#butilovefire

[aandrezel]

Rules

Rule 1: Always post the rules. Rule 2: Answer the questions of the person who tagged you and write 11 new ones. Rule 3: Tag 11 people and link them. Rule 4: Let them know you tagged them.

Rule 5: Break the rules if you feel it’s necessary.  (/The Clash voice: Know your rights!)

Questions from muchtoofullofsand.

1.     What is your favorite history or history-like book?

As a young adult, I read mostly historical fiction, so I have quite a few titles that made a strong impression: Trinity and Exodus by Leon Uris are excellent, as is Nicholas and Alexandra by Robert K. Massie.  I’m not sure how historically accurate they are, but they were good reads.  On a related note, but on the slightly more “literary-canon” side of things, Hemingway’s war novels matter a great deal to me--faults and all--so I’ll add A Farewell to Arms and For Whom the Bell Tolls.  And if the completely un-abridged version of Les Miserables (Hugo) doesn’t count as a history lesson I will eat some Napoleonic-era hats.   I’m also going to count autobiographies as history-like books, so I’d be remiss not to mention my love for Out of Africa (Isak Dinesen), West with the Night (Beryl Markham), and Seven Pillars of Wisdom (T. E. Lawrence).  And Shakespeare’s histories give me all the feelings, and auf Deutsch I am deeply in love with Schiller’s Don Karlos.  Finally, as far as actual non-fiction histories go, George, Nicholas, and Wilhelm: Three Royal Cousins and the Road to WWI (Miranda Carter) is a both tragic and side-splittingly hilarious look at the path to WWI.  10/10 would recommend.

Yikes! I almost forgot Germinal (Emile Zola).  It’s a freaking PHENOMENAL novel about miners and their families in 19th century France.  One of the most depressing books I’ve ever read (with a trigger-warning list as long as my arm), but so, so worth it.

I really, really like histories, OK?

(PS: If histories are your cup of tea, smokeandsong and brandochunderdarkseas probably have the best recommendations to give you.)

2.     Name a book that drew you in because of its catchy title and/or cover, but turned out to be a dud.

Mechanics of Sound Recording (Tony Zaza): 

“Sound is light energy moving at a slower speed than that of light.”

Sound and electromagnetic radiation (light) are two COMPLETELY different things, although both are related to wave propagation.  There is a lot of technical material in this book, but after reading a statement like this in the first chapter, I’m inclined to view all of it with a serious side-eye.

3.     What was your favorite book as a child (pre-teen)?

I think this is a tie between the Redwall series (Brian Jacques), the Chronicles of Narnia (C. S. Lewis) and the Wrinkle in Time series (yes, all the way through A Swiftly Titling Planet) (Madeline L’Engle).  I also really loved the Chronicles of Prydain (Lloyd Alexander), and the Dealing with Dragons series (Patricia C. Wrede).

Fun fact: I’ve never read the Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings.  There is a good story behind this.  Someone remember to ask me about it sometime.

4.     What was your favorite book as a young adult?

I can recall a large number of really influential books from this time in my life.  Most (but not all) of the histories I mentioned in question 1 were read between 13 and 18, and a fair share of them belong on this list.  In addition to the histories, I had a particularly strong affinity for Arthurian legend in my teens.  I read The Mists of Avalon (Marion Zimmer Bradley) at 13 and sort of wandered through different interpretations from there: Mary Stewart’s The Crystal Cave series, T. H. White’s The Once and Future King, T. A. Barron’s Merlin saga, and Susan Cooper’s The Dark is Rising series.  I love each of them in its own way.  I think that Mists and Once and Future King are most indelibly printed on my heart, but I have some strong head-canon about Roman Britain instilled by Mary Stewart as well (in particular, I recall a statement about Uther—or Ambrosious maybe?—along the lines of: “he was Roman in more ways than one…”).

But above all, I’d probably have to say Cosmos (the book companion to the series) by Carl Sagan.  It’s the book that, when I read it at 14, changed me from a would-be novelist to a would-be astronomer.  Getting to handle Carl’s old class notes while prepping to TA for a course at Cornell is probably the coolest and most surreal thing that’s ever happened to me.

5.     Are you a courtly or carnal lover of your books?

Need I be one or the other?  I love books as they ask to be loved.

6.     What is your favorite cheesepuff?  (Interpret as you see fit.)

Under the Moons of Mars series by Edgar Rice Burroughs.  Brandoch and I read them out-loud to each other before bed in college and it was the greatest thing ever.

