i legere

reading diary - thots and thinks

[piccolo-reads]

yes the cold withdrawing light when blanc speaks about his atheism yes the warm light reappearing when father jud speaks of his faith BUT ALSO that light the first time not quite reaching blanc’s eyes and only resting across his nose but in his final damascus moment the light spills across his whole face and his eyes are lit up by that glow as they are descaled

[piccolo-reads]

i saw a post that talks about how from the very first confession, wicks disrespects his own faith by lying to jud in confession

but there’s something to be said about how from that very first confession, wicks lays everything on the table, and does truly confess the worst about himself. envying the material wealth of others (the car ad / the inheritance), wanting power (his grandfathers power / manipulating the flock / teaming up with cy).

wicks is honest, he’s telling jud exactly the kind of man he is. but the thing is, it is still a mockery of the holiness of confession and a betrayal of his faith, because he’s not sorry for any of it

[piccolo-reads]

yes the cold withdrawing light when blanc speaks about his atheism yes the warm light reappearing when father jud speaks of his faith BUT ALSO that light the first time not quite reaching blanc’s eyes and only resting across his nose but in his final damascus moment the light spills across his whole face and his eyes are lit up by that glow as they are descaled

[piccolo-reads]

thinking about how victor’s red gloves appear after he is marked by the trauma of his mothers death and he wears it throughout preparing for and during the creation of the creature.

thinking about how when the creature finds him the morning after his creation, victor takes off those gloves in order to connect with the creature, to show him that he means no harm

thinking about how we don’t see victor with those gloves on again until he is deciding to condemn the creature, methodically donning them as he is coldly awaiting an answer (the right answer) to his impossible question from his underprepared child, the way his father expected an answer without properly preparing him, punishing his child the way his father punished him. donning those gloves and donning the abuse and the trauma once again

ive heard about the gloves being a metaphor for trauma, and they are. but those few weeks when he opened himself up to love, to vulnerability, to parenthood. before his impatience and inability to love the creature as a person rather than a project overrules him

[piccolo-reads]

not a book but

i watched wicked the musical and i have Thoughts

spoilers for both the book and the musical under the cut

obviously it is constrained by the limits of a 2 hour production, and the musical numbers themselves will reduce the amount of time available to dedicate to plot, so changes and simplification of the plot is inevitable, and the book does so much worldbuilding with religion, geopolitics and culture that i struggled to keep up with, so omitting certain things was definitely a good move. there are things i think was done well, such as keeping madame morrible and the wizard mostly the same in their motivations (specifically grooming powerful young women to be their political pawns), and the changes made to streamline the story (ie making madam morrible the press secretary) worked well. i also think the Animal rights plotline was simplified enough to fit well into the story without losing the core of the theme. i like the notes of propaganda and how easily the masses can be manipulated through effective propaganda. and i like the gimmick that is ‘characters we know turn into dorothy’s sidekicks’ - it takes a potential from the book and plays it up. i do think in a way it erases the trauma and unhealthy coping mechanisms that elphaba goes through, but i also do enjoy it. and of course, the songs and vocals are incredible

however, some of the character choices i think is a bit weird and makes the characters deviate completely from who they are in the book. of course, it is not compulsory to adhere to every detail when adapting a source material, but i think core characteristics should be preserved.

for one, the musical can’t seem to decide on how Good or Evil they want the wizard to be. he is power-hungry and wants to use elphaba’s powers, then is completely okay with killing her because she knows too much about his real lack of powers - but then mourns her as soon as he finds out she’s his daughter? and that revelation is enough to convince him to give up all his control if oz and go back to Our Earth, instead of killing Glinda the loose end and continuing his regime? the only explanation provided for this is his own declaration of being “a sentimental man who wanted to be a father”, which is the only time this motivation is mentioned. i hate to go Middle School English Teacher, but it’s a little too much tell and not enough show for me. maybe it was intended to give him nuance, so i guess it boils down to my personal preference, which is that the simple, straight Evilness of the wizard in the book is the whole point. he is simply a powerhungry man who saw a country available to overtake, who manipulates young girls and tortures his prisoners of war to achieve his means, who does not care about Animals, who exploits the lands of native people, and giving him nuance (in my opinion) does a disservice to the plotline of elphaba fighting against an oppressive regime and glinda being manipulated/brainwashed by said regime. additionally, i think his uncomplicated evil provides a good contrast to the nuance of elphaba, who is morally grey and makes morally grey choices and commits morally grey actions, which was the point of the book - to provide nuance to elphaba.

