Book updates!

So I’m sure most of you do not care, but since setting book goals for myself I have finished three books!…all of which are relevant to race/racism in America. I have loved every single one !

The first was The Autobiography of Malcolm X, as told to Alex Haley, which was so exciting and had so many twists and turns it did not feel in the least like an autobiography. The epilogue in it was also incredible. I feel like anything public schools bothered to teach most of us about Malcolm X were very much off the mark, and I think this book is important to read for any person. Reading about his assassination was incredibly sad for me, as I think he was reaching a point in his life where he was rethinking his values on so many things and he had so much to teach and learn and now it just will not happen. We have The Death and Life of Malcolm X in our home, and I do plan on reading that soon. (5 STARS)

Next I finished Why Do All of the Black Kids Sit Together in the Cafeteria? A Psychologist Explains the Development of Racial Identity Written by Beverly Daniel Tatum. Also a super important read for any person, ESPECIALLY those who work with children in any capacity. I will be buying a copy for my sister, who plans to go into education. The book really highlights that children of color are ultimately disregarded and viewed negatively in education, in that their history is rarely told (and often is told inaccurately), and also that they have no reflection of themselves in a positive light in most curriculums (POC viewed as victims only, and almost never as revolutionaries and people who organized and fought back). I loved this book, because as a POC of color it is something I have always been aware of but was never given the words to describe until now. She also wrote about children growing up in interracial families, which I really appreciated as a biracial woman. Anyway, super super informative and I gave it 4 STARS (Lost a star because sometimes her writing voice was unnecessarily frilly).

Lastly, I finished The House on Mango Street written by Sandra Cisneros. The book took me two days to read, but it was packed with so many great things. The chapters all told a story about a character or event in the most poetic ways and really touched on the topic of diaspora, which I am currently very interested in. I only wish it was longer, I would love to read more by this author. (4 STARS)

I am currently reading Motherhood in Feminism by Amber E. Kinser and How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents by Julia Alvarez.

A Game of Thrones

I think it's pretty cool that the author makes the most barbaric in the bunch people who are blonde and white. SOMETHING DIFFERENT FOR A CHANGE.

A Game of Thrones

I should write on here more often. Obviously for my own benefit, since no one will really read it (which is good). I'm not good at 'critiquing' literature and stuff. I know what I love and what's just ok I guess. I've missed the opportunity to bounce my own thoughts off the wall on so many books! I guess now is a good as time as any to get back into it.

Anyway, I started reading A Game of Thrones yesterday morning (by George R.R. Martin). So far it is VERY GOOD. I'm not at the 'THIS COMPLETELY RULES' phase yet, but I think I will get there.

I don't know if it's just me, but I keep finding that sometimes I have no clue who/what the author is talking about. I feel like sometimes the characters are introduced in ways that are too roundabout for me to grasp. Or a name or expression is thrown in there that I don't catch onto fully. Usually I don't have this issue. Most fantasy novels use this technique to pull you into the world they have created. Hoping to get more into the groove of this guy's use of language.

Whatevs. Pretty pumped on this book, it already made me afraid of its characters and stuff and I'm only 37 pages in.

THE SHINING

Still reading it but OMG IT IS SO GOOD.

The movie is possibly my favorite movie ever, but I think the book is EVEN BETTER. *I think. They're both so good it's confusing!

What the book has that the movie doesn't give you is a full history and character development of the three main characters (Wendy, Danny, Jack). We also get to see the thoughts of the characters as they are happening...for a character like Jack, this is an amazing thing to be privy to. We get to see the tension and emotional energy bubbling thinly in a way that is barely concealed. We get to see the emotional reactions of this negative energy and how the words and actions of each one person heavily effects the others.

This post sucks and makes little to no sense because I've worked myself up in my excitement to get back to reading

!

ISHMAEL by DANIEL QUINN

I've decided that the most effective way for me to talk about what I'm reading is to just act like I'm discussing what I have read with someone else. This means that anytime I write about a novel, the post may be subject to spoilers.

You have been warned.

My mom brought home this book called Ishmael from her college. The staff is looking to assign the book as a summer reading assignment, but some of the administrators were not sure if the book would be too dated.

