Thoughts on Da Finn

Having a third look at 'Phineas redux', and amazingly, I'm coming across things I either didn't see before or things that I saw before but only move me now. To say that Phineas has loved and lost is true a number of times over. He returns from 'Phineas Finn' seemingly back at Square One, and is back to dealing with political life and tons of unresolved sexual tension. His lovely and influential lady friends Madame Max and Lady Laura have their own problems but very much want to help him get back to a place of prominence. Lady Laura has a bigger problem than Madame Max, however. She chose the wrong guy and paid a fairly steep price for it. Now trouble's brewing between her, her estranged husband, and Phineas, who has the roughest time though he's more innocent than either of them. What drove this woman to first choose than leave her mate? What drove this man to lose her? Incompatible folks, but why should Phineas (the 'Other Man', on the other hand) be the one to get shot at? Apologies for any possible spoilers. It's a great book - better than 'Phineas Finn', although the latter is also a very good book.
Admittedly, the game between X and Y is quite the mystery to me, and will probably remain one for the rest of my days. Also, I fear that I will have to cut this entry short. Supper's calling me. I will doubtless make another Phineas-related post once I have come to the end of the book. BYE.

Marlowe thoughts and Barchester business

What makes a good villain? Do most villains know they are villains? Based on the number of antagonists I have observed in everything I have read, the answer is no. Really, the only villains I have come across who knew they were on the wrong side can be found in 'The Mahabharata'. Drona and Bhishma were on the wrong side and not only did they know it, they accepted it. They didn't like it, but they accepted it. There's also the Joker from 'Batman', to a lesser extent. Maybe he knew he was in the wrong, but I doubt he ever cared about that, since he stood for gaining control through whatever means necessary. His favoured weapon was chaos, and he employed that weapon every chance he had. I know precious little about Joker in the 'Batman' canon for real, so if I'm 'wrong', please let me know. I'm dwelling upon villains lately thanks to a lovely little book by Charles G. Masinton. 'Christopher Marlowe's tragic vision: A study in damnation' looks at the likes of Tamburlaine and Doctor Faustus, seeing where they went wrong and why. Definitely makes me want to read 'Tamburlaine' and 'Doctor Faustus' now. I've read Goethe's 'Faust' but I suspect Marlowe's take on it is much darker. 
Another excellent 'selling the soul to the Devil' story is 'The sorrows of Satan' by the magnificent Marie Correlli, but I have not read it lately, so I'll skip talking about it. One more digression before I move on. Robertson Davies (God rest his soul eternal!) wrote a great short story called 'When Satan goes home for Christmas'. Great ending to that story, by the way. Moving on now; I started reading 'Barchester Towers' by Anthony Trollope. I seem to recall that I wasn't very fond of the story the first time I read it. For some reason, this time I am enjoying it. Two of the villains are quarrelling at this point but the heroes aren't really happy either. Actually, I don't think there are any real heroes in this story thus far, although Trollope has labeled certain folks as heroes and others as villains. That's his right, I guess.
A week to go until Spring Break. Sigh......

Trollope, Mozart, and I Wanna Be the Guy

It has been more than a few days since I posted anything new, so I decided some updates were in order. I am now 31, and I am really not sure how I am supposed to feel about it. Just mentioning it suggests that I think it's pretty important. Not a milestone like last year's birthday, but there's something about being 31 that stirs the imagination, though for good or for ill, I cannot say. I suspect I will have more to say on my 35th birthday, but that's not for another few years. 35 is something of a milestone as well, I imagine. 31 just makes me feel like I've completely left young adulthood behind and have taken my first steps squarely into true adulthood. Does that make sense? When do I reach the plateau of middle age? Will I need to be 35 for that to happen? I was depressed about turning 20, for it meant saying goodbye to my childhood, but now I'm not so fixated on that. Some people never get over that loss. For some people, turning 30 is depressing, for you're saying farewell to your 20's. I never had that problem, and I'm grateful for that.
Meanwhile, I've gone back to 'Phineas Finn'. There is something about this book that I love enough to visit several times. Maybe I'll end up buying myself a copy when this is done. We'll see. Considering how little I like the fox-hunts Trollope seems to put into every book, I like reading about Finn and his adventures. I want him to be successful. Likable characters make the book work. While I read, I've been listening to Mozart. Classical music certainly calms the soul, which makes it a good choice of something to listen to while playing certain games, which leads me to I Wanna Be the Guy, or IWBTG in short form. Think the deadliest, more difficult 8-bit game you have ever played and take it up ten notches. That is IWBTG - everything kills your character and all you can do is trial-and-error until you make it. For some Let's Players, this game is maddening. The videos are hilarious, by the way.
So that is my life in a nutshell. Back to Phineas Finn I go. BYE.

