Puss In Boots

Okay, well we finished reading Puss In Boots today, and I have to say it’s my new favourite of the stories. I’m extremely fickle and every time we read a new story in lesson, I like it so much more and decide it’s my favourite! Anyway, on with the post;

Well, I’ll start with the narrator; there are many differences between this narrator and the previous narrators of the stories so far. For example this is the only male narrator in the whole book, and he is portrayed as being full of himself, “for what lady in all the world could say ‘no’ to the passionate yet toujours discret advances of a fine marmalade cat?” This is a quality that none of the other narrators appear to possess and is perhaps a stereotypical quality of males along with his obsession with sex? As well as being the only male character that we encounter, he is also the only one that is not human. I’m not entirely convinced that Figaro’s felinity has any impact on him as a narrator or character, especially as he is modelled on the Harlequin (a human character) from Italian pantomime.

Anyway, what struck me about this story is that even though most of the story surrounds the male characters, Figaro as the narrator and his master whom we hear a lot about, it is the two female characters that appear to be the most clever and dominant. For example it is the female cat, “Tabs,” who comes up with both plans to help their masters, for lack of a better phrase, get together, “she proposes her scheme to me.” Later in the book, we also see how the woman takes control of the situation when the Hag is suspicious of the noise and mess in the bedroom, “then lets her wardress into the scene of the faux carnage with the most modest and irreproachable air in the world. ‘See! Puss has slaughtered all the rats’”

I’ve kind of lost the will to blog now, so shan’t explain about comparisons to Italian pantomime instead here are some extremely brief notes;
Figaro = Harlequin
Master + Woman = The lovers
Signor Panteleone = The Pantaloon
The Hag = Fulfils role of the Pantaloon as she is conned and duped out of money.
Also, this story is almost like a play, contains lots of puns and over the topness etc etc.

The Tiger's Bride

So, we have just finished reading ‘The Tiger’s Bride,’ in lesson and I have to say that it is by far my favourite story that we have read so far (actually out of any of them- as I have read the whole book previously). Anyway, I think the first thing that strikes you about this short story, is the difference in the narrator to the previous stories. In The Bloody Chamber and The Courtship of Mr. Lyon, both narrators are willing to submit to every command of the male characters. An example, a very frustrating example, is where the young bride in The Bloody Chamber is phoned up by the Marquis and he tells her to come down to the courtyard to be murdered- and she goes!
At that point in the story, honestly, I was all for the Marquis killing her. Anyway, back to the point, ah yes, so I liked this story more because the narrator was slightly less naïve and wielded some power. For example she says of the town where the Tiger is from, “I myself spoke in favour of this remote provincial palace,” therefore this suggests that the narrator has some say in the destinations her and her father travel to, she is not completely powerless. Also, I really liked how cynical and sarcastic this character came across as, “what a burden all of those possessions must have been to him, because he laughs as if with glee as he beggars himself.” This narrator is also critical of her father- something which the female in the other beauty and the beast story lacked, “You must not think my father valued me at less than a king’s ransom; but, at no more than a king’s ransom.”

Other than the narrator, the other thing about this story that I really liked was the ending- it’s certainly a twist on the conventional Beauty and The Beast fairly tale, and although some of the other stories aren’t too similar to the original stories, this one thank goodness didn’t contain lots of well…….taboo language. I’m sure Carter had many valid reason for these language choices, but after a while it has less impact and is just annoying and often cringe-worthy in lessons :P Anyway, back to the twist, twas unexpected, the reader will have recognised the references to Beauty and The Beast- mirror, rose and the narrator being referred to as a beauty- and so the reader’s expectation is that at the end of the story The Beast becomes a man et voila everyone lives happily, conventionally after. But in this version, the narrator turns into a tiger, she changes, not the male. I’m not sure why Carter chose to do this, but it’s possible that she did it to give the narrator, the female more power. As it says in the story, “The tiger will never lie down with the lamb……….. The lamb must learn to run with the tigers,” this could mean that the tiger can not change to be with the narrator, even if he wanted- he has no choice and cannot, “lie down with the lamb.” However, the narrator can chose, “to run with the tigers,” she can change herself to be with him if she chooses, and so she has sole control over the possible future of their relationship. Then again, I could be typing a load of basura!