speaking of elphaba, her character also has very different motivations, particularly in act 2. i think it’s a strange thing to include the Animal rights plotline, only for it to not affect her decisions that much in the second act (except that bit with dr dillamond) when it was such a central part of her personal politics in the book. instead, her decisions are mostly driven by fiyero (who is a bit fridged). nothing wrong with love as a motivation, but dare i say it’s reductive. especially since agency is further removed from her when the Wicked Witch of the West title is branded on her, instead of a choice, a title she accepts and promotes to give herself power. i also find it strange that she chooses to “no good deed will [she] ever make”, when the nuance of her character in the book was that her actions are made of more-or-less good intentions but end up with less than favourable outcomes, and she never chooses to be actively evil. even towards the end of the book when she sends animals to attack dorothy’s crew, it is fueled by her wanting the shoes, not ‘i’ve decided to be evil because i’m heartbroken’. isn’t the whole point of humanising the Wicked witch is to show that she doesn’t commit Wickedness with intention? there’s little things too, like the accident that is the monkeys sprouting wings, which in the book is a careful, practiced undertaking which not only speaks to elphaba’s dedication and intelligence but also to her attitude towards animals and the slow unhinging of her mind.

galinda/glinda also feels underserved. it feels like the musical completely erases her aptitude for sorcery, where it was a key part of her character in the book. you could argue that perhaps the musical doesn’t have the time to elaborate on her abilities, and madame morrible’s insults to her skill is part of morrible’s character. however, if i remember correctly, the few times galinda attempts magic, she doesn’t manage it. combined with playing up elphaba’s innate powerful abilities, galinda/glinda’s character seems to be overwhelmingly that of an insecure friend and disappointingly one-note

in addition to that, the relationship between elphaba and galinda/glinda and their eventual rift also feels underserved. the moments of their friendship i think shines better in the musical than in the book, but i think it is reductive to make the driving force of their separation be a man rather than the complex politics they ascribe to. again, nothing wrong with romance and a good love triangle, and i can understand that a love triangle is easier to build a simple plotline around, but their politics was such a core part of their characters in the books that it feels fundamentally changed.

ultimately, i think the book characters and musical characters are different at their core, but again, there is no compulsory need to translate every single aspect of the source material when adapting, and it comes down to personal preference

after all this, this is not to say that i don’t like the musical. in fact i enjoyed it immensely and will definitely see it in theatre when i can, and will be listening to the soundtrack on repeat, and there are other changes made that i think served the musical well

i’m looking forward to seeing the movies (which is the whole reason i started reading the book and watching/listening to the musical in the first place) and seeing what changes are made to the characters from the musical. i can imagine ariana will want to add more nuance to galinda, and elphaba may be softened further, and i’m looking forward to seeing that

[piccolo-reads]

wicked - in the vinkus - uprisings

- the way nor’s perspective exclusively refers to elphaba as The Witch, and not auntie 🤌 the alienation of it all

the murder and its aftermath

- and then after, even in her own perspective, elphaba is only ever referred to as The Witch

- an entire book to flesh out the Wicked Witch of the West’s character, and in the end her motivation is the same. The shoes

- it’s the shoes that have more depth now. about Elphaba’s fraught family dynamics, about her own insecurities, about the politics she is entrenched in

- obviously it’s a fun choice and nod to the original to make the wizard just like, a mediocre white man, who just happens to be power hungry enough to take over an entire world in a realm he dropped into. but the book also implies he’s irish?

- woah he’s elphaba’s dad?

- aw the scarecrow isn’t fiyero.

