Classics Challenge Roundup

The Classics Challenge 2009 is sadly over, so here I am to sum up how it went.

The list I started with is as follows:

Definitely:
Silas Marner by George Elliot
Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carol
David Copperfield by Charles Dickens
The Tenent of Wildfell Hall by Anne Brontë
Saturday by Ian McEwan
The Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens

Possibly:
Agnes Grey by Anne Brontë
Great Expectations by Charles Dickens

What I read was:

Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen
Jamaica Inn by Daphne du Maurier
Dune by Frank Herbert
King Solomon's Mines by H. Rider Haggard
Martin Chuzzelwit by Charles Dickens
Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury
Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier
Catch-22 by Joseph Heller
To The Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf
The Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens
Agnes Grey by Anne Brontë
David Copperfield by Charles Dickens
The Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett
Saturday by Ian McEwan
Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott
The Tenant of Wildfell Hall
Middlemarch by George Elliot
I, Claudius
Titus Groan by Mervyn Peake
Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carol

So basically except for Silas Marner I got to everything on my list and then some.

Thanks much to Trish for hosting! You're brilliant!

I need to review a couple of more books, but I'm a bit short of time right now. I hope to get to it within the next couple of days.

Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen

Ok, so frankly this is cheating, but I've never actually reviewed any of JA's books in my blog, so I think I can get away with it this time.

Pride and Prejudice is one of my all-time favourite books. It really shouldn't be. I don't care much for romance, but this one is so well done that even I melt. I remember reading this for the first time and being so caught up in all the emotions of the book that I wasn't bothered about thinking about the book itself. Jane really did know how to get you going. She manipulates your feelings by drawing you into the story with her likeable characters. It's almost as if you're friends with Lizzy and Jane so you're indignant on their part when they are injured and you cringe when their family exposes themselves to such ridicule.

I think part of what makes them attractive is that they are realistic, even if some would argue that the situation might not be. Elizabeth, the heroine of P&P seems to be very sensible, practical and intelligent to the point of perfection. However, as the story progresses, you realize that she too has her failings. She judges situations much too quickly, leading to misjudgements that make her whole family's life difficult in the end. She also tends to count her chickens too quickly and is possibly too obstinate for her own good. Had JA left these failings out, Jane would have been too perfect, but as such, she feels like someone you would like to meet. The same goes for the hero, Darcy; any more perfect and he would have been odious. As it is, they make good role models, which was, I believe, ultimately her purpose.

Austen was looking to guide young women by pointing out folly and its consequences, while those who behaved properly and with honour suffered in the beginning, but were much better off in the long run. Granted, P&P is a bit heavy handed with this lesson and idealistic in the end, but it's such a good story, that it's easy to forgive any unrealisms (Ok, so it's not a word, let's just pretend it is, you know what I mean). Had it not been such a good read, it might have become pedantic and boorish with the those lessons. As it is, it's made it into one of the best loved books of all times. Re-reading it is like coming home to friends, so I'll never tire of it.

5/5 for Pride and Prejudice. Love it.

Jamaica Inn by Daphne du Maurier

Not long ago I read Rebecca by du Maurier and loved it so much that I decided I needed to look into more of her works, ergo, Jamaica Inn. I really didn’t know much about it and by the time I got around to listening to it, I’d forgotten anything that was written in the sales blurb, so the whole book was a complete surprise for me.

As du Maurier delved into Mary Yellen’s circumstances and life, I suddenly began to worry that this would be a very dreary, slow read, but as it turns out, it’s not. Even though she is really looking into the dark, unseemly side of life, the plot doesn’t dwell on it, but focuses on the mystery surrounding Jamaica Inn and its occupants. Mary’s mother dies, so Mary, as it was her mother’s wish, goes to live with her Aunt Patience at Jamaica Inn. Even before Mary arrives, she cottons onto there being something unseemly about the place from the attitude of the coach driver who seems reluctant to take her there. Mary, however, is used to hardship, loneliness and poverty and also wants to honour her mother’s wish, so she goes anyway.

From the onset it’s clear that life there is not happy. The Inn is a dirty mess, most of which is unused and looks neglected. There are no customers, indeed, customers are not welcome unless by express wish of the landlord, her uncle Joss. Joss is a hard man who tries to frighten and break Mary from the first, but quickly comes to realize that that won’t be quite so easy as it was with Patience. Far from being afraid, Mary is defiant and stands up to him leading him to leave her in relative peace as long as she stays out of his secretive and highly probably illegal business. Carts and people come and go in the night at Jamaica Inn, even though it is deserted during the day. There’s also a locked room into which only Joss is allowed. Mary would flee but for not wanting to desert her aunt whom she feels needs her.

Because of the situation, Mary finds herself in continual emotional turmoil. She’s afraid for her aunt, loathes her uncle, fears she will hang as an accomplice should Joss’ activities be found out and finally, she meets Jem, Joss’ brother who is a self-professed horse thief, but attracts Mary all the same. She has only one confidant, the Vicar of a near-by town, yet even that connection brings her no peace.

