vagansmom

OK, we're a few days from August. Hopefully many of us have had more time for reading. What's on your nightstand this summer? What have you finished reading this summer? I've finished reading: The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger (thanks to Treefrog's recommendation) Slow Motion and Family History - both of which were written by Dani Shapiro, an author I've gotten to know a bit this year. The first is her autobiography. The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brien, about soldiers in Vietnam She's Come Undone by Wally Lamb. I'd read his other novel awhile back but never this one. Couldn't Keep It to Myself: Testimonies From Our Imprisoned Sisters - compiled by Wally Lamb. This one's very timely because there's been a great hue and cry over the fact that one of the authors received a national writing award for a story in this volume. Jayber Crow by Wendell Berry Eats, Shoots & Leaves by Lynne Truss and I'm in the middle of The Jane Austen Book Club by Karen Joy Fowler. I couldn't wait to get my hands on this book but made a deal with myself that I'd finish everything else ahead of it on my list. On my nightstand: The Big House by George Howe Colt The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini Interpreter of Maladies by Jhumpa Lahiri Lost in Place by Mark Salzman Larry's Party by Carol Shields Refuge: An Unnatural History of Family & Place by Terry Tempest Williams What about you folks?

I'm re-posting the following excerpt someone posted as a question on a thread over on the Ballet Moms & Dads thread. It's a good question and will, I hope, reach a wider variety of knowledgeable professionals here. It would be great to hear the insights and experiences of you ballet folks.

Liebs, My daughter just finished that Eco book this past spring and loved it. Sounds like your kiddo and mine have similar tastes in books. My own vote, Jacqueline, is probably for TOTC as well although if she were just a tad older, I'd likely recommend "Good King Harry" by Denise Giardina. It's about King Henry V. It's pretty graphic, in warfare descriptions and sexuality so I'm not so sure about a 15 year old reading it. My kiddo's 19 and just finished the book last week. So far everyone I know who's ever read it (I've given it to them all) has loved GKH. It's my 24 year old son's favorite book, one of my favorite's as well as my husband's, and now that daughter and her boyfriend have both read it, they feel the same way. My book club group also felt the same way. This book is a great one for launching discussions about ethics, with many parallels to today's present world. It's also a darn good love story (had my gruff son with tears in his eyes). Methinks "Les Miserable" is miserable to wade through. I did it once and have to say that I like the movie very much! Another great historical novel that's also fairly short is "Darkness at Noon" by Arthur Koestler. I read it in high school and it set me off on a quest to read all the great Russian writers. Come to think of it, "Dr. Zhivago" by Pasternak is yet another one that's worth the read by a high school kid. As is so often the case, the book is so much more multi-faceted than the film.

Sandik, that's about what I think too. It IS an indication of something positive: more written communication. I like what Ed had to say in his post: .

Treefrog, my daughter just finished this novel and turned it over to me. She adored it and had finished all 500+ pages in two days. Occasionally I would hear little squeals of delight and anticipation emanating from her. I'm about 60 pages into it and, aside from still being at the stage of desperately trying to keep it all straight in my mind, am looking forward to each new bit of info that unfolds about Henry and Clare's relationship. Thanks for the recommendation.

Has anyone read this book? It is subtitled "The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation" and is (or recently was) the British #1 bestseller. I've just started it. It is informative, witty, and cranky all rolled up into one. The stickler in me is feeling well nourished right now.

The great Russian novels: Tolstoy's War and Peace and [/i]Anna Karenina,Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov, Pasternak's Doctor Zhivago. They are all works of fiction set in Russia at important periods in history. I've never found anything better.

I will have to check my video. It may be the one that Dale mentions but I thought that all, or perhaps most,of Etudes is on it. It features Eleanor D'Antuono in the turning variation if I recall correctly.

Check out St. John's College Great Books program list. It's got a list of 100 western classic through the ages. Some are philosophy books, others are novels. There are other groups that put together lists like this, but St. John's program (originally developed at Univ. of Chicago) is the one all the others have imitated. My own personal list: Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice or Emma. Tolstoy: War & Peace. I read it once a decade. Make sure yours is unabridged. Willa Cather: Death Comes to the Archbishop, Song of the Lark or My Antonia Charles Dickens: A Tale of Two Cities Toni Morrison: Song of Solomon or Beloved Arthur Koestler: Darkness at Noon Flannery O'Connor: A Good Man is Hard to Find John Steinback: Grapes of Wrath

Today's New York Times reviews Karen Joy Fowler's The Jane Austen Book Club. Read the review here This is from the article and I sure want to read this book.

I'm about a third of the way through "The Amateur Marriage". I got bogged down in it about a month ago however. I think it was my fault; I was going through a very scattered, inattentive period. I couldn't get into the novel whatsoever. It just didn't grab me but after reading what you've written, I'm willing to give it another try. It's the only Ann Tyler novel I've ever attempted to read.