Odd Italian thingies

Well, i read that websitey thing, and im confused as to how it relates to the work we are doing and so i kind of lost the will to write all of them up, so i disregarded all the ones that were incredibly similar to characters I'd already written about. Anyway, here we are;

Arlechino- or as I’ve previously heard it to be called, Harlequin.
This character became known in 1572, often found wearing a wooden mask (later made form leather) and a multicoloured patchwork costume. He is a poor and hungry fellow who through his naivety and simplicity is able to outsmart greedier, richer men.

Pantalone- or Pantaloon
This character can be anything from a merchant to a nobleman, however he is constantly faced with others trying to take his money away from him (as a rich and greedy man, he has plenty of this). He is too trusting of others and this teamed with his naivety means that more often than not he is outsmarted by wit and improvisation.

Il Dottore- or the doctor
His first appearance on stage was in the 16th century and was an, “I know everything,” character. His purpose was to break up the action within a play with longwinded monologues. His was generally dressed in black, well groomed and fat- his size is supposed to show that he is a very wealthy man- however he is very arrogant.

Il Capitano- or the captain
The captain was created to mock the armies that oppressed Italy- for example at one point the captain was clearly Spanish. This character was around from the 16th- to the 18th century. He is often seen with a long pointy moustache, a sword and several daggers, he repeatedly talks of bravery, but is easily scared off the scared by the Harlequin.

Pulcinella- or polichinelle
This character has a very simple, but poor nature, which was reflected in his costume- a white inexpensive costume with a sugar loaf costume. He is a very philosophical and dreamy character, a representation of the Neapolitan culture. His melancholic nature often lands him in problems, however it is this same approach that often helps him out of difficult situations.

Gli Innamorati- or the lovers
These characters lack any real personality- their sole trait is that they are in love with each other- and though this may be dull by itself, the lovers are essential to help draw the audience in and also much action can be developed around them. The lovers are very often young and the children of the elder characters, such as the doctor or the pantaloon.

The Bloody Chamber

After completing The Bloody Chamber, I shall use this blog to reflect upon it (this is by no means being forced by Mr. Francis :P ). Well, I guess the thing that most struck me about this short story is how it can be interpreted as a feminist story.

One reason I think this is because of the two main male characters within the book, the Marquis and the piano tuner. The Marquis is a cruel, sadistic murderer who treats all of his wives rather meanly (e.g killing and attempting to kill them). Whereas the Piano tuner is a far nicer character who is kind to the young bride and even sticks by her as she goes down to meet the psychotic Marquis. According to Laura Mulvey, the moment that men look at women they subconsciously hate and oppress them- and this is what the Marquis does to his wives, he controls them and eventually murders them. This theory is backed up by the fact that the Piano Tuner is blind, he cannot see the narrator and so that is why he does not hate and oppress her.

The mother of the narrator is a very prominent figure in the novel, she is portrayed as a very strong character, from the beginning we are told that she, “outfaced a junkful of Chinese pirates, nursed a village through a visitation of the plague, shot a man-eating tiger.” These are all very dangerous, heroic and assertive things to do- she is portrayed perhaps in a stereotypical role of a male. The mother acts as a role model for her daughter, who is far less assertive. In fact the narrator is a pushover and is not even given a name- she is that insignificant. She allows the Marquis to control her and is even so obedient that when he tells her to come down to the courtyard for him to kill her- she goes!

It is also possible to link the Madonna/Whore complex to this short story as when we see inside the bloody chamber, we see that the Marquis has dressed his dead wives in their bridal clothes. This is because this is the last time his wives were virginal and pure- after this, in male’s eyes women are whores and so by dressing the women as for their wedding the Marquis is seeing them as the Madonna. This is backed up as the Marquis refers to his newest bride as a, “whore.”

The Madonna/Whore complex

A few lessons ago we looked at this concept by Sigmund Freud, and I’m not completely sure that I understand it, because it is so….. well, weird and absurd and therefore I’m puzzled as to how Freud became so famous. Anyway, I believe the complex to mean that there are only two ways in which a man can see a woman, she is either a sacred love object, where no sexual contact has occurred and so to men she is the Madonna. On the other hand, once a man has had sex with a woman, then he will see her as the whore.

Within the context of Dracula, this complex is fairly important as, despite both Mina and Lucy being virginal, Lucy is seen as the whore stereotype and Mina is seen as the Madonna stereotype. At the beginning of the novel, Lucy is desired by many men and even receives three marriage proposals in one. Then later on in the book, Lucy is bitten by Dracula, she has been ‘penetrated.’ After this event has occurred, Lucy’s physical appearance has changed and we see her, “pure [turn to] voluptuous wantonness.” Then Lucy is no longer desired by many men, despite her appearance being prettier, only Arthur still is in love with her. And even then Van Helsing won’t let Arthur near Lucy and her new whore-like characteristics. Tis shows that men far more crave the Madonna type of woman.