It’s not for nothing that Hitchcock based a film on this book. It has all the Gothic secrecy and excitement Hitchcock could have wished for. The only thing I didn’t care for in this book was that the du Maurier’s superb use of language gets lost a bit in the subject matter. That may, of course, only be down to the reader being caught up in it in the first reading and trying to figure out what is going on. I’ll have to read it a second time to see if my assertion holds true or not.

All in all, not as good as Rebecca, but still a mighty good read. 4/5

Dune by Frank Herbert

This is another one of those books I choose to read simply because you run into it, and/or references to it everywhere. I wanted to see for myself what the fuss is about.

Paul Atreides is a young nobleman in an interstellar empire belonging to the house of Atreides. His father is a duke, his mother belongs to the Bene Gesserits (a religious/mystical order of women who have certain powers over other) who facilitated the match between Duke Leto and Lady Jessica in order to further their goal towards the perfect DNA sequence. The world, or empire, they live in is a fairly gruesome, honourless society where everything goes, including crawling over the dead bodies of people you just killed, when climbing the social ladder. It’s all about power, who has it and if they can keep it.

Paul moves with his parents to the planet of Arrakis when he is 15 so that his father can rule and control the valuable spice mines of the planet. They go in the knowledge that the move is a trap, but are hoping to be able to avoid getting caught since they know to be on their guard. Unfortunately, they aren’t able to stop events which have already been set in motion and Paul finds himself thrust into a harsh world where existence is difficult on many different levels.

It’s a good story, but all in all, I’m not exactly sure why this book ever reached the cult status it seems to have. There are some interesting and controversial themes which you could spend quite a lot of time discussing, but not much more than most other books. I often found the events exaggerated and overblown and personally think it would have benefitted by more subtlety within the plot, although that might have made it a really epic sized book since events probably would have taken more time.

Despite finding it a bit too much larger than life like, I do admire Herbert for the complexity of the novel. It’s impossible to read the book without realizing how much research and work he must have put into it. The research on ecology alone must have taken years, then there’s the whole socio-economic aspect of the book, especially in regards to the native Fremen and their struggles to gain back their own planet while just trying to survive all that the planet itself throws at them.

Finally, I feel I have to mention the gender roles Herbert uses within the novel. I’m not overly sensitive about gender roles because I think everything is a give and take and every person should be shown respect for their work, regardless of their tasks. E.g. if someone is happy being a housewife in the 1950’s sense, then good for them. They’re happy, so why should I stand in their way. A good housewife and/or mother deserves as much praise as the CEO of a large company in my opinion and I admire both parties for being able to do something I can’t. However, even I had trouble with the more than obvious separation of women/men roles in the book. I’ll give Herbert the benefit of the doubt and assume he wasn’t actually trying to put women in their place, but at times it really felt quite sexist and began to irritate me. Still, it didn’t feel as if he was doing it to make a point. It was more as if he was a 1950’s kind of guy who still strongly believed in old-fashioned values when he wrote the book (it was still 1965 after all). I have to forgive him for that since they were the times he lived in.

4 out of 5. It’s a good story, interesting food for thought, it just lacks that certain something that makes me wild about it.

King Solomon's Mines by H. Rider Haggard

This is another one of those books I read a while ago and forgot to blog about. After having seen The League of Extraordinary Gentleman, I wanted to know who exactly Alan Quartermain was and why he was included in that particular cast, so I looked him up and voilà, King Solomon's Mines.

After having read it, I still can't quite understand why they included him in The League, because frankly the man was a coward (he even admits to being one in the book). Basically, Quartermain is a hunter in Africa and Sir Henry Curtis asks him to go along with him to look for his brother who disappeared looking for King Solomon's Mines. After making sure his son would be provided for in the event of his death, off they go into the heart of Africa looking for said mines.

It's an adventure story and I love a good adventure story, but this particular one was a bit too old fashioned for my taste. Boys of past ages would have loved it because it's full of hunting big game, dangerous situations and hearty men beating the odds in the desert, etc. etc. The reason I say past age and old fashioned is because of the manner these things were done in. I haven't got a problem with hunting, but this was the kind where they went out and were thrilled to kill a whole herd of elephants just for their tusks. In today's society that's unacceptable and frankly I felt a little sick just reading about it, especially knowing that that's really just what happened. I think if I had a boy, I would let him read the book, but not without listening to my opinions on the subject (my unborn children thank me daily for their unborn state). Anyway, it was all very, very old-fashioned as to views and manners and treatment of the natives etc. Not the thing for me, but my brother would have loved it as a kid.

I'm not going to rate this one because it's just too difficult. Judging it by this age, it should be condemned, but you really can't do that. It would be unfair. After all, most of the action would have been considered commendable at the end of the 19th century. Suffice it to say that it's an adventure story of the old English guard and must be read as such.

Martin Chuzzelwit by Charles Dickens

Having heard that Dickens considered this book one of his best works, I was quite looking forward to reading it. It’s always interesting to see what an author likes best out of his own works as it gives a bit of insight into his own personality, only in this instance, I can’t quite put my finger on what he must have liked about it, or not for certain anyway.