Thoughts afore Mexico

In other words... what's going through my head in the hours before my mother and I leave for Puerto Vallarta. We're leaving this afternoon to be on the plane this evening, and we'll be there in the wee hours tomorrow. Mom says that all we'll do is sleep on Sunday and then start out fresh on Monday. She's done this every year, so she should know the drill. Anyway, to keep me busy, I'm bringing my diary, a couple of books, and I was seriously thinking of bringing some scribbling. The books might not be enough during the quiet moments (and I intend to have plenty of those!) and my diary might not be enough writing to satisfy me. There's no chance of me bringing my laptop, so all I can do is bring a pad of paper and a few pencils and erasers. I've only got one project that I'm writing the rough of, so this would be all right. Still, I'm wondering if all this will be enough during the quiet moments.
As for the books I'm bringing, there are two. One is a biography of John Milton and the other is 'The Eustace diamonds' by Anthony Trollope. This book is unique among Trollope's works because of one singular character. The first time I read this, I thought this creature an insincere beast of a woman. The second time around, I still find her beastly, but it's Trollope's skill I'm coming to admire. The character is, of course, Lizzie (Lady Eustace). She has little genuine feeling about her, dwells only on money and what it can do for her little family, and really doesn't care what anyone else thinks. She can work herself into an insincere passion that almost seems to move mountains and can be dangerous when spited. I don't like her at all, but I don't think she's supposed to be liked. I doubt Trollope wanted her to be liked. She's neither liked nor respected, but one does have to admire Trollope's skill for creating her.
She still has the diamonds at this point, and I don't remember how the story ends, so I can't really spoil it for anyone. I think she gets away scot-free, but I don't know for sure. She isn't the hero of the story anyway (a villainess if there ever was one). I'm re-reading the Palliser series because 'Phineas redux' astounded me last year, and I believe in going through the other books again just to get to the one I really liked. I'm starting to wonder if I'm going to go through this again next year because of 'The Eustace diamonds'. That's all I have for the time being. I probably won't have anything new for a while because of PV. The Internet services are a little cheaper in Puerto Vallarta, but there's no sense tying up a computer just for the sake of my little blog.
So, until then, BYE.

Thoughts on 'Phineas Finn'

To be honest, the first time I read 'Phineas Finn' I wasn't totally overwhelmed by the experience. I preferred 'Phineas redux' (for reasons I have forgotten but will recall in the weeks to come) the first time I read it. However, I had the chance to take 'Phineas' up again and read it from cover to cover. Last time, the ton's worth of British politics turned me right off. It can't be helped, considering Finn's choice of career. Sometimes I wonder if some politicians consider politics a dalliance/waste of money. It certainly seemed like that in Victorian times. Those M.P.'s certainly weren't earning a whole lot of money. A shame they earn money sitting on their duffs these days, wasting everyone else's money. Okay, I take such a grim view of politics that it will be better to just get back to talking about the book.
***SPOILERS***
'Phineas Finn' is a rather well rendered look at life for the upperclass Victorian. That's all Trollope seems to look at when casting his eye around him. It's why I sometimes prefer Dickens, although I confess that I haven't read Dickens for a long while. 'Phineas Finn' is the second book in the Palliser series, and I like the personal plot (I don't think you can really call it a sub-plot, as the title character has his professional life and his personal life, and the pair rarely mix) much more than the professional one. Finn's got his eye on a few ladies (3, but who's counting?) and chooses the Irish lass over the heavily monied widow after being turned down by two upperclass society ladies. Actually, one turns him down and then manoeuvers him away from the other, for reasons that probably wouldn't wash these days, although they make sense for the time.
Lady Laura is the more complex character (between her and Phineas, I mean). She turns him down because of money and steers him away from a wealthy young woman so this lass will go to her brother. Her brother's a jerk, by the way, and not really deserving of such compassion (he ain't heavy, at least he's not MY brother). I don't think Trollope wanted to punish her for dumping Finn, but making her marry Kennedy (the book's cold fish) would surely punish me should I be made to undergo that fate. Can you tell I don't want to get married, ever? Finn doesn't like Kennedy, but he does manage to save his life. Not something I would've done, but again, that's my take on the matter.
These are some of the thoughts I've had about this book. Well-written and worth a look, but don't look too long over the political parts. It'll put you to sleep. BYE.