- in the last few sections you can really start to see elphaba’s mind unravel. like when she jokingly thinks to herself about sewing wings onto the monkeys, and then time jump she’s doing it. or when she convinces herself that she’s not evil for wanting to kill dorothy

i finished it. quite honestly, i don’t understand it. it has lots of complex themes that i can’t quite articulate right now. i will probably need a few rereads.

but i can already tell it is very different from the musical, which i’m looking forward to watching and listening.

[piccolo-reads]

wicked - city of emeralds

- hello it’s ya girl picking this book back up after like 6 months

- elphaba praying at glinda’s altar are you kidding meee

- the thing about the worldbuilding in this book is there’s no exposition. the characters talk about the elements of the world assuming the reader already knows. sends my head spinning tbh, but i do enjoy it

- i do enjoy the banter between fiyero and elphaba though

- does not escape my notice that the white cat is one of the animals on elphaba’s portrait on the books cover. does she accrue familiars as she progresses?

- never mind fiyero is married. how much does the musical change

- never mind never mind

- don’t you hate when your relationship becomes a debate ground for philosophy and just war theory

- the whole of the city of emeralds is so interesting in the philosophy it explores in a way that my brain is too dumb to articulate right now

- in a way, in many ways, both fiyero and elphaba are complicit. fiyero complicit in not turning in elphaba, elphaba complicit in her refusal to take accountability for the collateral damage her cause takes

- but then, elphaba hesitates to take that collateral damage, and proves herself more human than she wanted to be

in the vinkus - the voyage out

- a child?? their child??

- something something elphaba needs to “atone for her mistakes” before she can “find peace” because she’s “returning to herself” but returning to herself involves a journey into the “spread legs” of the kumbricia pass, she’s returning to the womb of the witch who is beyond knowable time but lives on through her witch descendants. hello

- and she emerges from the kumbricia pass “more and more awake”. HELLO

- is killyjoy the wolf on the cover

- setting up elphaba “guise as a witch” is setting up questions about the eventual image of elphaba as a witch and whether that’s real

- AND THE MONKEY APPEARS

- wait i completely forgot that i thought fiyero was gonna become the scarecrow in the original wizard of oz. but he’s dead

in the vinkus - the jasper gates of kiamo ko

- i appreciate that the sisters are referred to by their birth order, just Four or Six. because viet people also do that hehe

- wait is kiamo ko going to be the wicked witch’s castle from the original wizard of oz

- in a way, elphaba is selfish still, to want to unload the details of fiyero’s death to sarima. it feels more like her own unburdening than a favour to sarima

- for all elphaba insists she has no aptitude for sorcery, she does demonstrate an innate, unconscious skill. which i guess is the point

[piccolo-reads]

wicked - boq

- why is the gillikin river a goddess’ piss

- i stopped reading this over the new years and promptly forgot most of my thoughts during this chapter

- but to be honest i was confused for a lot of it. esp all the things about doctor dillamond’s research

- suffice it to say the animal rights theme is not lost

the charmed circle

- the change from galinda to glinda is clearly deliberate but i’m struggling to pin a finger on what the significance is

- it is actually really lovely to see glinda realise she isn’t actually vapid and shallow and become friends with elphaba. we always knew she was capable of critical thought

- the scene where elphaba starts talking about the wizards influence in the quadlands and glinda is like i thought we were talking about your childhood. the significance of politics being in the everyday of the lives of the marginalised is also not lost

- all of a sudden a lot of characters are appearing. i did not expect fiyero to be winkie. and ?the cowardly lion

- oooo the silver shoes

- i am ashamed to say that i did not even consider that it was madame morrible who killed dillamond until just before ama started talking

- gelphie is so real in the book. like they straight up say they love each other hello

- YOU GUYS THEY KISS

[piccolo-reads]

wicked chap 9 - end of galinda

- i take it back, galinda was not the once future ozma

- i am actually quite surprised. based on the limited things i’d seen of the musical and movie (i was trying to avoid spoilers) i’d assumed that galinda came from money and status, the daughter of a politician or someone high up in and near the wizard. but she’s from a farming town and a modest background, even if she does seem to come from at least some wealth? she’s a country gal.

