Review: The 5th Wave by Rick Yancey

The story follows a couple narratives, the main one being Cassie, a 16 (ish, I think) year old girl. Cassie lives a normal life with her mum, dad and baby brother Sammy. She is invisible to the guy she has a crush on, worries about her hair and spends most of her time texting her best friend. Basically your standard teenager. However, her whole life gets flipped upside-down when the Mothership is seen orbiting Earth. Then the First Wave arrives - and there's no going back. We enter the story shortly after the Fourth Wave has ended. Cassie is camping in the woods, alone save for a teddy bear and a being in the dark.

When I first started reading this book I adored it. It was fast paced, exciting, you learn so much in such a short period of time and I raced through the first 60-100 pages. Cassie was a very real, down to earth character. Yancey does an excellent job of capturing the growth from girl to woman that Cassie is forced to prematurely experience (one line of the book mentions how she is worried that her supply of tampons will run out - which I loved as writers (especially male writers) tend to miss out).

I was surprised and a bit disappointed at first when the narrator changed, as it seemed a shame to move away from Cassie as she was becoming a fully fledged character. The other characters we follow aren't as well developed as Cassie initially, but they are engaging enough to sustain the plot, and I was looking forward to the point when the narratives collided.

However, I haven't only got praise for this book. One aspect of it very nearly put me off finishing it, mostly because I thought this book was better than the trope it used.

There will be sort of spoilers from this point on (concerning Cassie and Evan - both of whom the blurb of the book introduces), so read on at your peril if spoilers bother you.

-------- SPOILER WARNING ---------------------------------------------------------------

When Cassie first meets Evan, I'm ok with that. I understand that the author wanted to create a bit of romantic tension for his leading lady, and having her lusting after a guy who she's literally said a sentence to isn't the most engaging plot. When Evan kisses Cassie, that's when I get angry.

This kissing scene is described as a deeply romantic, sensual act. However, Evan essentially kisses Cassie against her will. We already know that he knows a lot more about Cassie than he's been letting on (and we later learn that he's been stalking her), and to add what can be described as sexual assault to this mix (and to portray it in a way which is meant to have teenage girls swooning) is disgusting and dangerous. I hate Evan and Cassies entire relationship - it's totally overdramatic and over the top. Whilst Zombie's relationship with Ringer is understated, natural and sweet, Evans and Cassie's is scary.

Not only this, but from the moment Cassie meets Evan most of her strength and conviction (her best and strongest personality traits) vanish, and she virtually regresses back into the teenage girl with a crush.From being such a strong female lead she turns into a girl who can't cope without her man. I thought this book was better than that, and Cassie's character was strong enough to sustain her part of the narrative. I understand why Evan was needed (from a knowledge point of view) but I don't understand why they had to be so overly 'romantic'.


This being said, the premise of the book was excellent and the execution (for the most part) was superb. I recommend reading it, so long as you can question the presentation you're given.

I gave it 3.5/5

xx

Currently Reading: Vagina: a new biography by Naomi Wolf

Review: The Reluctant Fundamentalist by Mohsin Hamid

People have been recommending Mohsin Hamid's work from all sides, so when I saw this in the library I thought I'd pick it up*. Let's just say the recommendations were wholly deserved - I really enjoyed this book.

* As an aside I have very conflicting views on libraries so hopefully I'll do a discussion post on that in the near future (along with all the other posts I've promised, sorry!).


1) It's premise really intrigued me - being addressed directly and so specifically was really interesting. This was particularly fascinating as I found I really did not like the person who was being addressed - and the uncomfortable situation this puts the reader is in just <emotivearmmovements> good. Really good.

2) The narrator is very eloquent yet very bare at the same time, which created just stunning reading. The book is written as a very one-sided conversation, and it really felt like you were sitting down listening to someone tell you about their life. This could be boring, but when the narrator has lived such a rich life it's very interesting.
3) It's surprisingly tension filled - the moment at the end (which I shall not reveal) may not be entirely shocking (due to the hints laid down in the novel) but is very very well executed.
4) I read it in two chunks (the first 3/4 in one sitting, and the last 1/4 this morning) but because of the style of the book I'd really recommend trying to read it in one sitting. It's only 200 pages long, so it really doesn't take that long to get though if you can set aside a couple of hours.