7.     "One of these things is not like the other" on your bookshelf.

Pfffffffft.  On the Edge: My Story by Richard Hammond.

8.     What was the first “grown-up” book you ever read?

See question 4: Mists of Avalon.

9.    What is your favorite movie based on a book, and do you prefer the movie or the book?

Out of Africa.  Oh god, I love them both.  Also Lawrence of Arabia. 

Douchebags. 

10.  Name the best book cover you’ve ever seen.

Ugh.  I don’t know.  But the cover of Under Great White Northern Lights (Autumn de Wilde + Jim Jarmusch + The White Stripes) makes me want to cry.  That whole book is so overwhelmingly beautiful.

Tagged:

borgevino

smokeandsong

brandochunderdarkseas

sea-change

muchtoofullofsand

milaggro

butilovefire

billyranger

theparadigmshifts

opalsinearrings

johnnydeppseyeliner

goodshipophelia

shireadventures

hylacrucifer

My Questions for You:

(1) Talk about a book that's the most like the language you speak inside your head.

(2) Tales of the sea or tales of the stars?  Favorite example?

(3) Talk about a book forever linked with your childhood.

(4) Talk about a book forever linked with coming of age.

(5) You've been left an inheritance with the provision it should be used for a book collection.  What do you buy?

(6) Tell me about your favorite library.

(7) Talk to me about your favorite literary representation of love.

(8) Talk to me about your favorite literary representation of "other" or "foreign" or "outsider".

(9) Tell me about your favorite poem.

(10) Tell me about your favorite book with very few words.

(11) Pick your favorite of the questions I answered and answer it for yourself.

Love,

Amelie

[harrietvane]

So I got to the ep on The Killing where Holder goes missing at the casino and Linden freaks out and calls it in to the dispatcher as a code '10-13'.

OH RIGHT LIKE I NEEDED MORE MULDER/SCULLY FEELINGS ABOUT THIS.

[aandrezel]

This is not your warm fuzzy fic

***MASSIVE 'THE KILLING' SPOILERS***

They pulled into the station because the gauge had already been on E for ten miles.  

Stephen got out of the car and slammed the door and stalked into the mini-mart.  Sarah sat straight-backed in the driver's seat, never looking any direction but forward, into the dark of the woods.  It was two, maybe three am.  

The out-dated fluorescents buzzed noisily overhead.

Stephen paid the attendant with his last twenty and came back to the car.  He hit the 87 button but nothing happened.  He slammed it with his open palm--once, twice, three times in quick succession--still nothing.  The attendant looked out the window.  Stephen pushed 89 and pumped in silence.

When he was finished, he got back in the car and put on his seatbelt.

"Nice job," Sarah said, still staring straight ahead.  "Now he'll remember you."

She turned over the engine.  Stephen waved at the attendant.  He was absorbed in the same copy of Hustler he'd been reading when Stephen had come in.

"He ain't gonna remember shit," he said.

"Well, you better hope not."

Stephen looked at her in disbelief.  "What the fuck, Linden," he said as they pulled out into the road.  "This ain't on me.  Do you even know what you look like?"

Sarah looked down at her chest and hands.  They were covered in blood.  She didn't remember that: touching the body.  At least it explained why Holder had let her drive.

Without warning, it came flooding back: Skinner on the ground, slumped execution-style; Holder, dragging her away--

--She began to wretch, clawing at the window crank.

"Easy, easy!" Stephen said from the passenger seat, reaching across to her almost involuntarily.

She got the window down and vomited out onto the highway.  They swerved hard.

"Keep driving, Linden," Holder commanded.  "You gotta keep driving."

Sarah swallowed hard and breathed heavily and focused her eyes back on the road.  The barreled on into the dark.

"You got it?" Stephen asked.

Sarah nodded.  The sound of her labored breathing filled the car.  

"Where's your jacket?" she asked flatly, about a mile down the road.  She had no idea where they were.

"Garbage bag in the trunk," Holder said.

She nodded again.

"And the gun?"

"Another bag."

Sarah kept her focus at the edge of the headlights.  The trees pressed close to the sides of the road.

"Did you put it in the trunk?"

Holder dipped his head to the side and pursed his lips.

"Jesus, Linden," he said, "That gun is registered.  It's in the system."

"Don't patronize me," she repeated coldly: "Did you put the gun in the trunk?"

Holder kicked the dash under the glove compartment.  He looked out the passenger window so that Sarah couldn't see his face.

"Yeah," he said.  "It's in the trunk."