The book is actually not just about Martin Chuzzelwit, but about the extended Chuzzelwit family. Martin Chuzzelwit the Senior is simply the head of the family who sets events in motion. Much of the book is about the how the characters deal with what Martin Sr. has put into motion. The whole story becomes very complicated with all of the characters who are involved. It can be a bit difficult to remember who is related to whom and how and if not related, how are they involved in the story. As much as I’d love to go into all of the characters and who is who and related to whom how, it would take an age to do so, so I’ll just refer anyone who’s interested to the Wiki page (Spoiler warning! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_and_Adventures_of_Martin_Chuzzlewit) where there’s already a good list.

The short version is that Martin and Anthony Chuzzelwit are two wealthy brothers who both lose their trust in humankind as they assume that everyone is out after their money. Such is Martin’s fear that he hires a young girl, Mary, as a servant and pays her well with the understanding that as soon as he dies, she will get no more out of him. This is supposed to ensure that she puts all her efforts into making sure that he lives as long as possible. He trusts none of his relatives because he “knows” that they want him dead so they can inherit his money. Unfortunately, Martin Sr.’s grandson, Martin the younger, falls in love with Mary and intends to marry her. That would, of course, destroy Mary’s disinterestedness in Martin Sr.’s will, so he disinherits Martin the younger who must then go off and seek his fortune alone, ultimately leading him to abandon England for the United States to try his fortune there.

The story’s villain is Mr. Pecksniff, a cousin of the Chuzzelwits who uses their mistrust of others and the absence of Martin to insinuate himself into a place of importance in old Martin’s life. He sucks up and brown noses Martin Sr. to the point of becoming an emetic. Both Pecksniff and his two daughters are a cause of outrage to the reader as he goes about promoting himself, especially by defaming honest people, whenever he feels it will be to his advantage. His is literally prepared to do anything to secure his own comfort, and is introduced into the story as a “teacher” of architecture who actually passes off his pupil’s work as his own and gleans both credit and money for the work. His character becomes more and more devious and audacious as time passes and he feels himself more secure in receiving an inheritance from Martin Sr.

There are many, many side and sub plots in the novel and it eventually begins to bounce back and forth between the US and England. The US does not come out smelling of roses, however, Dickens was very careful about printing his own comments about the American episodes with the novels. He begs his audience to take the book as fiction and to forgive him for his rather exaggerated portrayal of the more negative traits of the Americans. He was actually quite fond of the country and it’s people, but it did serve his purpose in making certain points about Martin the Younger’s personality and character development. My only qualm with this was that he should have put it at the beginning of the novel and not at the end, at least in all printings of the book which took place after completion of the series (This was another of Dickens’ serial works. He didn’t intend to send Martin to America from the outset, but changed his mind after the first parts had been published.).

Did I like the book? Yes and no. I found that some parts dragged and some were really suspenseful. Many of his larger than life characters really got on my nerves, specifically I would have liked to smack the Americans for being so annoying and Martin the Younger for being so stupid and gullible. Pecksniff really gets up your nose on occasion too. Still, it’s a good work and I’m not sorry to have read it. I’m giving it a 3 out of 5 rating, 2 points lost of annoying characters and occasionally dragging bits.

In my bid to finish all of Dickens’ works I still have the following to read:

The Old Curiosity Shop
Dombey & Son
Hard Times
Our Mutual Friend
The Mystery of Edwin Drood

I’m curious how I’ll like these in comparison. I’ll be sure to let you know when I’m done with them :0)

Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury

This book scared me witless and I sort of formed a love-hate relationship with it. I loved it because of the points it made, but hated it because it forced me to contemplate things which are, to me, unthinkable.

Montag is a fireman, but not like the firemen we know. His job is not to stop fires, but to start them. He burns books for a living. The setting is Earth in the future and books have been banned. All books. There are hints that there are technicalities governing the ownership of books, but practically speaking, all books are considered illegal and must be burned. The premise is that books and being well read inspire people to think they are better than others, in turn making those with lesser education feel bad about themselves. Negative feelings of self-worth are no longer tolerated in a society who wants to feel happy, happy, happy all the time. Therefore, anything that contributes to someone else feeling bad, must be done away with.

The scary part about this is that the way Bradbury set it up, and the way that society has developed since he wrote the book, it is actually a conceivable situation. As I was reading, I was constantly trying to reassure myself that neither I, nor my fellow book lovers, would allow such a sacrilege: we would fight to the death to retain our books and the right to read them. The question is, would there be enough of us to stop them from doing it? Are there really enough readers? I know that many, many people love to read, but what about all of those who don’t? There are probably more people out there than we know who haven’t picked up a book since they got out of school.

Comforting is the thought that so many people’s livelihoods are dependant on the publishing industry. To forbid the written word would decimate the economy, even in this day and age. Publishers, book shops, librarians, universities, shipping agents, printing houses, editors, certain web-cites would all be out of business if we were to ban books. That’s a lot of people if you think about it. Financially I think it would be impossible. Despite this being a comfort to those who love books, I can’t help but think there’s still something fundamentally wrong about a society who uses financial viability to validate the importance of the written word. It’s a fact of life, but it still seems quite oxymoronic to me.