- however, it already speaks to her character that she can’t empathise with dillamond on the impending dehumanisation (de-animalisation?) of the Animals. and also that she is a girly girl, bc who would think ‘stripes on the bias to their inborn design’ about zebras wearing striped suits

- and also these chapters speak to her need to be seen as someone influential and wanting to BE someone with influence, not just in sucking up to the rich girls, but also how she wants to make up a worldly-seeming saying about travel in order to seem worldly

- it speaks to galinda’s knowledge of art and architecture and fashion that i spent 10 mins at the beginning of this chapter searching up what words meant and then resigned myself to not knowing what the rest of the words in the chapter meant

- galinda babes u are never beating the gay allegation wdym you’re constantly thinking about how pretty your roommates hair is

- the scene where they start to become friends is so endearing. and galinda basically stumbles into it accidentally

- she is really putting herself into a double life here - genuinely enjoying her time w elphaba then pretending she hadn’t to buy herself social equity with the rich girls. and she is only friends w the rich girls for the social equity, one has to wonder if she even genuinely likes being friends with them

- it’s also interesting that we still haven’t had any of elphaba’s POV yet, continuing to distance us from her. it made sense when she was a baby, but now that she’s sentient it is even more obvious of an intentional choice

- i also love that there is so much politics weaved into this world and gently, slowly released to us one at a time. the paganism vs more recent unionist religion vs pleasure faith and tiktokism, and the government aspect of the wizard taking over the ozma’s reign, having our protagonists grow up during this change and be able to comment on both

- the tiktokism thing, again, like i was saying in the first post, it’s so interesting that there is a movement against ‘clockwork’ - it feels analogous to our worlds never-ending suspicion against modern technology, especially in the first years of technology booming, but even now. and again i wonder how it fits into the wizard, given (at least if we’re continuing the same lore as from the wizard of oz) that his spectacle (read: pleasure faith) relies on machinery (read: tiktokism)

- also very into the way this book discusses how politics works in the public - eg. the laws regarding Animals being passed but the girls not even knowing about it, whether that’s from wilful ignorance or if they’re kept from knowing.

- and it speaks volumes how these girls don’t seem to care. except elphaba. and galinda, who had such potential for empathy.

- seems very much to speak to how our governments treats underprivileged communities and further entrenches their disadvantage, and how those with privilege don’t know or don’t care

- i almost feel sorry for galinda, in her quest for greatness ending up being manipulated by the likes such as madame morrible (gee i hope it doesn’t keep going?)

[piccolo-reads]

wicked chaps 5 - 8

- i feel real bad for melena. leaving her silver spoon life only to be disappointed and unfulfilled by the man she married and the life she married into, so much so that she willingly sedates herself and leaves herself vulnerable. (its kind of giving trad wife)

- and immediately after this i felt bad for judging fred. chap 6 does a good job of humanising him - he does love his daughter, or tries to, and he does feel bad about the life he’s led melena to, clearly outside of his intention. it was a bit refreshing actually to have my opinion of him reverted slightly

- not the oziad lmao. i wonder what trials befell munchkin odysseus

- wait elphaba is a munchkin?

- i also cant take tiktokism seriously lol

- wait is the future ozma galinda??

- what an intriguing end to the first section. if my predictions are correct then galinda has just been robbed of her crown by the wizard?

- also the way the geopolitics are being set up with turtle heart talking about the road development, environmental destruction and resource exploitation of quadling country and how the government wants to centralise power in that region. interested to see how that develops

[piccolo-reads]

introducing - khanh reads wicked!

preamble: i want to read it bc i want to watch the musical and then the movie bc i am a pedantic nerd who wants to experience media (specifically media which has been released in a series) in the order it was released

prologue - chap 4

- very obvious intentional choice in the prologue to refer to the witch only as The Witch, holding off on introducing her name. i guess reading this you have to set yourself in an era before the musical established elphaba as a sympathetic ‘villain’, and people only knew her as the wicked witch. the prologue maintains that distance, because her name would have personalised her