5) It picked up some very interesting points about how we (or specifically how Americans - although it applied to most Western nations) judge people based on appearance. And how (again Americans, but us Brits do it too) completely misinterpret situations when the issue of terrorism is brought up.

6) The love story in this raised some very interesting questions about what rape is and what an abusive relationship is. If you don't mind a spoiler I'm going to put a little discussion at the very end of the post, so don't scroll down if you don't want to know.

Yeah. So, I think that pretty much sums my feelings on this book up. Highly recommend it. I gave it four sunbeams.

Happy Reading!

xx

---------------------------- SPOILER ZONE ----------------------

There is a moment in this book where the narrator has sex with the girl he is in love with. She appears to have feeling for him too, but is definitely not an active participant in the intercourse. When the narrator realises that she isn't getting involved, he, albeit begrudgingly, stops. I found this very uncomfortable to read, as to me, this was clearly a rape. She did not want to have sex with him. However, as you see everything through the narrator's eyes, it became very muddled in my mind. There is a second sex scene, which to my mind is also rape, although the girl is an active participant. The narrator abuses her mental fragility in order to get what he wants. Which, as I've said, constitutes rape, or at the very least an abusive relationship. Once again, because we see everything through the narrator's eyes, we can see that he wants to make her happy. However, we can also see how much he is manipulating his own thoughts. His rationale may be her happiness, but his motive is very much his own fulfilment.

I just found this interesting. If you want to contribute to this discussion (particularly if you’ve read the book) please leave a comment!

The Art of Fielding Review (SPOILERS)

 Basically this book will make you feel all of the things. As John Green once wrote “Sometimes, you read a book and it fills you with this weird evangelical zeal, and you become convinced that the shattered world will never be put back together unless and until all living humans read the book.” That's how I feel about this book.



SPOILERS FROM HERE

This book was beautiful. From the first five pages I had fallen in love with all of the characters. Henry is a well rounded character, carefuly crafted so the reader likes him despite the fact he's good at something and despite his mistakes he makes (mainly having a realtionship with his best friends girlfriend - I WARNED YOU ABOUT THE SPOILERS IT'S YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT). Equally Mike is the kind of guy you'd love to be mates with, he sticks up for what he belives him - even if it's at the expense of himself. The realtionship between Owen and Affenlight is believable - despite the fact that these are the two most two dimensional of the main characters (Owen is 'only gay' and Affenlight is 'only the handsome older professor' - although they do have other characteristics too). The reader pities Pella, once again despite her flaws and mistakes (the realationship with Henry).

I don't have much to say about the plot. I enjoyed it, it was interesting throughout the whole of the 500 or so pages, but I don't think it had a specific message. More like multiple messages, depending on which character you most identified with. Ultimately this was a book driven by its characters and characterisation, which is no bad thing.

I particularly liked the characterisation of Pella. She was a female character who had issues other than her physical appearance. She had qualities other than that of a sex object - when she had sex it was for her not for a guy. She is rebellious and independant and fiesty. I liked that.

So, yeah. Good book.

Rating: 5 stars

TTFN xx

Anna Karenina (SPOILERS) and Bitches Be Crazy

Like it says in the title: WARNING! THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS! Just so's y'all aware.

Remember. SPOILERS. So feel free to exercise your free will and go right ahead and not read this, ok? Good. Just double checking we are on the same page over here.

So initial thoughts: I enjoyed this film. I really did. There weren't any points when I sat there thinking about what I wanted for tea or anything like that. It was engaging and intriguing. For some reason I'm not raving about this film, and I can't quite put my finger on why. It might have something to do with the fact I didn't read the book first, and the two male leads (played by Jude Law and Aaron Taylor-Johnson) both have the same first name, or maybe because at one point the (overall excellent) cinematography made me a little dizzy. But all of those things I can completely overlook for the following reasons.

Background info/basic plot-type-thing: So, Anna Karenina (as a film) is based on the Leo Tolstoy novel of the same name and stars many fabulous actors, including Kiera Knightly (who I will be eternally infatuated with), Jude Law (ditto), Aaron Taylor-Johnson (ditto) and Matthew MacFadyen (oh come on guys he was Darcy! Obviously I am going to be madly in love with him! The 2005 adaptation of P&P is still my favourite adaptation. Think about it. Him. Kiera. Rupert Friend. Carey Mulligan. Donald Sutherland. See what I mean...).

