Monday, January 28, 2013

Elizabeth Gaskell's "The Life of Charlotte Bronte"


     Jane Eyre is one of my favorite books, and ever since reading it, I was curious to learn more about the novel's author. And Elizabeth Gaskell's The Life of Charlotte Bronte did not disappoint.

     At the time they were published, Bronte's novels sparked great praise as well as great criticism. They were considered too "coarse" to have been written by a woman, and when it was found out that a woman was, indeed, the mysterious "Currer Bell" who wrote Jane Eyre, Shirley, and later, Villette;  Bronte was attacked personally.

     Written by a friend of Bronte, The Life provides an interesting point of view. The book was written in part to defend the "coarseness" of Bronte's writing. Gaskell speaks directly to the reader, begging him/her to separate Charlotte Bronte the daughter and sister, from Currer Bell, the author.

     It is for this reason that Gaskell, at times, bends the truth to portray Bronte in the most socially acceptable way possible. But Bronte is not entirely shut out. The majority of the book is of letters written by Bronte.

     However, to get the most out of this book, it would be advisable to read a copy with good footnotes. I read the Barnes & Noble edition of the book with the notes and introduction written by Anne Taranto. The notes and introduction were almost as interesting as the book itself, however (to be nitpicky) there were a couple typos in the end-notes.

     While the historical accuracy of some of the content may be slightly skewed, this is in no way a fault. Through Gaskell's strong, ever-present voice, the reader gains a sense of Gaskell's character as well as Bronte's. Gaskell appeals to the reader's pity, presenting an emotional, rather than factual, account of Bronte's life.

     It is so crucial to get a copy of The Life with notes because the most interesting aspect of the book is what Gaskell has left out or skewed. The fact in and of itself that Gaskell had to write the book to defend Bronte's good name provides a fascinating insight into the way society viewed women writers during the 19th century.

     Overall, I give Elizabeth Gaskell's The Life of Charlotte Bronte a creamy beige rating. It is a long, dense biography, and is the type of book that may only be interesting to selective groups of people. Before reading it, I would suggest being somewhat familiar with Charlotte Bronte's work (and perhaps even that of Emily and Anne Bronte).

     But overall, The Life is most definitely a worthwhile read.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

The Great Shakespearean Challenge: Day 1


Armed with nothing but an eager mind and a bookmark...

     Today I will embark on a great literary journey. Armed with nothing but an eager mind and a bookmark, I will take on the great master himself.

     William Shakespeare.

     That's right, folks. I'm going to read every single Shakespeare play. One right after the other.

     No, not in one sitting. I'm not that crazy... and I don't have that kind of time. Unfortunately.

     I've been wanting to read all of Shakespeare's plays for quite awhile now, but the enormity of the task has led to its procrastination. Which play to read first? How should I space out the plays?

     I have finally realized that the only way I will read them all is if I just read the volume of The Complete Plays in its entirety. All at once. All 37 plays.

     The task is actually a little daunting. I mean, I've read Gone With the Wind and Anna Karenina; fat books don't scare me. But just look at this big guy:

1194 pages. No footnotes. No introductions or prefaces. 1194 pages of pure Shakespeare.

      Did I mention there aren't any footnotes?


     Yeah. That's why I was able to buy this giant hardcover for under ten dollars. Deals like that come at a price.

     But don't get me wrong, I really am looking forward to this adventure. I've already read Romeo and Juliet, A Midsummer Night's Dream, and Othello. But I read these plays for school, and well, it would be nice to just enjoy Shakespeare without worrying about what I'm going to have to write my next essay on.

     Not only that, but when your a freshman, reading Romeo and Juliet in a room full of immature, hormonal fourteen-year-olds (yourself included), the finer nuances of Shakespeare's writing gets lost in the class's amusement with lines such as "my naked weapon is out."

     And while the prospect of reading all these plays without footnotes is somewhat terrifying, I think the experience will do more good than harm. (For my intelligence, that is, not necessarily my sanity) And anyway, if things really start to get murky, I can always turn to my good friend Spark Notes.

     In my edition of The Complete Plays, the plays are arranged in chronological order from first play written to the last play Shakespeare ever wrote. So as I read, I will be following Shakespeare's journey, watching as the great literary genius grows and changes as a writer.

     The first play I will be reading is King Henry the Sixth. Actually, technically speaking, I will be starting Part One of King Henry the Sixth. Yup. It's a three part play. (Or is it three plays? I'm not too sure...)

     Shakespeare isn't going to start me off easy, but I think I'm up for the challenge.
   