Dracula- Chapter 5

A few lessons ago we were looking at chapter five of Dracula. In particular we focused on the importance of letters with in this chapter. There are many benefits to the use of letters, for example the sudden change from Jonathan Harker’s journal to the letters between Lucy and Mina reflect the distance between the two topics, joy of Lucy and Harker’s fear, and of the actual distance between the characters, Transylvania and England.

The use of letters between Mina and Lucy also allows the reader to get to know the characters more quickly. If a narrator simply explained the two characters’ thoughts and feelings and actions, the reader wouldn’t feel as close to them or have as much sympathy for the characters. This is particularly important for Lucy as she becomes ill and then dies fairly early on in the book and this more direct way of communicating with the reader will allow them to feel sorry for Lucy and ultimately her fate.

The reader may be more inclined to believe events that are told to them if it is through letter form. This is because it is not through a narrator and so it seems more direct and real. Lucy and Mina aren’t trying to convince the reader that what they say is true and real, these are private and confidential letters being read. Therefore they have no cause to lie and so this will help to add to the book’s attempts to make us believe that the novel’s events are true.

Letters between Lucy and Mina have the effect of showing a contrast between the two characters. Mina is shown to be very committed and almost, ‘wifely’ to Jonathan, “when we are married I shall be able to be useful to Jonathan.” Whereas Lucy appears to be almost promiscuous, “why can’t they let a girl marry three men?” The closeness of these comments highlights the differences between the two girls.

Verisimilitude in the Opening of Dracula

Last lesson, we were looking at verisimilitude. This is where a piece of fiction contains similarities or reference to real life. For example, some verisimilitudes in Dracula include the locations of France and Germany. Verisimilitudes are the true aspects contained in the novel, things which still exist outside of the novel, another example would be Harry Potter going to King’s Cross station in London. Although Harry Potter is a fictional character, the station is real and so exhibits some realism and authenticity in the reader’s mind. (I don’t know why I used Harry Potter as an example, given that I have never read any of the books).

Once the definition of verisimilitude was established, we than began to look at the opening of Dracula in relation to this. The first extract is from page 8/9 and contains many verisimilitudes and details such as descriptions of the local people, “strangest figures we saw were the Slovaks, who were more Barbarian than the rest, with their big cow-boy hats, great baggy dirty-belts, nearly a foot wide, all studded over with brass nails.” This one sentence alone contains much factual information about the clothing and appearance of the people, it is not very orientated around opinions, but around concrete descriptions. The second extract we looked at was on page 13 of Dracula and was less factual; it contained more picturesque and dreamlike descriptions, such as, “the road, losing itself as it swept round the grassy curve.” Finally, the third extract, from page 14, was even less fact based and contained phrases such as, “peasant’s cart with its long, snakelike vertebra,” and, “produced a particularly weird and solemn effect, which carried on thoughts and grim fancies engendered earlier in the evening.” This extract has become even more based upon opinion and contains far more imagery than clear description. Mysticism has entered the novel, and so because the very beginning of the book contained to much factual and relatable information, the reader is potentially more likely to believe what the narrator is telling them. This is particularly important in a book like Dracula, which contains a lot of mythological ideas and so by containing verisimilitudes, the reader may find the ideas more readable and enjoyable.

Docotor Faustus- Le Essay

Last lesson Mr. Francis split the group into two small groups in order to write an essay between us. The title of the essay was, “What do you find striking about Faustus?” Straight away the advantages of working in a group of four became apparent, we each only had to submit one point, and straight away we had a basic essay plan, no wracking of brains trying to find another point. I heard points that I never would have thought of and then we all discussed each one in further detail and so already we knew exactly what to write.

However, it was at this point, when some difficulties began to arise. The designated writer for a paragraph could not concentrate on writing and discuss every word that they were thinking of writing down. This took too much time and since we were under a time limit, was near impossible. Instead, we would together discuss the next few sentences and then the current writer would write up discussed ideas in their own way. This worked very well and we managed to write more than the other group (whooo!) but it does mean that the essay does not flow as well as if we had discussed exactly what to write word for word. Another disadvantage of doing a group essay is that we wrote far less than if we were doing the essays on our own.