- i have had some slight spoilers from the book/musical, so reading the prologue it was very interesting to keep track of what the scarecrow is saying. i’m not sure how much of his previous personality he retains, but very interesting that he doesn’t (or minimally) partakes in the gossiping (it was mostly the tinman and the lion)

- the first chapter of any fantasy novel, as always, the worldbuilding is dizzying

- but also as a healthcare worker i cannot take the name melena seriously

- wow 8 pages in and we’ve already got commentary on the double standards of childbearing between the genders

- ah, classic ‘pastor’ figure who is subtly hypocritical and doesn’t care about his wife giving birth and his first child being born. love. and of course he preaches against ‘wickedness’ which sets him up perfectly for having an imperfect daughter

- but also, very interesting that he is preaching against idolatry, specifically of automaton and machinery and spectacle, and the first 2 chapters tell of how the people are rapt by and follow the stories that this machine dragon tells. is it setting up how oz follows the spectacle of the wizard even though they don’t know him or what goes on behind the scenes

- also the “singing” melena hears is fascinating. is that the baby singing?

- lmao the “the devil is coming” / “don’t say that on the day our child is coming” , how very macbeth

- of course there’s a mother maiden crone at the birth of a witch!!!!

- she was born in a graveyard for desecrated souls???

- she tasted blood before milk???

- again, as a healthcare worker, i can’t recommend the ideal birthing plan of sedating the mother, delivering the baby, then leaving the still unconscious mother with their infant in the rain

- also, is there? foreshadowing? to the fact that the dragon was made of green leather and silver claws and it came to town and baby witch was born?

- also also, there is definitely foreshadowing in the fact that there’s been hella drought and when baby witch is born it storms. ironic, given her hydrophobia

- the entire third chapter makes me feel so sorry for elphaba. her father referring to her as ‘it’. wanting to _exorcise_ her. only nanny giving her the benefit of the doubt and even then being disgusted by her. all for being born the wrong colour

- it really can be read through a queer lens or a neurodivergent lens or a disabled lens, or any lens involving an ‘other’

[piccolo-reads]

pride and prejudice chaps 1-3

- what a fun time. i’m having a lovely time reading it out loud with a british accent

- i like that it opens with bingley instead of darcy. a little expectation subversion

- the first three chapters actually do very well in terms of setting the scene, characters and general vibe. opening with prospects of marriage lets you know this will be a romantic novel, setting up the characters (eg. mrs bennet’s sole purpose in life, mr bennet’s personality).

- the prose/narrator’s voice is also really enjoyable. snarky at times. almost like you’re being told this by a friend at a party.

- wish we got to spend more time getting to know the bennet’s girls, but i’m sure we’ll have plenty of time later on

- i love that the whole description of darcy was “he’s hotter and richer than his friend, but man what a dick” and the whole ton disregarded him based on that. which is very valid

[piccolo-reads]

alright everybody it’s time for the classic, the og, the paradigm - it’s time for pride and prejudice

pre thoughts

- have been wanting to read this for a while but kept putting it off (in favour of bridgerton)

- i have not watched the movie nor read the books, though being on social media means some spoilers, so i have some sense of some plot points but largely im going in blind

- i haven’t read classics in a long time, and when i did read classics i didn’t always have the easiest time, so we’ll see how we go with this

[piccolo-reads]

victoria and the rogue chaps 6-end

- i finished the rest of it in one sitting

- it continued to be very low effort and minimal brain power required

- and continued to be very predictable

- although the third act becomes so very unhinged and anachronistic it was laughable. you have to give it some leeway though

- victoria continued to be as uppity and clueless as ever. and slightly annoying and know-it-all, but she did manage to turn that urge into a positive force so i guess that’s a positive

- slight patriarchal vibes from the main man. but period-appropriate?