    

Thursday, January 17, 2013

Taylor Swift's "22"

     When I first heard Taylor Swift's new album, Red, I was slightly disappointed. I mean, I liked the songs. They were catchy and fun to sing along with, and isn't that why we all love Taylor so much? But there was something missing. What exactly was missing I hadn't quite figured out.

     Listening to some of Taylor's older songs, I finally realized what it was that Red didn't have. It was that teenage insecurity, that young, inexperienced vulnerable-ness that makes her so beloved to adolescent girls.

     I think it is safe to assume that most teenage girls can relate to Taylor Swift's "You Belong With Me." Who hasn't been the girl in the bleachers, losing the guy to the cheerleader who wears short skirts and high heels?

     But who can relate to a girl who sings about her break up with Jake Gyllenhaal? Or who sings about how hard it is being famous?

     Taylor Swift is no longer the girl in the bleachers. With a long list of celebrity ex-boyfriends and a very large bank account, not even your stereotypical cheerleader can relate to Taylor.

     Now 23 years old, Taylor Swift is beginning to grow out of her teenage angst. The songs on Red are powerful and (by Taylor Swift standards) edgier. But, if you give the lyrics a closer listen, if you read between the lines, it becomes evident that Taylor hasn't completely lost her vulnerability and naivety.

     Take, for instance, her song "22."

     When I first heard "22," I wasn't a huge fan. It sounded like a G-rated version of Katy Perry's "Last Friday Night." To be brief, the song was annoying.

     I kept listening to it anyway. (It's a fun tune to sing along with) And after hearing it for about the millionth time, I realized that maybe, just maybe, there was a little more depth to the song than I previously thought.

     Think I'm crazy? Let's have a look at the first few lines:

     It feels like a perfect night
     to dress up like hipsters
     and make fun of our exes

     It feels like a perfect night
     for breakfast at midnight
    to fall in love with strangers

     As mentioned before, Taylor Swift is 23 years old, though the song was most likely written when she was 22. But the singer of this song most certainly does not sound like 22-year-old. Rather, she sounds like a 12-year-old singing about what it must be like to be 22 years old. The idea of "dressing up" and eating "breakfast at midnight" is all very childish.

     Furthermore, the speaker's age is, in fact, somewhat ambiguous. We know Taylor Swift is literally 22 years old, but the song lyrics do not explicitly say "I am 22," but rather, "I'm feeling 22," or "keep dancing like we're 22." It is this careful selection of words that reveals the true meaning of the song.

     The fact that Taylor says she feels 22 on this particular night implies that, on a regular basis, she does not in fact feel "22." But what does it mean to "feel 22?"

     This is where the song's message becomes paradoxical.

     Being 22 is not fun. It's not easy. It's not all about dancing all night and falling in love with strangers. Let's consider these lines:

     Tonight's the night that we forget about the deadlines

     And then later,

     Tonight's the night that we forget about the heartbreaks

     Being 22 is full of "deadlines" and "heartbreaks." It's the beginning of adulthood. To steal Taylor's words, it's "miserable and magical."


     So what does Taylor do to escape the responsibility and miserableness of being 22? She creates this childish, magical concept of 22, this image of dancing all night and eating breakfast at midnight.

     We get the impression that Taylor is playing dress-up. But instead of dressing up like a hipster, as mentioned in the first line of the song, Taylor is dressing as a 22-year-old. She might as well be a 6-year-old girl wearing a princess costume saying, "Oh-oh, I don't know about you, but I'm feeling like Cinderella!"

     In this song, being "22" doesn't mean literally mean being 22 years old. Literally being 22 years old means responsibility. It means heartbreak and deadlines. To Taylor, being "22" means being carefree and childish. The song sounds like something a twelve-year-old wrote because Taylor misses the days of being young and having little responsibility.

     Taylor is not ready to grow up. She is not ready to face the heartbreaks and deadlines. That teenage insecurity that so defined many of her older songs is still apparent in "22." The most prevalent example is the voice over, "Who's Taylor Swift, anyway? Ew," which plays after the line, "this place is too crowded, too many cool kids."

     The childish insecurity of being left out among "cool kids" reflects the idea that Taylor has not yet grown up. She is still naive and inexperienced, still troubled by what others think of her.

     Now, you may be thinking that this is all far-fetched. Did Taylor really think about all of this as she was writing her song?

     There is no way for knowing for sure. Although I keep calling her by her first name, Taylor and I are not best friends. I have no idea what was running through her mind when she wrote "22." But even if this deeper meaning is completely accidental, does it make the song any less meaningful?