Oooh, Treefrog, that book sounds really intriguing. When was it written?

Tutumaker, do you have an opinion about her "magician friend"? Do you think of him as a hero or a coward? What did you think of his conscious decision to eliminate all contact with her (as he did with every friend who managed to leave) once she left Iran? Do you think that was his way of protecting himself from the pain of his still being there? Do you find much of his behavior as serving to insulate himself? Your sentence: I thought, actually, that Nafisi proved her point that Austen's novels AREN'T frivolous at all, but actually very relevant to female readers in the Islamic Republic. She stated, in fact, that Austen was considered dangerous to a society such as Iran's, because, in Austen's novels, Nafisi also alludes to all those unsympathetic characters that people Austen's novels. Very easy to picture certain of her more reactionary male acquaintances in that description. And then elsewhere, Nafisi tells us that her "girls", the young women whom she taught, nicknamed a male classmate from their university days "Mr.Collins" (a pompous clergyman in Pride and Prejudice) because of his overall rigidity and then his startling proposal of marriage to one of the young women in her class. And also somewhere in the book, Nafisi tells us that her young female students gave themselves the nickname the "Dear Jane Society". Please, please tell me more! Although I can guess, she never fully explained why. But obviously her students felt a strong affinity to Jane Austen. How I would love to know more! :yes:

Tutumaker, I was hoping you'd reply to this thread. I too thought she was carefully protecting her marital privacy and of course I respect that. I wonder what he is doing professionally now? In Iran, he apparently was a very well-respected architect who received the most prestigious and creative projects. One can only imagine how hard it must've been for him to leave all of that. That was something I really loved about this book. It gave us an idea of how the disparity between the lives of men and women created such terrible rifts in even the best of marriages. But I have so many questions for Nafisi's husband! Did you also think that the form of this book lost its way by the final two sections (James and Austen)? Because I am such a Jane Austen fan, I so looked forward to the Austen section. I really wanted to read all the literary references and was disappointed that they were few and far between. After so much detail on Nabokov, I expected the same treatment of the other authors.

Yes, Henry James, and yes, you definitely will get much out of it even if all you've done is seen the movies. In fact, you don't have to have read any of the books she comments on in order to enjoy her book. The only chapter that's heavily-laden with critical commentary is the first one on Lolita and even then, with my reading having been ages ago and not very enlightened, I still found much to ponder. I reread my post and think it may sound harsher than I'd intended. I LOVED this book.

I am starting a thread on this book in the hopes that it'll encourage others to read it and comment. An intriguing book: it is partly literary criticism, especially of Nabokov's writings and partly autobiography. Azar Nafisi, the author, was a professor in Iran from the beginning of the Islamic Revolution there until 1996. For two years, she secretly taught Western literature in her own home to a group of hand-picked young women. The book is separated into four long sections plus a brief epilogue. The sections are titled Lolita, Gatsby, James, Austen. I found the very first section, on Lolita, to be the hardest since I'd (sort of) read Lolita when I was very young and, reading on my own as a naive 17year old, really didn't understand the book. Now I have to go back and give it the read it deserves. This first section of Nafisi's book is written more as a critique of Nabokov's writings than anything else. I remember wishing there'd be less on that and more about the lives of the Iranian women reading the books. By the last section - the one entitled Austen, the opposite held true. While I was still interested in the lives of the women Nafisi had introduced us to, I wanted more literary criticism about Austen's books and most especially, I wanted to hear from the women reading them. What did they think of Austen's characters? Of the conflicts? There was plenty of discussion about Humboldt (Lolita, within the pages of this book but by the time the author got to the section about Austen, it was slim pickings. And that disappointed me. I guess it was to be expected because Nafisi had earlier written a book, a literary critique, of Nabokov so she probably mined that research to create her chapter on Lolita. The next chapter, Gatsby was still quite satisfying because, not only are we treated to the thoughts and feelings of the women reading The Great Gatsby (and there is a wonderful section where the book itself is put on trial within Nafisi's classroom,iwth Nafisi herself acting as the book), but we also really begin to know some of the people in Nafisi's life. But that too is necessarily problematic. Nafisi had to protect their physical safety so she, of course, changed much about these real-life characterizations. That was fine but I felt often, through this book, that there was so much she left unsaid, not just about individual people, but about her own relationship with Iran. I had so many questions about how she managed her own life all during those nearly two decades but I think, again, that, in order to protect individuals still living in Iran, she had to be very deliberately careful in what she said and what she left out. I both respect it and am frustrated by it. And I really was frustrated by how her book didn't seem to carry its theme all the way through to the end. The first two chapters did so quite nicely, not so the last two sections. By the time she got to James and, especially, Austen, I felt as though she were straining to find instances where she could compare and critique. It was both too studied and too thin. So that was a disappointment. My saying all of this makes it sound as though I didn't like Reading Lolita in Tehran but nothing could be further from the truth. I was fascinated by it; it inhabited my dreams as well as my awake time. I was greedy for more of what she dangled in front of us. She writes well, her topic is compellingly complex; I wished she'd been able to say more.