Even better than the book was Bradbury’s afterward where he tells of many people’s (publisher’s) attempts to edit his books so that they would be acceptable to everyone, i.e. removing all references of God or minorities so that no one would be upset by the content. I hope he asked them if they had actually READ his book, although even if they did, they obviously didn’t get the point. Bradbury points out that the constant editing and re-editing of books is exactly the sort of thing that would facilitate a society as Bradbury describes in Fahrenheit 451. He points out that “blacks don’t like Twain and whites don’t like Uncle Tom’s Cabin” (paraphrasing there). What’s the answer? Do we get rid of both so everyone is happy, or do we keep both and teach from them so that everyone can learn why someone else would have a different point of view? Would we even be happy if we were always “happy”, i.e. if nothing ever upset us, or would our happiness disappear through lack of contrast?

There’s a lot of material in this book for discussion and I came away feeling like I’d like to make it compulsory reading for all schools. There’s much that can be learned from looking at the consequences, albeit fictional, of well-meaning but ill informed intentions based on short term results.
Loved the books and thus, 5 out of 5.

Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier

Once again, there are other books I should be reviewing first, but I just finished this on Sat. and want to get my thoughts down before they disappear.

Plot: The unnamed heroine of the novel is a companion to an older American lady in Monte Carlo when she meets and falls in love with Mr. de Winter. I refuse to say anymore about the plot since I really think it would spoil the book for others. I read it cold and am glad I did. Actually, if you haven’t read it, but plan to, stop after the first three sentences of the next paragraph and go read the book. It’s better that way, trust me.

I loved this book. It’s brilliant. Du Maurier is a genius. I don’t just say that because she writes a great story, which it was, but because she is a master at language. Her writing style is similar to Virginia Woolf, only with much more structure. As I was reading this book, the language, always so soft, floating, diaphanous, made me feel pleasant and happy, even though I knew there was disaster must be coming. It was a bit like being a leaf which is gently blown along the path by a late summer breeze, lazy and content, yet with the knowledge that disaster will and must strike sometime in the future. It could come in the form of an early winter, or linger on until late November before the catastrophe happens, yet all the time you know it will. You’re not quite sure if you should sit back and enjoy the ride and the lovely breeze, or try and prepare yourself for the coming evil.

For me it was the direct contrast between the oh so beautiful language and the not so beautiful actions of some of the characters that heightened the sense of impending doom -throughout the book really, but especially upon the return to Mandalay. Mrs. Danvers, for example, is never overtly evil, yet she is one of the most innately evil characters I’ve ever come across. Du Maurier’s contrast between the language and the actions rather heightens than dampens Mrs. Danvers subtle hostility and vicious menace. The evil is there, weaving its way between the lines as if poisoning the book while the reader is pleasantly carried onwards through the story.

Granted, I did often feel like slapping the heroine and telling her to grow a backbone. However, after having finished the book, I’m not so sure that would have done her any good. More intelligence and less naïveté, on the other hand, would have helped. It was painstakingly obvious that De Winter and his wife needed to have a serious conversation about Rebecca, yet they both, to their own detriment, avoided doing so. However it was this undercurrent of things unsaid and things unknown that kept the book from becoming solely a beautifully written narrative and turned it into a fascinating mystery.

Overall, 5 out of 5 for this one. Loved it and will surely read it again.

Catch-22 by Joseph Heller

As Trish said in her review, this book isn't easy to write about. Heck, I'm tempted to just say, hey, if you want to know about this book, go read Trish's review, but I'm going to try and stick it out and write about it anyway.

The only reason I read this is frankly because I confused it with Fahrenheit 451, which I wanted to read. Oh, and it was also on sale on Audible and I'm a sucker for a sale. Anyway, I was a little surprised to suddenly find I was reading about WWII and not about book burning, but knowing that this is one of those "must read" books, I stuck with it. The first two or three hours of the book I found quite intriguing. The writing style is simplistic, but the composition is quite clever, so easy to understand on the surface, but confusing and complicated below.

The first difficulty is overcoming the non-linear plot. The story bounces around from place to place and time to time and it can be quite difficult to keep up with it. The shifts are also not always very pronounced, and that adds to the confusion. Once I got to grips with all of the shifting, I realized how clever the book really is. Not only are the circular arguments - all logical enough in bits and pieces, but maddeningly insane as a whole - thought provoking, but the constant time shifts are really well knit together. Heller must have either had a very good plan or was a fantastic strategist, because otherwise the book would have fallen apart. Just when you thought something was over and you’d heard the last of it, the scene pops up again from another perspective, giving you more insight into the situation as a whole. This would be a good book to read two or three times and then discuss in a group. There are so many different facets that it’s difficult to get to grips with them after just one reading.