     If anything, it adds to the song's meaning. Here Taylor is, trying to write a grown-up song about partying and being an adult. But what does she sound like? Anything but an adult!

     Taylor Swift has a great voice, but nothing special. Her guitar-playing ability is nothing extraordinary. Yet she has record sales and millions of crazy fans. Why? Because the honesty of her lyrics, the childishness, the inexperience, make her appealing to adolescents and adults alike.

     Even when Taylor is at her most serious, even when she is trying to sound confident and experienced, she can't help but to give off innocent vibes. Her fearlessness of pouring her heart out into her music as well as the whimsy of her songs is what makes her so beloved.

     "22" is only one example of Taylor's complexity. It is a nuanced complexity, an overlooked complexity. But it is complexity that should not be ignored. At heart, Taylor is still (to quote one of her older songs) "just a girl, just trying to find a place in this world."

     And while her critics may dismiss her lyrics as overly sentimental or superficial, I can say with ninety-percent certainty that those sentimental, superficial lyrics reflect the thoughts and feelings of all those girls out there who are also trying to find a place in this world. For them, Taylor Swift is a kindred spirit. Her songs are a reassurance. These relatable qualities were a bit lost in Red, but I think, if we take a closer look, it is obvious that Taylor we all know and love is still there, hiding between the lines of each song.

     Taylor is getting older, but she hasn't quite grown up yet. And I already can't wait to see what her next album brings.








    

Sunday, January 13, 2013

Why Both "Hipsters" and "The Mainstream" are Irrelevant

     Hipsters.
Like my hipster glasses? (Okay, fine, I admit. They're 3-D glasses I pilfered from the movie theater. But close enough, right?)


     I just don't get them.

     What is a hipster, anyway?

     After spending about an hour Googling "definition of hipster" and reading entry after entry on Urban Dictionary, the answer still proves inconclusive. This was mainly because the relatively more reliable dictionary cites (Dictionary.com and Merriam-Webster.com) gave me vague, and sometimes outdated, definitions.

     So I was forced to resort to urbandictionary.com, which only reaffirmed the hazy idea of hipsters that I learned from the media and suburban culture. That is, to be brief, individuals who reject mainstream culture, wear skinny jeans and vintage clothes, drink copious amounts of coffee and tea and love all things "indie."

     The paradox of hipsters is that it is now seen as "cool" to be a hipster, thus making mainstream to be a hipster; a conundrum which challenges the very definition of hipsters. This is why, if you ever meet a true hipster, s/he will vehemently argue that no, s/he is certainly not a hipster!

     The specific aspect of hipsterdom that I will hone in on in this post is that hipsters reject anything mainstream. I am concentrating on this certain aspect because it is this characteristic that wannabe-hipsters latch onto. By wannabe-hipsters I mean people who will happily admit "Yeah! I'm a hipster!" A declaration which, as we know, reveals that they are not true hipsters.

     These pseudo-hipsters (I see them all the time walking the halls of my suburban high school), are consciously trying to be a hipster. This is why they will readily tell you that they are a hipster. And this is fine I guess. I have no problem with hipsters. Sure, mainstream music, books, clothes, etc. can be annoying. I can understand the disillusionment.

     But what happened to open-mindedness?

    What I mean by that is, why do we like things because they are not something else? So you like the band Arcade Fire because they're not mainstream, but isn't that just as bad as liking One Direction because they are mainstream?

     What happened to liking something just because, oh, I don't know...you just like it?

     This is not to say that either hipsters or mainstream-loving-popculture-fanatics don't like the music they listen to or the clothes they wear; in fact I'm sure a vast majority of them do. But that doesn't mean these two groups should hate on each other.

     A lot of the definitions I read on urbandictionary.com were really just insults aimed at hipsters, accusing hipsters of being snobby in their choice of music and books and clothing, among other things. Quite a few definitions asserted that hipsters thought themselves better than everyone else because of their superior taste.

     But what is taste, really?

     Fumbling for a definition? That is because taste differs from one person to another. I remember having a discussion about music with one of my classmates, a little less than a year ago. I mentioned to him that I mainly listen to singer-songwriters.

     "So you listen to Taylor Swift, don't you?" he said, his tone making it clear that he was definitely not Taylor's number one fan.

     "Yeah, I like Taylor Swift. I like that her songs are from the heart, no matter how superficial they may seem."

     "But she plays the same chords every single song! She's an awful guitar player!"