Linden let the facts sink in.

"Did I--" she began.  She rephrased.  "After the--"  Fuck it.  A deep breath.  "How bad are the post-mortem wounds?"

The more she calmed down, the more agitated Holder became.

"Well, they ain't good," he said. "But shit, Linden, listen to me: your gun. is. in. the. system."

"I know it's in the system!" Sarah shouted back, slamming her fists against the wheel.  "They've got the gun.  What the fuck do you want me to do about it?"

"You gotta decide what we're doing here," Holder said, staring at her from the passenger seat.  "I've gotta know.  You want us to drive to Canada, we'll drive to fucking Canada.  What the fuck do I care?  Say the word and we'll go.  But right now, you've gotta think about the facts and you've gotta make up your crazy-ass mind and you've gotta tell. me.  Now."

Sarah watched the headlights careen into the black.  

"They've got the gun in the system?" she asked again.  "And the shot was--" she gestured vaguely toward her head.

Holder nodded.

Sarah took a deep breath.  Her face settled in determination.

"We've gotta call it in," she said.

They were quiet a moment.

"Yeah," Holder said.  "We've gotta call it in."  

He paused:  "But first we go back."

Sarah nodded.  She rested her hands across the wheel and she nodded.

"Pull over," Stephen told her.  "Let me drive."

[harrietvane]

OK, so some slightly less coherent The Killing rambles aimed at smokeandsong and butilovefire... (but all are welcome if that's your poison)

No but seriously, this HURTS MY HEART that last shot of Holder getting into Mystery Car all 'they totally bought my tollbooth camera lie because i am a lying liar who lies and am awesome at lying!' Like I DON'T WANT TO BE SPOILED but I have to wail at you both as i'm sure you UNDERSTAND. I thought Linden was gonna zoom down the aisle of the plane like a flying squirrel and tear the arm off the stewardess until she got out for the purposes of murdering Holder. And I kind of wanted her to do that. 

How awesome is it that Lindedn's ex is Tahmoh Penikett? Get it, guuuurl, you don't need to explain that mistake. And it's only that I know TP is like 7 foot tall that I realise Enos is actually average sized and not a miniature person, as her in the room with both Kinnaman and TP was COMEDIC, size wise.

Also wooo Alone Tal! I LOVE when she shows up in things!

Is it me, or did it seem like they hit the breaks, revelation-wise in the last few eps? Like they seems to have this big reveal about Rosie's Baeu Soleil connection, then they just kind of left it open-ended re that night? Like, was she booked? How did this become a regular thing? Why was the account in her aunt's name? I feel like the fact that her being an escort was just kind of handwaved, like it wasn't totally out of character. I mean I'm gonna assume they decided to space these kinds of things out to allow for season 2, but it seemed they rushed a lot of info in the last 3 eps, but didn't explore any of it. At all. Again, all questions rhetorical, just putting thoughts out there.

I'm super impressed at Kinnaman's accent. I mean I'm not a US local myself, but by comparison to any of the Skarsgards for example he doesn't have a lot of skandi there to hear, at least to my ear. 

I feel like I've been standing in sheeting rain and sitting in sodden cars for MONTHS. 

[harrietvane]

You guys weren't f*cking around - this is some Mulder and Scully level vibes they're giving off.

things i love about Linden include that her domestic snafus are not displayed as her DEFINING characteristic, but rather a SYMPTOM of her other, well-rounded traits. Eg she's not primarily the 'oh she's fighting with her kid and always forgets The Important Things' adorable/tragic klutz, but you get the focus on what SHE IS ACTUALLY DOING (eg saving lives/fighting crime/being awesome) and then as consequence there's an inevitable friction in her home life.  But it's one of many consequences, and not the sole purpose of their attempts to (narratively) make me like her, as a character. 

(Also if you're not 100% about marrying Callum Keith Rennie I VOLUNTEER. JUST SAYIN')

Please tell me that's the last time Holder tries to wear a suit. Ever. Disreputable hoodies for life.

I can't lie, I'm a bit pissed S1 ended on a cliffhanger - but I have my reasons: I dig ambiguity re: resolution, but that's usually b/c I have become so involved in the tone or in the characters or world (eg Deadwood), but the 'world' in this case was SO GRIM I feel drained and in need of the small comforts of either puzzle solving (al la procedural) or character mutual support (a la X Files) to make MY HEART STOP HURTING LIKE IT'S BEEN SANDPAPERED.

