at these two covers, you'll realize that both are from 1961. Just think of Addams's popularity to do multiple covers in a single year!

I can not talk about Chas without talking about his cars, after all it was his passion and he had his fatal heart attack sitting in one in front of his apartment. He was able to capture this dichotomy from urban to suburban because he often travelled back and forth between his apartment in the city and his house in Sagaponack, New York. As he raced along the streets he was able to see this transition and then put it into images. That house in the Hamptons is now home to the Tee and Charles Addams Foundation, where his studio remains intact, and the Foundation carries on works in his name.

But if you don't feel like leaving the city, then it's time for another stop on our stalking dead authors tour... between 5th and 6th Avenue directly behind MOMA if you are looking up the island, was Chas's home in the city. Here is an excerpt from Linda Davis's Charles Addams: A Cartoonist's Life describing her visit there:

"The Addams dwelling at 25 West Fifty-fourth Street was directly behind the Museum of Modern Art, at the top of the building. It was reached by an ancient elevator, which rumbled up to the twelfth floor. From there, one climbed through a red-painted stairwell where a real mounted crossbow hovered. The Addams door was marked by a "big black number 13," and a knocker in the shape of a vampire.

The apartment consisted of the top two floors of the building. It stood under a leaky ten-thousand-gallon water tank which had flooded the bedroom at least once, destroying the drawings, photographs, papers, and other mementos Addams kept in boxes under the bed, as well as on closet shelves. The layout was equally eccentric. The bedroom, where Addams worked most of the time, was upstairs, accessible to the downstairs living room and kitchen only by outside service stairs.

Inside, one entered a little kingdom that fulfilled every fantasy one might have entertained about its inhabitant. On a pedestal in the corner of the bookcase stood a rare "Maximilian" suit of armor, which Addams had bought at a good price ("a bargain at $700") from the Litchfield Collection at Sotheby's Parke-Bernet gallery thirty years earlier. It was joined by a half suit, a North Italian Morion of "Spanish" form, circa 1570–80, and a collection of warrior helmets, perched on long stalks like decapitated heads: a late sixteenth-century German burgonet; a German trooper's lobster tail pot helmet, circa 1650; and the pointed fore-and-aft helmet from the sixteenth-century Italian suit, which was elaborately etched with game trophies, men-at-arms, monsters, birds. There were enough arms and armaments to defend the Addams fortress against the most persistent invader: wheel-lock guns; an Italian prod; two maces; three swords. Above a sofa bed, a spectacular array of medieval crossbows rose like birds in flight. "Don't worry, they've only fallen down once," Addams once told an overnight guest. The valuable pieces of medieval weaponry, which would ultimately fetch $220,113 at auction, mingled with books, framed cartoons and illustrations, photographs of classic cars, gruesome artifacts, and such inexpensive mementos as a mounted rubber bat.

Everywhere one looked in the apartment, something caught the eye. A rare papier-mâché and polychrome anatomical study figure, nineteenth century, with removable organs and body parts captioned in French, protected by a glass bell. ("It's not exactly another human heart beating in the house, but it's close enough," said Addams.) A set of engraved aquatint plates from an antique book on armor. A lamp in the shape of a miniature suit of armor, topped by a black shade. There were various snakes; biopsy scissors ("It reaches inside, and nips a little piece of flesh," explained Addams); and a shiny human thighbone — a Christmas present from one wife. There was a sewing basket fashioned from an armadillo, a gift from another.

In front of the couch stood a most unusual coffee table — "a drying out table," the man at the wonderfully named antiques shop, the Gettysburg Sutler, had called it. ("What was dried on it?" a reporter had asked. "Bodies," said Addams.) The table had holes in each corner for draining the fluids, a rusted adjustable headrest, and a mechanism for raising and lowering the neck. There was also, Addams genially pointed out, "a rather sinister stain in what would be the region of the kidneys." The table was covered with the usual decorative objects — a Baccarat goblet, a couple of plates, a miniature castle, a bowl of ceramic nesting snakes."

As a final stop, I think it's time to see some of these works in person. Sadly, because the two times I was in this New York institution I had not heard of this gallery I can not verify if it is still there, but Neil Gaiman and the Tee and Charles Addams Foundation back me up, so there's hope... At the Main Branch of The New York Public Library at West 40th Street located right on 5th Avenue there is a gallery devoted to Charles Addams. As Gaiman said "[t]o this day, one of my favourite places in the world is the tiny Charles Addams art gallery on the third floor of the New York Library (follow the signs to the Mens' Toilets and it's just before you get there)." So follow those directions from Neil and revel in the artwork of a man who was a literary great and was somehow able to capture what it meant to be human and a New Yorker, in the most wickedly delightful way possible.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: A Cartoonist's Life, Cars, Charles Addams, Dorothy Parker, Edgar Award, Linda Davis, Literary Landmark, MOMA, Neil Gaiman, New York Public Library, The Addams Family, The Algonquin, The Hamptons, The New Yorker

For years I dreamt of a bookclub. You may think that I exaggerate, you may think this is hyperbole. It is not. My search for one yielded nothing. At school when asked to do projects I would somehow make then about books or bookclubs. When people told me they where in bookclubs I would ask them when and where they meet, perhaps with a little too much fervor, seeing as they never told me, like Gomez Addams calling into Sally Jesse Raphael, pleading to know where the cults meet. Yes, obscure Addams Family reference there, but I'm sorry, that movie is awesome.