     And there you have it, folks. Taste is completely opinion-based. In the case of music, it's all about what you value or look for in a song or artist. My classmate would most likely argue that people who have good taste in music listen to talented musicians who can masterfully wield a guitar. Being practically tone deaf and knowing very little about guitars, I concentrate on a song's lyrics.

     What I'm trying to say is that we need to respect other people's "taste." And in order to respect others, we need to understand them. The best way to understand why someone loves a certain band is to understand what they value in music.

     Back to the whole "open-mindedness" thing.

     As soon as we learn to respect other people's "taste," we must reevaluate why we like the songs we like. Or, perhaps, more importantly, why we don't like certain music. We pigeon hole ourselves as being "mainstream" or "hipster," but reality isn't quite so black and white.

     Is it so wrong for there to be a girl who loves to jam out to Carly Rae Jepsen's "Call Me Maybe," but reads Kurt Vonnegut and Ayn Rand before bed? Or what about the guy in the colored skinny jeans and shaggy hair who loves The Hunger Games?

     Sure. There might be some people who are pure hipsters through and through, who for very thoughtful reasons, may only like non-mainstream things, and that's perfectly fine. On the same note, there might be individuals, who for very good reasons, like only mainstream things.

     But for the majority of us, we're a mix. If we would just overcome the stereotypes we try to define ourselves with, we may find that books or music that we previously thought were stupid are actually kind of awesome.

     It's like the kid who convinces himself he hates The Catcher in the Rye before reading it just because it's a book he has to read for school. Actually, buddy, you might like it. And it's okay if you like it. So what if people call you a nerd?

     You know how little kids always protest that they never want to eat Brussels sprouts even though they've never tried them before? They've just heard through media or their friends (or in my case, ironically, my mother), that they taste awful, so they don't want to try them. They hate Brussels sprouts. But how do you hate something you've never tried?

     Dear reader, I entreat you to eat your Brussels sprouts. Read a book that's mainstream. Listen to hipster music. Try something new and crazy. Who knows? You may even find yourself enjoying your Brussels sprouts.
     

     

    
    

Thursday, January 10, 2013

Kacey Musgrave's "Merry Go 'Round"



     It is very rare in country music, especially what is commonly called “new country” that you find a song that criticizes Southern or small-town life.

New country singers (examples would be Kenny Chesney, Carrie Underwood, Taylor Swift, Jason Aldean, etc.)  croon about loving life in the boondocks, motor boating on the pontoon, and speeding down dirt roads in a beat-up truck. Their tunes are energetic, happy-go-lucky, and always remind me of summertime. And as for the sad songs, they are more often than not about disillusioned love. But very rarely do the songs reflect negatively upon country life.

This is why Kacey Musgraves’s single, “Merry Go ‘Round,” caught my attention the first time I heard it on the radio.

Musgraves shows us that small town life isn’t always the easygoing lifestyle that her fellow country singers portray. Take for instance the opening lines of the song:

“If you ain’t got two kids by twenty-one
you’re probably going a die alone,
at least that’ s what tradition’s told you.”

The song continues on in this tone, questioning this “tradition” that dominates the small town (or perhaps towns?) that Musgraves sings of.  This tradition perpetuates on the symbolic “broken merry go ‘round,” and its riders “just like dust…settle in this town.”
               
        “Merry Go ‘Round” is interesting and well-written. Aside from the symbols of the merry go round and dust, there is, most notably, the clever wordplay of “merry,” marry,” and “Mary,” as well as the twisted nursery rhyme allusions in the last few lines of the song.
               
        Perhaps Musgraves’s “Merry Go ‘Round” could be compared to Carrie Underwood’s hit, “Blown Away”. The latter song tells the story of a girl who makes no effort to save her alcoholic father when a tornado comes sweeping toward their Oklahoma town. Like Musgraves does in “Merry Go ‘Round,” Underwood sings of dysfunctional families and an unhappy environment that the song’s protagonist is powerless to.
              
        But even then, the songs have distinct differences. “Blown Away” has such a dark, strong tone that the power behind the song almost overshadows the emotion. Don’t get me wrong, the song is moving, but something about it just doesn’t feel genuine.

“Merry Go ‘Round” is heartbreaking because of its domesticity. Because of Musgraves’s soft-spoken voice. She manages to sound both cynical and defeated. The song is heartbreaking because it feels real. Musgraves is honest with us, and it is obvious that this song is, to some extent, personal. You can hear the emotion in Musgraves’s voice.

I could go on for quite a while about this song, but you really just need to listen to it. Just once. Let Kacey Musgraves speak for herself. I will warn you though, the song is almost maddeningly catchy. I heard about twenty seconds of it on the radio once, and I had the chorus running through my head the rest of the day.