Now, did I like the book? I’m afraid not. After the first few hours, the repetitiveness of the arguments and constant return to situations already described annoyed me greatly. It seemed to me that Heller beat his themes to death when I was ready to move on to something new. It made me feel like I was going about as insane as some of the characters were and couldn’t wait for the book to finish. The style also reminded me of Catcher in the Rye, which I didn’t care for either. That said, I think that had I read Catch-22 when I was younger, I would have liked it better. The contemplation of such conundrums and analysis of inner turmoil appealed more to me then than it does not. I might just be too old and too lazy for both of these books.

To The Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf

This is the first book I’ve ever read by Virginia Woolf, so I was unsure what to expect. To the Lighthouse centres around the Ramsay family and their summer home on an island with a lighthouse just off of it. The lighthouse is a thing of wonder for their son James, who dearly wants to go visit it, but is thwarted by his father’s negative reaction and by the weather. The second focal point of the novel is Mrs. Ramsay who is one of those goodhearted but ethereal women who are loved by all for one reason or the other. All of the other characters seem to vie for her love in one way or the other and the conflict of selfish love rears its head in several instances, especially between father and son.

There isn’t actually much of a plot to the book as its intention was to focus on the inner thoughts of the characters and their reaction to small events in the beginning and larger events later on, all of which are only mentioned in a casual manner and only serve to give direction to the thoughts of Woolf’s characters. Because they are so secondary, they seem to swirl around in the story almost unrealistically instead of being the solid, important events they really are. Even the lighthouse is more of a symbol than of a reality, even though it is an unmistakeable landmark which draws the attention of everyone near it.

It’s easy to think that it would be difficult to continue reading a book with so little plot and so much introspection, but the characters give enough away to keep the story coherent, even though they are focusing on themselves. It’s interesting to see the way their thoughts develop in reaction to the other characters as they interact with each other. Not only do they reveal the beauty of humans, but also their innate selfishness and their bent to protect themselves from becoming weighed down by others, for example when Lilly knows she should be sympathetic to Mr. Ramsay, yet cannot bring herself to show him any kindness at all, but strives to protect herself from being backed into a corner by his overwhelming misery. Woolf shows her mastery of writing by intertwining the romanticism of the age with the realism of human nature without overdoing either side. They seem balanced in this book and it seems natural that they are.

Had I read this book for the first time when I was 20, I would have fallen in love with it and it would have become one of my most favourite works I’m sure. Its introspectiveness and disregard for momentous occasions would have really appealed to me. Being slightly older now, I feel as if I’ve passed through the phase. Still, the language used is undisputedly beautiful and pulls the reader in. It’s a pleasure to read just for the richness of the language even if one isn’t as interested in the particular style or subject of the writing. One thing I should add is that because most of it is so beautiful, several of the points Woolf makes, especially about the treatment and standing of women in society, are all the more poignant for the sudden switch to a slightly harsher tone when Woolfe glosses upon the subject. She uses fewer words and never states anything outright, but the point is made beautifully all the same. For this and for her general mastery of language, To the Lighthouse gets a five out of five. This should be a standard read in school, which is when I wish I had read it.

The Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens

Charles Dickens wrote some very good stories in his time, but I have to admit that this particular work isn't going to make it onto my favourites list. The Pickwick Papers is basically a collection of short stories involving the same characters, Gentlemen all belonging to The Pickwick Club, which tell the tale of their humorous travels and trials around England.

Mr. Pickwick is a like-able fellow who starts up a club with his name and then starts off on adventures of his own with a couple of the club members. As the stories continue, characters come and go and come again, which can be slightly confusing with time. The stories themselves are amusing for the most part. Dickens is obviously taking the micky out of life in England at the time. The Law, social customs and courtship all feature heavily and are all made fun of in their turn. As I was reading (or listening as the case was), I couldn't help but think that they would have been hugely entertaining for people living in the day. However, I'm fairly certain there were many little hints a references I missed simply because I don't know enough about the era. Even though this obviously isn't Dickens' fault, it did detract from my enjoyment of the book.

This all makes it rather hard to rate The Pickwick Papers. I think for anyone who has a better grasp of history and the mid to late 19th century, this would be a great read. Alas, since I don't, it only rates a 3 out of 5 for me personally. Worth a read, but it's not something I'll read again any time soon. I prefer the novels with more cohesive, direct stories.

Agnes Grey by Anne Brontë

I should actually be reviewing Hard Times by Charles Dickens in this entry, since I read it first, but I just finished Agnes Grey and it's fresh in my mind.

This was the only one of the Brontës' books I hadn't yet read. Not knowing what to expect between the brilliance of some of the Brontës' novels and the dullness of others, I just started reading with an open mind, or rather listening as it was an audio book. Although it lacks the mystery and atmosphere of Jane Eyre and The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, it's still a really good read, especially if you're interested in reading about the lives of governesses in the 19th century. Having read Governess: The Lives and Times of the Real Jane Eyres by Ruth Bandon last year, Agnes Grey was doubly interesting. The story is a history of Agnes Grey, the daughter of a minister who loses everything speculating on a shipment of goods which sinks. Subsequently, the family is forced to look for other means of earning their living and Agnes' only possibility to to go for a governess. Agnes is an infinitely practical and realistic person. She knows life will not be easy, but sees no point in sitting at home hoping for a miracle, so she goes off to work.