Last year my friend Daniella and I said "IT IS TIME!" There may have been a god like bolt of lightning, or there may have just been a facebook group formed... but the gist is this: I HAVE A BOOKCLUB! I love that I have a bookclub! February is about love. It's the time of year when couples are sickeningly sweet and make everyone else feel sad and lonely at this cold and bleak time. But really, there are so many things to love, and I love books and my bookclub. Therefore I thought that this February, I would ignore the coupledom of Valentine's and concentrate on the love aspect. So this month is an ode to my bookclub, The Last Word Bookclub, (yes we have a name,  a tagline, and soon a blog, I really got to get on that, we meet this weekend) with a selection of the books we read over the past year. Books we loved or loathed or changed our views on human ashes forever, yes I'm looking at you Cheryl Strayed. Stay and enjoy the height of ultracrepidarianism (points if you know what that word means!)

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Bookclub, Cheryl Strayed, Facebook, The Addams Family, The Last Word

The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie by Alan Bradley

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Agatha Christie, Alan Bradley, Bonepenny, Buckshaw, Daphne Du Maurier, Flavia, Penny Black, Philately, Reading Challenge, The Addams Family, The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie

The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie by Alan Bradley

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 1 comments  

Labels: Agatha Christie, Alan Bradley, Bonepenny, Buckshaw, Daphne Du Maurier, Flavia, Penny Black, Philately, Reading Challenge, The Addams Family, The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie

Grab a seat and a cup of eggnog as the BBC brings us some wonderfully cheery shows for the holidays. Also because sarcasim can't be typed... that was sarcastic, marginally. I'm really looking forward to this seasons viewings with David Tennant as Hamlet and the new adaptation of The Turn of the Screw... but happy these ain't. They are bordering more on the awkward family get-togethers where old family films are shown and then feuds are revived and all hell breaks loose. Hopefully the ladies of Cranford will add some balance to what would otherwise be a dramatically bleak holiday season. That said... I can't wait! To tide you over to Christmas Eve, here are the trailers for the BBC... they're hoping to light up your season... I think they don't get irony either... unless one of the Addams family was writing the press release... in which case, yes, cheery holiday fare with the Bard and evil incarnate! Also what exactly is Eddie Izzard in? Never mind, The Day of the Triffids it is... see happy! In that disaster film sort of way.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:12 AM 4 comments  

Labels: BBC, Christmas, Cranford, David Tennant, Eddie Izzard, Hamlet, Return to Cranford, The Addams Family, The Day of the Triffids, The Turn of the Screw

That's happy if you like the ass end of the prettiness of fall and the descent into winter bleakness accompanied by darkness at 5:30PM with dead leaves underfoot that are kind of slimy and try to trip you. But then again, those leave are probably just helping you get into training for ice...So what can we do to alleviate this sadness? Well, give books away that's how! If you recall I've been running two giveaways right now, what I refer to as the Ad(d)ams giveaways, one for the lovely Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in sweet boxed set form, the other for the biography of Charles Addams, the macabre creator of The Addams Family.

The 1st Giveaway:
As you may or may not recall, the question I asked you all was who was you favorite character in the Hitchhiker's books...Arthur was sadly beaten by a robot...a robot, who when he learns he one will not care, due to his chronically depressed nature...it's in his programming. Marvin won by a landslide. But let's give a shout out to GOD and the Existential Lift!

Now, drum-roll....The HHGTTG Winner of the boxed set is.....Sheere...who eerily enough was entry 43! That random.org...only one off from the answer to life, the universe and everything...creepy.

The 2nd Giveaway:
Well, the favorite Gomez Addams is John Astin...personally I think it's all about Raul...but there you go. You chose Patty Dukes husband, you know the one she cheated on and told her son, Sean "Samwise Gamgee" Astin that John was his father and there was all that drama. Who would have thought Patty Duke would be so messed up? That's just child actors for you...

Anyway, I digress, the winner of the book is....my goodreads, facebook and all around Doctor Who lover friend Michelle! Yeah Michelle, the random generator likes you today!

More Giveaways to come! If you didn't know, I still have one giveaway going till next Saturday night. You could be in with a chance to win The Nearly Departed signed and inscribed to you by the author, Micheal Norman! A rare opportunity that is. Plus I have will be having a giveaway of one of the books I recently reviewed...I was thinking of saving it till December, but then though, naw...you guys want it now!

Posted by Miss Eliza at 1:34 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Charles Addams, Contest, Douglas Adams, Giveaway, Michael Norman, The Addams Family, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The Nearly Departed