As much as I love happy-go-lucky country hits such as Little Big Town’s “Pontoon” and Luke Bryan’s “Drunk on You,” “Merry Go ‘Round” was a refreshing change.  While the song’s melancholy message may polarize some country fans, Kacey Musgraves is not someone who should be underestimated. She is certainly someone whose music I will be keeping an eye on, and I cannot wait until she releases a full CD. It is safe to say that when that time comes, there will be a review of that CD on this blog.

Whether that review is positive or negative, whether her Musgraves’s next songs live up to the originality of “Merry Go ‘Round,” remains to be seen.

 Kacey Musgraves’s single, "Merry Go ‘Round"is a light orange. Unexpected and attention-grabbing, but understated in its lightness.

Cold Mountain: One of my Favorite Books. Ever.

     I can think of no other way of beginning this post than by saying that I absolutely love Charles Frazier’s Cold Mountain. It’s the sort of book that feels so real that you sort of fall into it, and when you put it down and return to reality, it’s takes a while to adjust to the world outside of the book’s cover. I could go on for hours about why I found Cold Mountain so captivating, but I will try to limit myself, as I do not want to bore you or ruin the novel for you.
Here’s a quick rundown of the book’s premise:

     It’s the tail end of the Civil War and Inman, a wounded Confederate soldier, is disillusioned and homesick. Within the first chapter or so, Inman deserts the army and embarks on a perilous journey back to his home in Cold Mountain and to the love of his life, Ada Monroe. The novel is told in third person point of view, and the narrator switches off between Inman and Ada each chapter.

     Doesn’t sound like anything spectacular? Here are three good reasons why I think everyone should read this book:
1.       Characters
              While the premise may sound like a 19th century Nicholas Sparks novel, the striking realism of the characters saves the novel. Inman and Ada’s romance is anything but oversentimental. It is understated, genuine, and at times, awkward. More importantly, they do not dwell on their lovesickness; it is something that is always with them, but never something that never overshadows their struggle to survive. Frazier allows the reader to delve into both Inman and Ada’s psyches, and by the time the book comes to a close, the reader feels as if he or she has personally known each and every character.
2.       Historical Accuracy
While reading Cold Mountain, I often had to check the copyright date. Though published in 1997, I could have easily been convinced that it was published in 1870. Granted, I’m no historian, but everything just feels right. Antiquated words are used. The food the characters eat, the way the food is made, the weapons they use, all are described in such detail that it seems that the book had to have been written by one of the characters themselves. It is evident that even if the historical accuracy isn’t quite as perfect as I think it is, Charles Frazier put a great deal of time and effort into recreating this world. He managed to give a convincing account of a time period alien to us without overloading the book with historical facts and trivial trivia. Everything just seems so natural.
3.         Setting
Perhaps the most striking aspect of Cold Mountain is the sweeping landscapes. I think it is truly brilliant the way Frazier juxtaposes the gritty, harsh, and at times gruesome, realities of a nation torn by war with a picturesque, almost postcard-like landscape. Nature and nature cycles play a key role, both symbolically and literally, in the plight of both Inman and Ada. Nature keeps not only the characters grounded, but the reader as well.
     Okay, so I kind of lied. There are four reasons. The fourth reason is, very simply, writing ability. Cold Mountain is just a really well-written book. Frazier put a lot of thought into this book, and in my opinion, it paid off. I have included a link to an interesting article I found on the similarities between Cold Mountain and Homer’s The Odyssey. Here it is.
I give Charles Frazier's Cold Mountaing a dark blue rating with gold accents. Dark blue for it's depth and sweeping majesty. Gold for its rich literary value and emotional impact.

Hi.

     Bienvenue.

     Thank you for taking the time to read my blog. My name is Amelia. I love to read, write, and sing obnoxiously loud. As a proud English nerd (as the title of my blog may imply), one of my favorite past times is analyzing the deeper meaning of my favorite song lyrics. I spend more money on books than food. And writing is a physical need, perhaps even surpassing my need to breathe.

     But enough about me.

     Through this blog, I hope to share my love of the written word by offering up my humble opinion of books, music, movies, and TV shows. Books, music, movies, and even TV shows are, in my opinion forms of art. They may not always be good art, but they are art nonetheless. The art we value says a lot about our society, which is why posts on this blog will not just be about what I think of certain books or movies, but what I think of society, and society's relationship to art.

     Books will be rated in colors. What will this scale be, you ask? Don't worry, I'll figure it out as I go.

     Happy reading!