Her positions, although carefully researched and considered, are nothing short of nightmares and emphasize the often helpless lots of governesses at the time. Many lacked both the support of the parents and the power to enforce their authority over their charges. Basically, the tried to walk a thin line between retaining their positions and their sanity. Agnes is forced to suppress all of her feelings and pride in order to remain employed. Her charges are arrogant, unruly and have no respect for anyone, including their own parents. The children even go so far as to intentionally make her life difficult for her; treating her more as a figure for sport than as a person of any importance in their lives. They thought nothing of humiliating and abusing her for their own entertainment.

Despite all of the hardships, Anne Brontë didn't allow the book to become the same sort of dour, dreary book that Villette and The Professor are. Agnes remains a positive person throughout all. She would have made a good role model for any young girl of the day as she trusted to hard work and perseverance to help her to improve her situation. Her realism forced her to firmly separate her day dreams from reality and focus on what was necessary for her and her family, yet she still had those dreams which endear her to the reader. You know she's holding out the same hope we all do in times of trouble that everything will be all right in the end. I liked Agnes and I liked the book. This will get a 5 star rating in my list.

David Copperfield by Charles Dickens

First off, I just have to mention that I listened to David Copperfield rather than read it. I have the version narrated by Martin Jarvis (published by BBC WW) and his narration was nothing short of brilliant. He really made the characters come to life and coloured in the story. It was like seeing a black and white film in colour for the first time. I'm working my way through all of Dickens books and am really glad I got this particular audio version. I'll certainly be looking forward to hearing more of Jarvis. He made even the slower bits entertaining, although I think I could have done without getting to know Mr. Micawber quite as well as I did though his narration (tongue in cheek). Sometimes Dickens does go just a bit over the top with his characters sometimes.

Even though this is one of the most well known of Dickens works, it’s not one I would recommend to someone as their first Dickens novel. It’s quoted in Wikipedia as being the most autobiographical of Dickens’ works, which I suspect is largely due to it’s first person narration. David Copperfield himself tells you about his life from the time he was a little lad at The Rookery. The first half of the book can be a bit slow in events at times, so if you don’t care for Dickens or haven’t read any of his works yet, I could see that it might be a bit tedious. The second half more than makes up for this though. I really found myself enjoying it once Copperfield reached an age where he was able to control his own life somewhat.

This book, or perhaps the fact that I listened to it rather than read it, made me realize that one thing you must have to enjoy Dickens’ works is a good imagination. You can’t just read about what the characters are doing, you have to picture their actions to make it interesting. Once you start to do that, you can begin to appreciate his use of descriptive language rather than just finding it tediously long and circumspect. I suspect that’s always what I’ve rather liked about Dickens, but just hadn’t realized it so concretely. The scene where he mentions the cell window being six or seven deep in men’s heads as the jostle for a better position takes on much more of a comic atmosphere when you picture it happening instead of just reading about it.

If you like Dickens, you’ll love this one, if you don’t, you may want to try the audio book (which I can recommend either way). I loved it and will certainly read it again sometime.

The Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett

I think I may have read this for last year’s challenge as well, and didn't really intend to read it again for this one, but it’s such a good book. The Secret Garden is one of my earliest memories of reading a book alone and is one of the reasons I fell in love with reading. It’s romantic without being overly soppy, positive and just a really good story.

Mary, a spoiled, neglected English child, living in India, loses her parents to typhoid and is returned to England to live with an uncle who neither knows nor really wants her. For the first time in her life, Mary is confronted with people who do not believe that life centres on her and she is forced to learn much about herself and the way in which she views the world. As the story continues, the reader watches her grow into a charming little girl with the extraordinary power to heal not only herself, but her cousin Colin as well, by simply realizing that sharing your pleasures with others is the key to happiness yourself. She shares her secret garden and in doing so increases her own pleasure in it. It’s a lovely, uplifting, story and is always a pleasant read. If only that summer could be stretched into childhood for everyone, we’d all be better off for it.

5 out of 5 for this one, whether you’re 5 or 50 or even 100.

Saturday by Ian McEwan

Saturday is my “New Classic” book for this round of The Classics Challenge 2009. I chose it after having read Atonement on the recommendation of friends, which was not as good as I had expected it to be, but made me curious to know about Ian McEwan’s other works.

McEwan wrote this book from a rather different perspective than usual and, it has to be said, proved his ability to write well by pulling it off. Saturday is a microspective view of one day of the life of Henry Perowne, a neurosurgeon on his day off. The narrator keeps a running description of every thought, action and reaction Henry has during that day, beginning with his waking in the night to discover a plane on fire in the sky to, well, that would be giving it away, wouldn’t it? The potential to bore the reader to death with such a blow by blow narrative is enormous, yet there is a compelling aspect to the prose that keeps the flow going so well, that there is little temptation to put the book down.