I'm not that fussed if Billy Campbell is the killer or not. I just don't like the guy (not the actor, who's been bang-able since The Rocketeer lbr). I mean that whole All Stars, 'let's shoot some hoops kids!' is just so effing condescending. Sure, start the program, pay the money, but then go away. Those photo ops were gross. But I may be underestimating full horror of US political campaign norms?

I was getting major second-hand emotional trauma from Michelle Forbes' everything. It got so I had to make the viewer smaller in her scenes it was that distressing. Where is her Emmy? But to be clear, this was really unpleasant.

Holder trying to do high school style 'if he has a half tank of gas and the road is this long how far does he go' type problem is my new favourite thing.

His phone message to his sister re: 'I have this friend, she's in need' is potentially my fave character moment so far.

I may take a break before S2 just to recover emotionally, but I do plan to continue. If you wanna discuss season 1, my Ask is always open!

[aandrezel]

Jarmusch’s picture was the second-last to screen in competition at this year’s Cannes Film Festival, and the weary audience were right in step with its drowsy, meditative tone. When the film begins, the two lovers are on opposite sides of the globe. Adam is in a crumbling mansion on the outskirts of Detroit, a city that itself looks thoroughly bled dry; Eve resides by a souk in Tangiers. Each has a reliable supply of fresh blood at hand: Adam from a bribable haematologist at the local hospital, and Eve from Kit Marlowe – yes, that Kit Marlowe – who, in the Jarmusch world, is also a vampire, is played by John Hurt, and wrote the complete works of Shakespeare. Early on, Eve flies to Detroit and the couple are happily reunited. They drive around the city at night visiting points of interest to vampires – “Look, there’s Jack White’s house,” says Adam – and sup top grade Type O Negative plasma from dainty glass goblets. Afterwards they slump backwards in a spaced-out state, utterly bloody-minded.

The Telegraph review of OLLA

[borgevino]

bookcoversproject replied to your post: REPLIES ARE BECOMING LENGTHY, SO CUT ...

hahah oh honey we can prolly get you pretty hungover in NYC, I bet harry and I can do that.

I WOULD BE EIGHTY THOUSAND PERCENT DOWN FOR THAT TBQH (we should talk about logistics there some more, i have my dates p set for sept 24-29-ish??? for the sort of dumb reason that the ntl othello is on in that time span, and if i was in indiana i'd have to drive three hours, and why not take advantage of my vacation time and go to nyc instead. i don't think the pstew/mckellan waiting for godot is on then, though, so i may have to. try again.)

bookcoversproject replied to your post: REPLIES ARE BECOMING LENGTHY, SO CUT ...

also yes I am the kind of person who mostly has good binge-drinking stories from grad?school? (I don’t think that’s even a big enough group to be a Kind Of Person tbh)

you are my favorite human it is you.  (i don't have any really good drinking stories tbh.  although i once convinced a country songwriter that i had a tequila story in spain without saying anything at all.)

bookcoversproject replied to your post: REPLIES ARE BECOMING LENGTHY, SO CUT ...

(on the other hand we might be too old for that sort of thing anymore)

lskfjs LIES.

[borgevino]

butilovefire replied to your post: [screeches the text of a play is inextricably...

yep. i mean you CAN look at texts separately from performance but you have to recognize and acknowledge the severe limits of that approach (esp if you’re trying to address authorial intent which would obviously be entangled with performance)

exactly!  all texts are living texts (in the way the reader responds to them) but plays are doubly so—because you have the text, and then the production's response to the text, and then the viewer's response to the production and the text, and different productions activate different elements of the text—even elements that weren't there in the author's intention.

(and even if you're looking at text as just text it's impossible to ignore the ways it has interacted with culture in the past, and will interact with culture in the future—surveillance-state hamlets, atemporal twelfth nights, news-network coriolanuses, soviet macbeths...)

sea-change replied to your post: [screeches the text of a play is inextricably...

but i mean like texts THEMSELVES aren’t static things so even if you were looking at a playscript seperate from the idea of performance (which. whyyyyyy. unless MAYBE you were deep into someone like muller but even then) you. can’t force it to be something it’s not for the sake of your argument??? like, ALL texts are meant to be engaged with, and playtexts are meant to be engaged with bodily. it’s not even authorial intent, it’s the shape of text itself, and its job is to shape you.

and then jacqui says exactly the thing i meant.  because yes.  i really haven't done theatre enough to really talk about this, but there's something about the potential ways the text is uniquely transformed and embodied by each actor who performs it that's just.  really fundamental.  to even its existence as a text.