I could tell immediately that this book is anything but dated. In all actuality, it is eerily current. Or rather, sheds light on the fact that the same environmental and population issues that we are considering a crisis now were also a crisis in 1992. And were also a crisis before 1992. As a "civilized" human society (or as Ishmael calls us: Takers) we have been aware of the problem but have chosen to ignore it because we are being told by Mother Nature that human beings do not need to live by the same standards as animals.
We have set ourselves apart from the wild with the false assumption that we we were "born to turn the world into a paradise, but tragically [we were] born flawed. And so [our] paradise has always been flawed by stupidity, greed, destructiveness, and shortisghtedness."

This book gives an extended discussion between the teacher Ishmael, who happens to be a gorilla, and his student. Presumably, the student represents me (the reader) in his ignorance and persistence in questioning. The student is me because he is learning at the same time as I am what Ishmael has to say. Which is a lot.
In the particular discussion that I am thinking of, Ishmael explains to his pupil about gaining knowledge through a system of trial and error. He explains that mankind learned how to fly when he discovered that there were certain laws which govern flying. The laws of aerodynamics working hand in hand with the law of gravity. Without this knowledge, a man could build the most beautiful flying machine but it will not fly if it is breaking the laws.
The pilot, full of dreams and not aware of these laws, will ignorantly throw himself and his craft off a tall cliff. For a long time, the man thinks that he is flying when in reality he is in an extended fall. He will only realize that he has not flown when he ceases to fly: ie- he crashes.

"Trial and error isn't a bad way to learn how to build an aircraft, but it can be a disastrous way to learn how to build a civilization."

endpost.

The War on Choice: Discussion 3- Conflicted *If you were directed here by my facebook...COMMENT

So I've gotten to the halfway point in The War on Choice...for the most part, what I have read has sat well with me.
That was up until a day or two ago when I came across a few passages concerning the right to abortion for people who are underage. I am seriously conflicted on this one.
I can completely understand the need for parental guidance on this issue, but I'm also not sure if requiring parental permission is crossing the line and infringing on the rights of the young woman who may be forced to bear the child. I am on the fence with this issue. To the point where I've been asking people about it all day, and haven't been able to get it off my mind.
A friend of mine brought up a really interesting point to me, saying that underage teens should actually be required to have their parents' permission to keep the baby. On the grounds that the parents would be the only financially stable people in the infant's life, and should therefore be able to choose whether or not they wish to support the new child...if the parents do not wish to support the child, they can choose to abort it. That argument actually brings up a lot of interesting points that I didn't think about until now. Like, if the pregnant minor is the one who wants to keep the child, but the parents don't, then who has the right to choose?
Whatever. The point being is that this friend of mine thinks the parents should be the deciders of whether their pregnant minor can keep the child or not. Using the above example...if that makes sense. Which it does in a roundabout way.

So people: what are your stances on this very important issue????? I really want to see how others view this topic *although I am not asking to be persuaded...simply asking for input*

Hop to it! Let's see some comments



endpost.

The War On Choice: Discussion 2

Over the past couple of days, I've been trying to write down any interesting quotes, facts that I'm not sure about, and new information I have learned from The War on Choice.
I've been flying through the book and I'm already almost halfway done because I have enjoyed it so much.
Writing things down as I read them has helped me to absorb more information, or at least given me the opportunity to recall anything that I may have forgotten in my haste to move on to the next topic.

Below is one particular quote that I found to be of immense interest. The reason for this is that I am unsure of how much truth it holds, or whether or not the truth is being stretched here...
Read below::

"...in many religions, as I discuss below, the fetus is not considered a person until it has either "quickened'...or grown to viability-- the stage of which it could survive outside the woman's body."

When I mentioned earlier about my confusion over this statement, I was referencing the disbelief I have that this is the actual belief of any religion. As I understand it for many religions, or at least Catholicism, life begins at the moment of conception, not the moment of fertilization (I'm still not sure I even understand the difference between these two...) and not at quickening or viability stages. Quickening meaning when the mother begins to feel the child within the womb (ie- kicking) and viability is the stage at which the fetus can survive outside of the womb (primarily after the third trimester).
The quote above just seems ideally left-wing in a society that is almost completely right-wing where religion is concerned.

So, readers...wherever you are...if you can answer my questions: feel free. My main concern being which religions did Feldt mean in the above quote??
If I don't get a response, no worries- I'll answer the question for you.


Here's to next time!



endpost.