Two in one

That's right: two topics in one post! I don't think I've done anything like that yet. Let me start with the disgusting part. Saturday night my sister and I went for supper. I ordered the enchilada, which I haven't done in a while. I was fine for the rest of the evening, although I had what I thought was just a gas attack toward midnight. I went to bed around midnight and slept until 2, which is when the madness started. There's a comic out there (his name escapes me) who suggests that the stomach is the body bouncer. White blood cells kill the unwelcome, but the stomach kicks them out, one way or another. My built-in bouncer decided the chicken in the enchilada had to be dealt with. As a result, I was up all night and into Sunday morning. I spent all day Sunday sitting or lying around, staying close to the bathroom. Here we are, Monday in all its glory... and I didn't go to work.
I woke up this morning not totally 100%, so I decided to call in sick this morning. 1st off, I work with kids, and I didn't want to (it could happen!) accidentally transmit whatever bug I picked up from the chicken. Also, it would not've looked good for me to be running to the girls' room in the middle of Story time with the kids (again, it could happen!). The staff washrooms are on the main floor while the library is on the second floor, and I might've ended up being sent home anyway. Perform damage control and have one more day to recuperate. I alerted the teachers and secretary as to my situation and hopefully all goes well for them. It's back to work tomorrow, as I'm feeling a little better now. My stomach is accepting food again. My stomach muscles hurt every time I cough or laugh, but that too shall pass.
The second part of my post concerns an author I just cannot seem to shake. Anthony Trollope strikes again! It doesn't help that I'm reading one of his series. A question: is there a plural of 'series'? I would love to know the answer. I finished reading a series of essays he wrote (character studies, more like it) on various types of clergymen. Stuff that would make most people snore, I imagine, but every experience has worth. If these character studies helped him out any, there's a chance they will help others. In his Barchester series, he never strays far from the bishops, vicars, wardens, and other titles in the Church of England. Catholicism doesn't have vicars, prebendaries, or wardens; at least, I don't think we've got'em. It's the Anglican church that has all these figures. I know the Catholic church doesn't have prebendaries.
Thankfully, I did not come across one fox-hunt scene among those essays. That would've been a cause for throwing the book across the room.
There will be more Trollope in the weeks to come. Rest assured, I am not done with him yet! BYE.

Trekking through Trollope

Last year, I must've been churning through Anthony Trollope's Barsetshire series and through his Palliser series, for I rated Phineas Redux high enough to want to return to it in a year's time. Well, I've got plans to get down with 'Can you forgive her?', which is the 1st book in the Palliser series. But before I get through this one, I've got a few words to say about 'Orley Farm', which I just finished reading. Trollope, not one to be modest where his own scribbles are concerned, considered this book to be the best of the bunch. I'm tempted to side with him by saying that this is a rather good book. I have only one fault to make with Trollope's writing, but I shouldn't really lay the blame on him, but on British society at that time in history. If they had come up with other forms of diversion at that time, Trollope would have probably employed these other diversions. I can't blame the artist for the scenery being bad.
Anyway, I was enjoying 'Orley Farm' and along came a damned fox-hunt scene! Dickens, preferring the bleakness of poverty or sturdiness of the middle-class, rarely, if ever, dragged a fox-hunt into his works. Trollope is overly fond of throwing a fox-hunt into his books when he wants to take a break from the main plot and ventures into a romance between some young buck and a fresh, unspoiled young maiden. This time, one of the lordlings broke his leg and a few ribs while hunting the fox, and he spent a lot of time recuperating on a couch and mooning over the lady of the household. I was pretty pleased that it was one of the hunters who ended up getting hurt. The fox gets the short end of the stick, don't you think? Also, none of the horses got hurt, which is also a good thing.
Apart from the dreary fox-hunt as sub-standard sub-plot advancement device, the main plot was very good. I got into the story pretty early on, and found myself a little disappointed when I learned that the main character, whom I was cheering for, turns out to be guilty. I should've known this would happen. Every sapient creature has the capacity for good and evil, and this character was no different. I was pleased enough with the outcome of the book, though. It was a resolution, which any good writer should shoot for. I would've like a somewhat better outcome for the main character, but bad things happened to the 'bad guys' in the book, so there was something for everyone.
All in all, though I won't return to 'Orley Farm' in a year's time, I do recommend it. BYE.