litlover12

I haven't read as much of C. S. Lewis's literary criticism as I have of his theological and fictional work, but I always enjoy a dip into it. And though I haven't yet read Paradise Lost, my book club may read it this year, so this was helpful preparation. As always, Lewis's work was lucid, deeply insightful, and a pleasure to read. I did find myself occasionally disagreeing with his religious points, though, which is rare for me. Let's just say that, when Dorothy L. Sayers used to say that Milton had a bit too much influence on Lewis's views of the battle of the sexes, she may have been on to something. Let us all thank heaven that Joy Gresham came along and opened his eyes to a few things. :-) Four out of five stars.

I also worked a belated Christmas present into the schedule, Why Shoot a Butler? by Georgette Heyer. This is my second Heyer mystery. I liked it, but at the same time I couldn't help noticing a marked similarity to my first Heyer mystery, Behold, Here's Poison. Heyer seems to have a weakness for conceited young lawyers with carefully concealed hearts of gold who mock the police, solve the crime, and get the girl. I rather hope this doesn't turn out to be a trend in her work. Two such characters are all right, but a whole mess of them would seem a little formulaic. That's why I had to stop reading the Brother Cadfael series: similar characters, similar romances, and even similar plots kept showing up until I felt like I was reading the same book over and over again.

Getting back to Heyer, probably her greatest weakness here is the tendency to lapse into telling instead of showing -- especially in places where she summarizes conversations instead of giving us actual dialogue. Conversely, though, when she does give us dialogue, it's one of her greatest strengths. The plot is original and strong and the characters, despite the hint of the formulaic, very good. Three-and-a-half out of five stars.

I've now started Jasper Fforde's eagerly awaited Shades of Grey. I also happen to be on the last day of Operation Book Binge. One more book in one day -- can I do it? We'll see!

New meme:

Leave me a comment saying "Resistance is Futile."

• I'll respond by asking you five questions so I can satisfy my curiosity
• Update your journal with the answers to the questions
• Include this explanation in the post and offer to ask other people questions

Here are tempestsarekind's questions and my answers:

1. Would you rather hang out with Shawn or with Gus?

I have to say Shawn. Now, I would feel safer with Gus, because he doesn't pull quite as many insane stunts (at least not without giving them careful thought beforehand). But life with Shawn would always be fun and exciting and never dull!

Also, if I hung out with Shawn, I could shake the stuffing out of him and yell, "What are you DOING with Abigail, you dolt?? Juliet is totally the girl for you!"

2. I have not yet seen any of the Sayers adaptations, but I've gathered that there are in fact two separate series. Which one should I watch?

If you watch only one, it should be the one with Ian Carmichael. I kind of hate to say that, because Harriet Walter is such a great Harriet Vane in the other series. However, Edward Petherbridge is too languid as Lord Peter. Carmichael gives him more energy and just plays him as a more multifaceted character in general. I always say that Petherbridge had the right look and Carmichael had the right personality for the role, so together they would have made the perfect Peter Wimsey. But if I have to choose just one, I choose the one with the right personality. And then, I think the Carmichael series is a little more faithful to the spirit of the books and the characters.

3. Related question: What is your favorite film/miniseries adaptation? It doesn't have to be the one that you think is most *successful* as an adaptation--just the one you love most.

That tends to change. Right now I think I love Little Dorrit most. Of course, I haven't seen nearly as many adaptations as most of my LJ friends, which makes me feel quite ignorant. But maybe I'll manage to catch up one of these days.

4. Who is your favorite female character in Dickens?

Miss Betsey Trotwood, because she is made of pure awesomeness. She's strong and kind and funny and she strikes back against the forces of evil, whether they happen to be represented by donkeys or Murdstones!

(Now, if I had to choose a favorite Dickens heroine, it would be Amy Dorrit. She has that core of strength under all her quietness, and she knows what she wants and holds onto it no matter what.)

5. Aside from 19th/early 20th-c. literature, do you have another favorite period?

Ah, there you have me. I gave that a lot of thought last night, and every time I thought, "Well, I like this group of authors," they all turned out to be from the 19th and 20th centuries. :-) I like isolated authors from different time periods (e.g., Dante, Shakespeare), and I like reading history from various periods (especially Tudor history), but as far as literature goes, it seems to be just the one period. However, some of my favorites do extend all the way into the mid-20th. Some members of the group that one of my professors called the Oxford Christian Writers -- Lewis, Sayers, Tolkien, et al. -- were writing well into the '50s. And I have a great fondness for many of the early New Yorker writers, especially Dorothy Parker and James Thurber, who also were still going in mid-century. So that's about the best I can say for myself on that front!

So if anyone wants to be asked five questions about yourself, leave a comment saying "Resistance is futile!"

[Error: unknown template qotd]Probably either Harriet Vane in the Lord Peter Wimsey books, or Anne in the Anne of Green Gables books.

Kind of a broad range. :-) My life has been a lot more like Anne's (leaving out the traumatic early childhood), and I think about certain things the way she does. But I also think about certain things the way Harriet does.