Books Read: North and South

This alas, is only the second in my TBR books challenge. But I’ve now read two of the longer books on my list, so that’s good, I guess? I just got more books from the library today, so I’m making more progress!

North & South, by Elizabeth Gaskell

Title & Author:

North & South, by Elizabeth Gaskell (1854-1855).

Summary & Thoughts:

The story primarily follows Margaret Hale, daughter of an ex-vicar who has left his profession, as she adjusts to life in a strange place in Milton, a cotton-mill town.

The family (a father, mother, and grown daughter) has difficulty learning the culture of the place in which they find themselves. As the title suggests (once you realize it’s a 19th century British novel, not an American Civil War novel), a large part of the book is the clash of the Southern sensibilities and slower pace the Hales bring with them when they relocate to Milton in the North; a bustling factory town with a harsher feel yet productive people.

North & South also includes a brooding, Darcy-esque mill owner, Mr. Thornton, who becomes a pupil of Mr. Hale’s, and an admirer of Margaret’s. The narration usually follows Margaret, but occasionally we get Mr. Thornton’s inner thoughts as well, usually when those thoughts are about Margaret.

While the romance is fairly central, there is also a great deal of discussion about factory economics, and the responsibilities of mill owners, who have a great deal of authority. It was more interesting than I anticipated reading the various opinions on the business side of the book. As well as talking to Mr. Thornton about his views on the responsibilities of mill owners, Margaret befriends Nicholas Higgins, a factory worker, and hears his side of the question as a member of the workers’ Union. There are many discussions of how to protect both the interests of the workers and how the owners/managers ought to act as authority figures who ought not abuse their position of power.

The book has a little of a Pride & Prejudice feel, with the brooding rich man and the outspoken, strong-willed heroine without a fortune.

Apparently Gaskell discusses industrialism and economics and politics more in some of her other works, but I thought this book struck a good balance. I’m not sure that I would have read a book on industrial Britain’s economics alone.

Gaskell doesn’t quite have Austen’s style, but the writing was engaging, and some passages are really beautifully well-written. If you like Jane Austen and want something in a similar vein, give Elizabeth Gaskell a try.

There’s also a BBC adaptation which is fairly faithful to the book. Of course, there are a few exceptions, like the last scene taking place in a train station instead of a drawing room. Because, drama? But overall I thought they did a good job of capturing the feel of the book and the main events.

It’s also a change to see Richard Armitage (aka Thorin from The Hobbit) at normal human height (he’s actually rather tall) and Brendon Coyle (aka Mr. Bates from Downton Abbey and Lark Rise to Candleford) play the same part (magical disappearing limp not included).

Tl;dr:

I liked North & South, and if you like Jane Austen, give Elizabeth Gaskell a try. Fewer balls; more discussions of industrial economics.

Also the BBC miniseries is worth a watch. You’ll probably see actors you know because there are only 30 actors in the UK.

Rating:

★ ★ ★ ★

Book Reviews/Recaps!

Book pages

Since I’m going for the 2015 TBR Pile Challenge this year, and also because I think it will help me remember books I’ve read in general (and I have friends who do similar things), I want to start posting about books I’ve read. I don’t know if I’ll put every book I read here, but I at least want to document my thoughts on them, and invite conversation about books.

Tell me why you disliked a book I liked, or why I should give a book I didn’t like a second chance.

Also, tell me if you prefer Austen or Bronte. I hear usually people fall into one of those categories. Personally, I love both. It’s weird, actually. I have read numerous blog posts/ articles by someone who loved Jane Austen and couldn’t get into Jane Eyre, or people who pledge undying devotion to Jane Eyre and think Pride and Prejudice is just meh. It seems many people prefer one or the other.

I understand that they have very different tones, but I love them both. I would happily pick up Pride & Prejudice or Jane Eyre any day and read them again. Just tell me you want to do a re-read of either and I will leap at the excuse.

…But I digress. Someday I’ll try to analyze why people fall so hard along these lines (and why I don’t want to pick sides). Without further ado, the real point of this post!

Here’s the tentative format (all subject to change at the whim of management):

  • Title & Author (and year of publication)
  • Brief Summary (hopefully spoiler-free or spoiler-light. I’ll warn you if I want to say something spoiler-y)
  • Other thoughts I had on the book
  • Goodreads/Netflix style, I’m also going to try incorporating a star rating for how much I liked the book (I might change my mind tomorrow and think a star rating is a terrible idea. I’m going with it for now).

Maybe I’ll do that with some movies too. Who knows.

Photo by Send me adrift. used under Flickr Creative Commons License.