When I came to do my solo essay at home, I found it so much easier because we had had chance to discuss potential points and ideas. And because it was written solely, I was able to finish it the last point, something we didn’t manage as a group and so hopefully this essay should be an improvement on my last Doctor Faustus essay.

Act 5 Scene 2

This lesson we were looking at the very last scene of Dr. Faustus (whoo finally finished!). The very first stage direction of the scene is interesting because it says, “Thunder. Enter Lucipher, Beelzebub, and Mephistopheles (above).” The weather has been used to show to the audience that the upcoming scene is going to be serious and full of tension. The other part of that stage direction that is interesting is that the devil comes from above. Hell is usually associated with being down below and heaven above, and so this one direction challenges that idea. I do not know why this has been done, but maybe it is simply used to enforce that these characters are otherworldly.

Faustus’s last speech contains quite a lot of interesting ideas. The one that me and Rosie originally picked up on was where Faustus says, “Let Faustus live in hell a thousand years, a hundred thousand, and at last be saved.” This shows that Faustus accepts what he has done wrong, he sees that he has sinned, “o, if my soul must suffer for my sin,” and understands that he does deserve a punishment. However, what Faustus wants is for the punishment to come to an end and not be eternal. This is very similar to catholic purgatory, where people who have sinned receive temporary punishment from God before being allowed to be admitted to heaven.

Act 4 Scene 2

Today, we looked at act 4 scene 2. In this scene, we see that Benvolio wishes to take revenge on Faustus for giving him horns in the previous scene, “Then draw your weapons and be resolute.” Benvolio enlists the help of Martino, Frederic and some soldiers to do this. As Faustus enters the stage, Benvolio attacks Faustus, “He strikes Faustus,” and, “Benvolio strikes off Faustus’s false head.” The men then rejoice at Faustus’s apparent death, until suddenly Faustus gets up again, “Faustus rises.” Faustus then calls Mephistopheles and some other devils and they attack the men, “Take thou this other, drag him through the woods,” and “They set upon the soldiers and drive them out.”

We then discussed how this scene in the play could have been performed, looking specifically at the stage direction, “Enter Faustus with a false head.” This is to aid Faustus in pretending to have been decapitated, however it is unclear whether, when being performed, the audience would have been able to tell that Faustus is faking his death. Faustus could be wearing a fake head very similar to a human head, which would make the audience think that Faustus had died when Benvolio attacks him. This would make the resurrection of Faustus more shocking to the audience as they thought him dead, and so it reinforces the power of the devil and hell as Faustus as seemingly just come back from the dead. However, if Faustus were to come on the stage wearing an obviously fake head, and allow the audience to be in on the trick, allow them to see him putting on the fake head. This would make the scene more humorous as the audience knows something that the other actors don’t.

Act 3- scene 1 and scene 2.

We looked at these two scenes in act 3, scene 2 and scene 3, to highlight Marlowe’s use of comedy and serious content in different scenes. Both scenes contain elements of seriousness and comedy, but the humour in these scenes are very similar to each other- they are very much physical. For example, it is clear in scene two to see why the audience would have found the action comical. Faustus is first presented with a, “magic girdle,” which Mephistopheles tells Faustus to, “first wear this girdle, then appear invisible to all are here.” This allows the audience to be in on whichever mischief Faustus gets up to. They are aware that Faustus is there and invisible, so making the scene far more humorous. For had this not been shown to the audience, then any of the antics that Faustus performs would have been confusing to the audience, they would not have had a clue what was causing the moving of items around the stage, therefore making the scene more puzzling than comical. Also, allowing the audience to understand what Faustus is doing would have made the production of the play easier in a theatre, as it is not necessary to make Faustus invisible, items such as the wine would not have to appear to move by themselves. The director could have Faustus move them in front of the audience’s eyes and they’d understand that the other characters could not see Faustus.

A bit later in the scene, Faustus hits the Pope, “Faustus gives the Pope a blow to the head.” And then Mephistopheles and Faustus “beat the Friars and, fling fireworks among them.” This would be funny to the audience as there would be chaos on the stage, and again the audience understands what is going on, but the characters wouldn’t. The humour is something that the audience can physically see; this is the same in scene 3. For example, in scene 3 we physically see Dick and Robin transformed into an ape and a dog, this is funny because these are two characters that the audience has little attachment for, so are not upset by their fate. Instead they are free to enjoy the silliness of the situation, especially the way the pair exit the scene, “Exeunt the two clowns (with Dick on Robin’s back).”