[piccolo-reads]

victoria and the rogue chapters 1-5

- so far, very easy-to-read, very low effort minimal brain power required. like a great rom com you’ve watched a thousand times that you chuck on in the background while you eat. in a cosy way

- victoria (main lady) is coming off very annoying. makes me think emma (austen) altho ive never read emma. just busybody thinks she knows best. though i guess the point is for her to have a character arc and learn some humble pie

- victoria’s marriage prospect is so clearly set up to be a disappointment it’s hilarious. she’s the only one who doesn’t realise it. and i get that it’s part of the plot, the point of which is to be predictable as hell. but it’s still funny

- jacob, the main man, is the stereotypical roguish boy. and victoria reacts the stereotypical way of “ugh he’s so annoying 🙄 but also cute how dare he be cute 😒”

- the plot is very stereotypical. classic enemies-to-lovers. like i said it’s very cosy

- the dialogue is very regency but also the prose is adapted to be regency. it’s like how people in bridgerton talk but in internal monologue. it makes me excited to watch bridgerton lol

[piccolo-reads]

hello good evening i am back like 5 months later and im about to read ‘victoria and the rogue’ by meg cabot 🫣 it’s a silly little historical romcom

for context i Loved the princess diaries when i was young and also read this book and the other regency inspired book by meg cabot and had a good time and i recently found this in a thrift store and ive been collecting books i enjoyed from my youth so i thought why the hell not

also i want to get into more classics and have been recommended to read pride and prejudice (i haven’t read p&p ik 🫣) and i feel like this will put me in the right mood for p&p

alright here goes hold on to your corsets

[fictionadventurer]

I think the Hunger Games series sits in a similar literary position to The Lord of the Rings, as a piece of literature (by a Catholic author) that sparked a whole new subgenre and then gets blamed for flaws that exist in the copycat books and aren’t actually part of the original.

Like, despite what parodies might say, Katniss is nowhere near the stereotypical “unqualified teenager chosen to lead a rebellion for no good reason”.  The entire point is that she’s not leading the rebellion. She’s a traumatized teenager who has emotional reactions to the horrors in her society, and is constantly being reined in by more experienced adults who have to tell her, “No, this is not how you fight the government, you are going to get people killed.” She’s not the upstart teenager showing the brainless adults what to do–she’s a teenager being manipulated by smarter and more experienced adults. She has no power in the rebellion except as a useful piece of propaganda, and the entire trilogy is her straining against that role. It’s much more realistic and far more nuanced than anyone who dismisses it as “stereotypical YA dystopian” gives it credit for.

And the misconceptions don’t end there. The Hunger Games has no “stereotypical YA love triangle”–yes, there are two potential love interests, but the romance is so not the point. There’s a war going on! Katniss has more important things to worry about than boys! The romance was never about her choosing between two hot boys–it’s about choosing between two diametrically opposed worldviews. Will she choose anger and war, or compassion and peace? Of course a trilogy filled with the horrors of war ends with her marriage to the peace-loving Peeta. Unlike some of the YA dystopian copycats, the romance here is part of the message, not just something to pacify readers who expect “hot love triangles” in their YA. 

The worldbuilding in the Hunger Games trilogy is simplistic and not realistic, but unlike some of her imitators, Collins does this because she has something to say, not because she’s cobbling together a grim and gritty dystopia that’s “similar to the Hunger Games”. The worldbuilding has an allegorical function, kept simple so we can see beyond it to what Collins is really saying–and it’s nothing so comforting as “we need to fight the evil people who are ruining society”. The Capitol’s not just the powerful, greedy bad guys–the Capitol is us, First World America, living in luxury while we ignore the problems of the rest of the world, and thinking of other nations largely in terms of what resources we can get from them. This simplistic world is a sparsely set stage that lets us explore the larger themes about exploitation and war and the horrors people will commit for the sake of their bread and circuses, meant to make us think deeper about what separates a hero from a villain.

There’s a reason these books became a literary phenomenon. There’s a reason that dozens upon dozens of authors attempted to imitate them. But these imitators can’t capture that same genius, largely because they’re trying to imitate the trappings of another book, and failing to capture the larger and more meaningful message underneath. Make a copy of a copy of a copy, and you’ll wind up with something far removed from the original masterpiece. But we shouldn’t make the mistake of blaming those flaws on the original work.