Disney and Brave

On a recent plane ride, I was bumped up to the Economy Comfort section, which meant a little extra cushion on the head rest, a little more of the coveted leg room, and free movies or tv.

Knowing that sound on planes leaves something to be desired, I opted for a lighter movie: Disney’s Brave.

Princess Merida - Disney's Brave

I would give it a solid “meh.” There we’re aspects of it I liked, and aspects that either didn’t work and some things that frustrated me.

Things I liked:

  • the movie wasn’t just about a Princess growing up and automatically falling in love. I appreciate that. Girls can do other things.
  • both parents were alive. Unusual for Disney princesses.
  • the central relationship was the mother-daughter relationship. Since the mother is usually not alive for the story, this was a pleasant change.

Things I didn’t like:

  • the pacing was sometimes a little labored. Maybe it’s that I’m not 8, but I got tired of watching them race around the castle after a few minutes.
  • the 3 little brothers. I think they were supposed to be funny, but again, I’m not 8, so it wasn’t as effective for me.

The main I didn’t like:

  • the portrayal of men

And now, the soapbox:

What really bothered me was thinking the reason Princess Merida didn’t want to get married was that all her options were oafish males who were more interested in hitting each other over the head than…pretty much anything else. I think it’s great to see a story about a girl who isn’t just interested in finding true love, but it would have been more interesting to me to hear her saying, “these guys are nice, but I’m just not interested in them.” In this movie, the guys gave her no reason to be interested in them. In fact, you’re relieved she isn’t settling for the stupid one or the vain one or…the third one. I forget why he was objectionable, but clearly, he didn’t have much going for him.

Even Merida’s father, who loves and cares for his daughter, is a little slow and clueless–all the thinking is done by his wife. He is a giant fighter who is easily distracted by weapons and ready to pick a fight at a moment’s notice. His wife does all the planning and I think the only reason he was made king is that every other male is equally interested in fighting, so his prowess made him a good choice. And his wife probably convinced all the other wives that it would be a good idea.

I know the story was trying to tell girls that other interests matter, and that you should listen to your mother occasionally, but what does this tell boys who sit through this movie with their sisters? I know many men who are intelligent, kind, and not easily provoked into hitting each other over the head (well, maybe if they’re age 3 they might be more prone to hitting; but I’m talking about adults here). By all means, tell us about princesses who find other things to do with their time (and the princesses who get married need to do something once they’ve found a prince), but we do not have to tell those stories at the expense of men.

Malapropisms

Yesterday while driving to work I turned on the radio and a woman was being interviewed about herbal remedies for winter ailments. She first said that there was a new herb shop about to open and they were going to interview the proprietor in a moment, but first she mentioned the name of the establishment: The Elderberry.

“Speaking of elderberry,” she said, “it is the Magna Carta of cold remedies.”

Wait a moment. The Magna Carta?

I think that’s probably only for British colds. And I have no idea why an herbal remedy would be reading an ailment its rights. I mean, I think that’s probably something the white blood cells do–right before they attack a virus. So maybe herbal remedies deliver it to the white blood cells?

Ok, there’s no need to anthropomorphize blood cells and herbs. I think she probably meant to say “it’s the Holy Grail of herbal cold remedies,” but Magna Carta is pretty funny.

I have no idea what else happened in the conversation, and I hope the store owner is slightly more knowledgeable, but that snippet of conversation make me laugh the rest of the way to work, and I decided the humor needed to be shared with the world. I hope you enjoy.

A Note on Dates

A few years ago I realized I preferred the European style of writing out the date. To those of you who know I’m a bit of an Anglophile, this will come as no surprise. At the beginning I wrote with the day first, then month, then year just because it was a little fun and different, but, of course, I had to analyze why I liked it more than the typical American method of writing out the date.

For some reason, it seemed to make more sense, and here is why: The European way of writing the date looks like this:

25 August, 2013 (day, month, year)

The American way looks like this:

August 25, 2013 (month, day, year)

The American way doesn’t make logical sense to me. Why would you start with the month, then proceed to the day, and then move to the year? The European way starts with the day (the smallest increment of time), then it moves to the month, and then the year (larger increments of time). It proceeds in an orderly, logical manner, while the American way zigzags between larger and smaller increments of time.

Who designed or standardized these systems?

I understand that one might also wish to go from largest to smallest increment of time: year, month, day (2013-08-25), and that is fine with me. We write out time that way: 8:33:25 (hours, minutes, seconds), so it might be more consistent to also proceed in that order with dates.

I will continue with my logical notation of date, but I won’t be offended if you choose not to do so yourself.