It follows the story of Anna (Knightly)- a rich Russian woman -who is married to a much older man, Alexei Karenina (Law) - a prominent politician - with whom she has a son. Her son is the centre of her world at the beginning of the film. Her brother Oblongsky (MacFadyen) has been having an affair, so Anna goes to visit her sister-in-law (Dolly - played by the amazing actress Kelly MacDonald) to try to convince her to take him back. Whilst she is there she goes to a party with Dolly and Dolly's sister Kitty. It is at this party that we are introduced to Kitty's two suitors - Levin (a wealthy land owner) and Count Vronsky (Taylor-Johnson). Levin is madly in love with Kitty and proposes to her - she turns him down in favour of Vronsky. However, at this party Vronsky meets Anna (technically for the second time - they also met at a train station when Vronsky gave money to the family of a worker who had just been run over by the train he was fixing) and it becomes very clear that they are attracted to one-another. Kitty is distraught and Anna, feeling guilty, returns quickly home. However, Vronsky follows her and they begin a passionate affair, with Anna eventually falling pregnant. There is a very complicated situation in which Alexei refuses to divorce Anna on the grounds it will ruin her, but eventually after the birth of the child he begins the divorce procedure. Anna is rejected from society and, highly aware of the whispers that follow her, becomes increasingly jealous of the attention she perceives Vronsky giving to other women, and is convinced he is having an affair (as Dolly tells her "men never change").

Meanwhile, both Levin and Kitty are miserable, however Levin has the added concern of a very ill brother who is also revolutionary anti-capitalist. Levin finally plucks up the courage to ask Kitty to marry him again (with a little help from Oblongsky) and they appear to have a happy future together.

Anna, on the other hand becomes increasingly more manic and convinced of Vronsky's falling out of love with her, and so throws herself under a train. The film ends with Alexei sitting in a field, happily watching his son and Anna's daughter play together.

So, as you can its a pretty complicated story, even with only the bare bones. The whole film was set in a theatre, which I adored, and with many of the scene changes the camera simply followed the main character as they walked from set to set, with extras pulling in new furniture or pulling down backdrops. This was such a clever idea - and even though it made me a little dizzy at points - it added such a sense of atmosphere and also entrapment, which became vital as the film reached it's conclusion.

The acting performances were incredible. There wasn't a single character who was weak. I particularly enjoyed MacFadyen's performance as he held some light comic relief for the film without detracting for its dark plot.

The thing I most enjoyed about the film, however, was it's presentation of women in the late 19th century. Women are completely trapped within society. It is acceptable for a man (in this case Oblongsky) to have a series of affairs and still be deemed a respectable gentleman. Anna, on the other hand, is condemned by most of society for her affair  (with the exception of Dolly, Princess Betsy and Princess Myagkaya). She has no escape, except madness and, ultimately death. This is a theme that is reflected through literature over centuries, from Shakespeare to Bronte. Madness is the final escape of a women who is perceived to me damned (multiple times throughout the film Anna and Alexei refer to her damnation).

This struck a particular chord with me as the guy I went to see the film with and I had been discussing how women go "crazy" in relationships. He argued that women go more crazy than men, and recounted from his personal experiences with girls he had been in relationships with. I argued that women and men go equally crazy, just if a man goes crazy it is perceived as sweet and "oh my gosh look how in love he is with you", whereas is if a women goes crazy then she is psycho, creepy, something to be avoided. It amazed me that this was still so prevalent in society today - a society that prides itself of equal rights and anti-discrimination. The complete sexism of the perception of the emotional states of men and women. It disgusted me that we still viewed the world in this way, and also made me reflect on the different escapes women have for their emotions now as opposed to a century or so ago. Luckily we have a lot more outlets. Women are allowed to be viewed feeling and experiencing the same emotions as men - through literature and art and self-expression. And the fact we are allowed that shouldn't be undervalued. But to be honest, it shouldn't have been something we were "allowed" by men. It should have been accepted as norm a long, long time ago. That is what is so hideous about society. It still holds patriarchal values. Films like this highlight how recently these values were held so much stronger than they are today, as well as the fragility with which they are held.

Recommended reading: www.justmargaret.tumblr.com she posts some excellent things on feminism and you should probably check her out.

Anyway, I am told that the book was better than the film, so I'll be reading that as soon as I can.
Rating: 4 stars

TTFN!! xx

Currently Reading: Flappers and Philosophers (Kindle edition) by F. Scott. Fitzgerald.