The serious tone of each scene is also presented in each scene the same way. The seriousness of both scenes is less clear and easy to see as the comedy was. In scene 2, the realisation of what Faustus is doing had quite a sever effect. Yes, it is funny that he is invisibly moving the items, but essentially he is abusing the Pope, the most important mortal religious figure to Catholics. However, as the audience at the time that this play would have been performed was Protestant, this could add the amusement. Faustus is mocking and attacking Catholics. But, I think that most of the audience will still understand the seriousness of what Faustus is doing. Because he is Catholic and so he has gone one step further than just betraying God by siding with the devil, but he is using the devil and his power to physically harm such highly regarded religious figures. Physically attacking God almost. In scene 3, we can see that what occurs is quite shocking. Although Dick and Robin summoned Mephistopheles on false pretences, “for we called you but in jest,” it is awful to see how little the pair have to do to receive such a sever punishment. All they have done is summon Mephistopheles and are then turned into a dog and an ape; this shows how unforgiving the devil and his minions are. It also goes to illustrate how far apart heaven and hell are, as Faustus himself has carried out great acts of betrayal to God, and yet he is being told all the way to the end of the book that he is still able to repent and be forgiven. Yet Dick and Robin hardly do a thing to the devil and they are punished. The Devil is cruel and such a small slip can cause you to receive a punishment.

Lesson reflection.

Erm.... I probably shouldn't post this as late as I have, because I have pretty much forgotten the lesson. Well, we were looking at the opening to Dr. Fautus, and Mr.Francis evily made me read the Chorus and I had a cold. Anyway, we then moved onto Dr.Fautus's first speech and didn't get further than Alex reading it because Mr.Francis suddenly decided to go into our homework on Christian views on souls, God and such. And the class being so philosophical (or wishing to avoid formal work) began a debate about believing in God. Then twas the end of the lesson, and so I really learnt very little, however was sehr interessant.

Doctor Faustus!

Well, it took me quite a while to find a bookshop that actually had Doctor Faustus in stock, and when i finally found one it has other plays in the book as well. So, I'm hoping the version is not terribly important.

Anyway, I have not heard of this play before so am not to sure on the plot itself, nor do I have that many expectations. I have read through a synopsis of the play, so I have some idea about what I am going to read and think that the story does seem fairly interesting. Well, the only thing that really struck me when reading about the play was that it doesn't seem that dark or horrorish (I am aware that this is not a real word). However, jsut from the main plot you can tell that the whole book will be about the struggle Faustus has between good and evil. I can't actually think about this play without thinking about Cats the musical (because of the character of Mephistopheles, and yes i know this is not vey literature related or analytical).

I think that the worst thing about this play, will be the main character. I think that I may spend all of the time I am redaing it annoyed at the character's choices. Faustus, from the summary, seems to know that he is making the wrong decision and yet still go on with it becasue it seems easier in the short term. Only when his life is coming to an end does he think, wait, this is wrong and try to repent his sins. But then again, the author may have written the play in such a way that the reader feels sorrow and pity for Faustus. Oh well, I shall see, and since i have about 24 hours to read this play, I had best get on with it! :S

Finally finished Dracula!!!

Okay, well I think I did quite well reading Dracual in three days. When I first picked up the book I originally thought it wasn't that long, but i soon discovered that the pages are tres thin and the print ist sehr klein. I didn't seem to be getting anywhere on Friday with it, so i spent 9 solid hours sat at my dining room table today until i finished. And despite minor neck ache, it really was worth reading.

I mean, normally I would never have read Dracula because I was convinced that I knew the story, though looking back I was realy really wrong. For a start, despite having seen the film in lesson not long ago, I was confused about many of the characters and their roles. For example I thought that the man at the start of the film who goes to Transylvania (who I now know to be Jonathan Harker) was Renfield- and that Renfield was a survivor of the ship wrecked ship. Also I am not sure if it was the film that made it seem this way, but I was sure that Lucy died fairly quickly and that her death and life was never fully explored, however near half of the book talks of her downfall and then death. I was actually really rather suprised when she died because i thought she was the character that survived (I now know this to be Mina).

Although these things have been cleared up for me, I'm still confused about the overall locatio of the book. I'm sure I was jsut not paying full attention, but I got the impression that part of the story was set in Whitby- where the two girls (Lucy and Mina) were staying, I also understand that this is where the ship was washed up. But then didn't both girls leave Whitby? The rest of the book centres around the sanitorium, and Dracula's house, I'm sure I'm jsut being dense now, but was this in Whitby still?