Henry is a successful man, with a successful wife, two wonderful and successful children. The picture is very nearly too perfect, yet remains believable (another tribute to McEwan’s writing ability) because the reader is allowed to see that he is neither superficial, nor ungrateful for what he has. With full knowledge of his advantages in life, Henry is looking forward to his Saturday of relaxation and release from the stresses of work, as we all do. Although he knows there might be minor difficulties ahead with the reunion of his daughter and her grandfather at dinner, he anticipates no serious trouble, and thus begins his day.

How many times does anyone begin such a day, only to have it turn into a disaster? Every death, accident or incident is prefaced by someone getting out of bed to start his day, and thus it is so for Henry as well, only this time the reader experiences the start to the day and the shock of events as they unfold. Henry’s morning is marred when he is involved in a minor car accident in the city while he tries to avoid the anti-war demonstrations taking place in London that day. This accident and the actions of the other car’s occupants shape the rest of Henry’s day, forcing him to contemplate moral issues ranging from his duties as a physician to the validity of war in Iraq. He tries to conquer his inner turmoil while not letting it affect the rest of his day and his interactions with friends and family.

The constant attempt to contain the seepage of his irritation with himself, his reactions and his refusal to address the situation for fear of further ruining his own day drain Henry and create the opposite effect. He becomes so involved with himself and his thoughts that he fails to see the bigger picture and the potential dangers. McEwan uses both the close examination of Henry’s thoughts and his temporary, but obvious, inability to see outside of himself as platforms for his themes. Showing Henry to be a flawed man prevents the book from becoming a ethical handbook for the different moral questions McEwan introduces. Since Henry is not perfect, his judgements may be just as flawed as himself, ergo his opinions are to be questioned and not viewed as law.

I’m finding it rather difficult to describe this book. It’s all rather intricately woven together, with many questions left unanswered because they cannot necessarily be answered, yet still must be considered and debated for society to progress and not regress. In the wrong hands, both subject matter and style could have been diabolical, but McEwan makes it work and makes it work well, leaving the reader with much to think about. Although some people may find it tedious in places, I’m still going to give this one 5 out of 5 because of the skill with which the work was executed.

Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe is the fourth of my Classics Challenge novels and one I was looking forward to. In this particular case, I wish I had chosen to read the written version as opposed to listening to it as an audio book. I'm afraid I didn't care for the narrator. I think had it been better read, it would have been a fantastic book. As it was, I listened to parts of it on the faster setting, just so I didn't have to spend more time than necessary listening to the narrator. Often he made the characters sound like bad robots instead of actually infusing emotion into the reading as I'm sure was intended. This is just my opinion, mind. I know there are people out there who liked the narrator, so it's a question of personal taste.

The story is brilliant. There's intrigue, murder and bloodshed enough to keep just about anyone interested. It ought to be a must in schools to get children interested in the classics. Even though it is fiction, it still paints a fairly accurate picture of history and how life must have been at the time, although certain aspects may have been exaggerated or romanticised in order to make the story more palatable.

One of the less pleasing aspects of the novel is Scott's portrayal of the Jews and their treatment by the English people. It was all quite shocking to read. Most people wouldn't dare publicly profess such opinions of any race/creed these days, but in that era, it was quite common and this is a good reminder of that, and also of how far we have come in that respect. I thought Scott did this well, even if it did shock me. he didn't use the opportunity to "preach" to the reader, nor did he heavy handedly portray the Jew and his daughter as innocent victims while completely vilifying the Christians. Not all of the Jew's actions were commendable and not all of the Christian's reprehensive. That kept the narrative believable and prevented it from becoming ridiculous.

Scott himself billets the novel as a romance, and it is, but not quite in the manner we think of romances today. He uses the desired liasons as catalysts for the rest of the story, when in reality, much of it has to do with politics and power, as is usually the case when more than one man with a sword is present, or even when there is only one man and a sword. That is to say that more fighting and less love making take place as the story unfolds.

I particularly liked the ingenious way that Scott integrated the popular story of the honourable Robin Hood into the action. It was intriguing to hear all of the references to come up as the did and to try and guess what would happen next based on the knowledge of the Robin Hood tales. It made it all the more interesting.

This was another good book that I can recommend to anyone who likes a little action in their classics.

The Tenant of Wildfell Hall

What I thought was going to be yet another of the Brontës' dark and dismal books turned out to be rather good. Until now, Jane Eyre is the only Brontë novel I’ve really ever cared for (I apologize to the Wuthering Heights lovers. I’ve tried, but I just can’t make myself read it a second time.). Knowing that this book dealt with a horrible marriage in which the wife was more or less abused, I was expecting lots of dark, depressing scenes, yet instead of telling the story linearly, Anne starts the novel in a time that gives the reader hope and knowledge that things will get better. She also cleverly creates a mystery, despite giving the reader insight into the future. She only tells part of the story, leaving the reader to guess or wonder out how it reached that point. This pulls the reader into the story as half a story is, well, just that, half a story. It also gives Anne a good side story by allowing her to tell us how people of that day and age looked upon mysterious people. Anyone whose history is not fully known must be bad, otherwise they would tell you what you want to know about their past. There seems to be no feelings of generosity or Christian spirit involved, despite the otherwise important place of Religion in that society. Indeed, it is the vicar who is one of the most involved in spreading slander.