I am in the midst of Reading Lolita in Tehran and will heartily second Tutumaker's recommendation to read this book. Besides making me want to go back and read much of my high school literature, this book also carries in its pages a very poignant story of women's lives in Iran these days. I am two thirds of the way through Women of the Silk. I have mixed feelings about this book. Basically I think that the author shows promise as a writer but isn't quite there. I almost feel as though she needed to make the book at least twice as long as it is. Too much is glossed over ala TV docudrama style. Much is mentioned of the special relationship between two of the main characters in the first third of the book but little of it is depicted. It's a shame, I think, because the author, Gail Tsukiyama, writes in a very pleasing style and the subject, the women who lived and worked together at the silk trade in the early 1900's in China, is such an intriguing one. I'm very frustrated, though, by what's left unwritten. It isn't a matter of being deliberately teased; it's almost as if the author were given a word limit and didn't do a good job editing to make the story tighter. Next week I begin Carol Shields' The Republic of Love and also Swann. I hope I love them as much as her other books.

Well, truthfully, I think that "sashay" came about when some square dance caller with poor phonemic awareness, botched the word "chasser". Kind of like the reason why American versions of Irish jigs and reels are missing a couple notes: When the Scots-Irish emigrants came over on the boat, they leaned too far over the rails of the ship and a couple notes fell into the ocean.

I think that we have to look beyond the names of the individuals running the event. I read through that list and yes, there are some well-known names in the ballet world listed there. But they need jobs just like anyone else does and I don't blame them in the least for signing on. But does that make this competition good for ballet? Or good for our kids?

According to here What word meaning "to walk ostentatiously" was coined by mispronouncing French? The word sashay was coined from the French chassèc); it means "to walk or move ostentatiously, casually, or diagonally."

I agree with Oberon: I too would've been happier had they eliminated Franco's character in favor of real-life loves of the ballet dancers. It would've been very interested to see who they are, what walks of life they hail from, etc. But then again, I think all I wanted was a documentary anyhow. :shrug: Anything that took away from the REAL story of Ithe Joffrey was just filler time to my mind.

I too adored Reichlen as Lilac Fairy. In fact, she was the high point for me at Sat.'s matineee performance. Her calmness and clean lines reminded me of Michele Wiles. On the whole, though, I was a bit disappointed in the Fairies in the first Act. I don't have my program with me right now but none of them made me sit up and take notice. I was very distracted by their inelegant upper bodies. Not true of Reichlen who was lovely in every way, with a graceful upper carriage as well as those gorgeous long legs. De Luz was Bluebird and a real treat to watch although, in his variation, the brise voules (spelling?) looked to be a little odd. Was the bending of his knee caused by anticipating his landings? It seemed to pop him out of position too soon every time. Other than that, he was flashy-exciting.

Obbligato, I remember having the same reaction at the end of Part 1. I too felt a little discouraged and not sure I wanted to begin a new section. But Part 2 was ultimately the section I loved the most! And then I underwent a bit of a mourning process yet again, entering Part 3. But by then I understood what the author was doing with the story and so I was more patient and curious about how she would tie it all together.

Carbro, that's a good idea - reading the END of newspaper reviews first. I'd never thought of it (now where's an emoticon that says "duh!"?) but I am going to employ that strategy from now on. BW, it would be a very small book club indeed. The truth is that nobody but you and Treefrog would be so goodnatured about putting up with my clunkers!

Oberon, I'm always fascinated when I hear that people read the last sentence (or paragraph or page) of a book as part of deciding whether or not to read it. The very first time someone told me that, I thought she was unusual in that habit but I've since realized that many - this would make a good poll - people use the final page as part of their criteria. It would completely destroy my interest in reading it! I like surprises and if I already know what happens, or how a book ends, then I feel cheated and don't want to bother. But I think I may be in the minority on this. I teach 4th and 5th grade literature classes and I always ask the kids at the beginning of the year how they choose what book to read. To a person, they say they read at least part of the final page. Each week I glance at the NY Times Book Review. It's been awhile since I've actually read that section carefully but I do always give it a cursory read. Often that's where I get interested in a book. Our school staff is a very literary bunch of folks and I value the recommendations that come from any member of that group. I also value the recommendations made within the threads on this forum. And I make choices at the bookstore. I like to browse for a morning or afternoon reading a chapter or two before deciding to buy a book. Three Junes was discovered that way. If I've enjoyed one book by a particular author, I will always seek out more. I tend to devour books author by author. Like you, there are many classics I haven't touched. My husband attended St. John's College, home to the Great Books Program, so we have a fine collection of books. I keep saying that someday I'll systematically read through them but that hasn't happened. Also like you, I have devoured and reread many an obscure book. Other criteria: Size and clarity of font! That's a biggie in my middle-age.