Oh well, geography aside, I did enjoy this novel. I really found the characters fascinating. As I have previously said, I am not a fan of first person accounts as you are never sure what has really occured, or what the character perceives to have happened. Anyway, i thought this style really worked for the book, you are able to see how the characters are feeling at different events and so no matter what is occuring you have a really good insight. I'm trying to decide on my favourite character currently, but I can't because as soon as I think of a reason, i straight away think of an equally good point about a different character. A example is I think maybe I like Van Helsing because he speaks so wisely, fairly and quite matter-of-factly to everyone, but then I think, Seward is my favourite because he shows so much compassion for all of the other characters, he does his best to help people he has no obligation to help and is loyal all the way through the book. On another point, the appearance of Dracula himself, suprised me. He is described at the start of the book as having, "a long white moustache," from all the interpretations of Dracula that I have ever seen, he is always completely dark, clothes and hair.

Erm..... i think that's all I have to say, so i think I would give this book 8.1/10. It got such a good mark because despite how long it took me to read it, I was never bored, there is always something happening, no long boring passages of meaningless description or dialogue. However, it lost some of its marks because I really didn't think of it as a horror book. Sure it has some very dark themes, I mean a lot of people die, but it lacked any scaryness pour moi. I jsut looked up horror genre on wikipedia and it says this- "Horror fiction is a genre of fiction in any medium intended to scare, unsettle, or horrify the audience." I feel this book really failed on this front and I'm not sure why, maybe I am jsut being picky and maybe vampires have really been over done, I no longer find the idea in fiction scary. Oh well, I'm waffling so will finish mon post.

Starting Dracula.

Okay, well I realise I've left this a little late to start reading Dracula now, but I have been really neglecting my Gothic texts in favour of Ponsford's reading (whoops). Anyway, having read the blurb, the book does sound good. However, i think the fact that the book is so well known really lets it down. Because it's going to be predictable, I know the story line, I know the characters and I know how the book will end. So I guess it is going to have a lot less impact than it would have done, no suprises or being kept on the edge of my seat.

On the other hand, I may be able to understand the book itslef better, i won't be confused about the plot (like I was with Frankenstein). Also, as we have seen the film in lesson I will be able to imagine the book better in my mind and hopefully my opinion won't be swayed by the director's interpretation of the text. Oh well, i best get on and start reading, atleast the book doesn't look too long.

Finshed Bloody Chamber

Erm..... well, I finshed Bloody Chamber two days ago, but was in Blackpool and deprived of interent access, so I'm only writing up my opinions now. I wish i had thought to jot them down on paper, because i am having a hard time remembering the book itself, never mind what I thought about it. Oh well!

Actually, to be honest, the book was not as bad as I had anticipated. The short story structure worked well for me as I found the book itself a little boring and so the way it was split into ten sections encouraged me to read more at once.

However, through out reading this book, i kept thinking that there was supposed to be some meaning at the end of each story, for example in, "The Lady in the House of Love," the last line was, "Next day, his regiment embarked for France." I was unsure if that was meant to mean anything significant, if not I'm confused as to why it was given it's own new paragraph. And so I spent most of this book thinking I really am not understanding what is going on. So it was tres hard not to give up and read something easier.

Missed meanings aside, my favourite of the stories was, "The Tiger's Bride," unfortunately, this is not becasue it was particularly good, but because I have something negative to say about all of the other stories. I really id not like the story, "The Bloody Chamber," as i found that it took such a long time for the actual storyline to get going, I mean I'm sure this is intentional to set the scene and such, but i really was sehr bored by the time the woman found her husband's previous wives.

Overall, I guess, if I am being nice, I'd give this book 4.2/10.

Bloody Chamber

Well, two days after results day and since I have opted to continue literature, I don't have long to read the three gothic texts :S. I have chosen to start with The Bloody Chamber because out of the two novels it is the shortest and I am lazy. To be honest I don't have high hopes for this book because it is broken up into ten short stories and I think that this will cause the book to either compramise on description or plot itself.

However, the concept of the book is somewhat intriguing. Either it is going to make me see some of my childhood favourite stories in a new and bizarre light, or I'm just going to become more and more annoyed at the author's demonisation of once innocent stories. Oh well, it's only 149 pages- here goes nothing.