Once having created the mystery, she goes on to tell the story of how Mrs. Graham wound up as the tenant at Wildfell. This part of the book does become dark and sad. The only criticism I have of it is that it went on just a bit too long. I felt like I’d gotten the point and could we please just move along now. However, I don’t suppose the characters were able to do that, so why should we? Finally, it does move along and the author goes on to tie the two sections of the books together.

All in all it’s a good story and one that must be finished to understand how it all fits in together. The author makes many statements about life and religion, the meaning of which aren’t clear until the book has been read to the end, at which point, things seem to fall into place. Anne Brontë's style seems to be something between realism and romanticism. She tries to give the reader a strong sense that should we live our lives as we should and not as we want, things will turn out for the best in the end, but that suffering will and must take place first for us to truly comprehend the extent of our blessings. It’s almost as if she wants her characters to suffer through antithesis of what they are striving for, so that they can see that their ideals are maybe placed a little too high. We should be content with less than perfection, but will only be able to be so if we suffer through horrors first.

I’ll just add that the book has an interesting perspective, namely that instead of focusing on one particular person as a villain residing within a better class of people, Anne shows us what the world of the villain looks like. That is to say that in literature in general, there are often references to unworthy young men who run with the wrong crowd. Anne shows us what the inner workings of such a crowd look like. For this reason alone, the book is worth a read.

Middlemarch by George Eliot

This book took me a bit by surprise. I've tried many times to read The Mill on the Floss and failed, so I assumed that Middlemarch wouldn't really interest me either. However, I have to admit, I actually liked it, for the most part anyway.

While reading I kept thinking of Thomas Hardy and Charles Dickens. It turned out not to be quite as Hardiesque as the beginning led me to believe, but Elliot does drop into the same long narrative style that Dickens quite often uses. My only real criticism of the book is that sometimes I felt like it could have used a good editor. These bits droned on a tad, but the audio format once again helped me not succumb to boredom and give up. I suppose you could add a similarity to Jane Austen too, but to tell of that would give the plot away.

Middlemarch basically boils down to a soap opera set in an English villiage in the later half of the 19th century. Who did what with whom and when and what happened as a result. Many times you could see that the characters were walking into a mistake, however, much of it turned out quite surprising in the end. Some of the events the reader finds himself hoping for turn out to be a mistake for one or more of the characters, while some things that seem foolish turn into positive experiences. This twists and turns of the plot keep the story interesting while forcing the reader to constantly reappraise his opinions of both the characters and their actions. All in all, I found it quite a good book.

Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass

I chose this book for the Classics Challenge because it's one I've never been able to make myself finish and indeed, had I not been doing it for a challenge, I might never have finished it. I don't even have much to say about it other than I don't understand the popular appeal. It's ridiculous, nonsensical and just strange. I suppose it was meant to be and thus it fulfilled its purpose, and I also suppose it's the reason for its popularity. It just really didn't do anything for me. I don't quite understand the appeal of reading something that makes no sense at all. Even the humour escapes me on this one. Through the Looking Glass was a bit better than Alice in Wonderland, but not much. At least there seemed to be a sort of purpose behind it all instead of just being like a dream that randomly switches from one scene to another without really trying link the stories together. However, neither is something I'll ever read again.

I, Claudius

Do you like war, treachery, betrayal, plots and schemes, conspiracies and even a little (or maybe a lot) of murder? Yes? Well, then I, Claudius is the book for you.

The story is of the Julio-Claudian dynasty of the Roman Empire (44BC to 41AD) is told from the perception of Claudius (the forth Emperor of Rome) who is born disabled and develops a stammer as he grows up. For these reasons, he is shunted off to the side by his family and makes the perfect observer of events as they unfold (his family's disregard of him is also one of the only reasons he survived, i.e. because no one thought him to be a threat to anyone's power). He tells the story of his power drunk grandmother Livia who basically uses her power, contacts and lack of conscious to plot, scheme and murder her way to more power and control of the Empire. None of her family, excepting "poor Claudius" is exempt from her scheming. She's entirely Machiavellian in her belief that the end more than justifies the means.

As the novel progresses, the reader's sympathies are turned and twisted along with the events. Very few of the characters seem to possess the kind of self-disinterested qualities that make them sympathetic to the reader. However, what eventually becomes quite apparent is that, as scheming as Livia is, she is actually the only force that holds the Empire on a stable, if immoral, course. She manages to keep factions from forming which would ultimately destroy the empire by tearing it apart. In the end, you don't really know whether to hate her or admire her. To say more would, again, give the plot away.

I, Claudius was an interesting and good read. I think I'd recommend it for anyone trying to get teenagers interested in history, and Roman history in particular. Not all of the story correlates with fact, but it does make history a lot more interesting than dry facts and would have done more to motivate me to read history than any history textbook or fear of getting a bad grade. All in all two thumbs up for this one.