It was never going to be a temporary thing. They were never going back to their normal lives.
This isn't really my thing. You know, the mob. Gangs. MurIt was never going to be a temporary thing. They were never going back to their normal lives.
This isn't really my thing. You know, the mob. Gangs. Murdering people and dismembering them and throwing them in the river. I'm not really into this scene. Mob movies and mob books bore me.
I'm not buying into this brand of feminism, it's kind of pissing me off. For one thing, this book was written by a man. OK. So keep that in mind. Two, ... it promotes the idea that killing others and being able to enact violence brings the women in this book onto the level of men. I'm doubtful that this is a level that they should even be on.
I'm not saying women are full of light and goodness and it's icky that they sully their hands with violence. Instead I'm saying, "Is this what you are aspiring to?" In this book, men do awful things. Then the women say, "You know what? I want money, too. So I am going to start doing awful things." This isn't empowering. Sure, there are flashes of empowerment here and there, like when Raven threatens her husband, and he leaves. Then Tony comes and says, "I won' let him hurt you." and Raven says, "I don't need you to fuckin' save me, Tony." And you know it's 100% true. They are not dependent on men, and they are making names for themselves and earning a reputation for themselves.
Unfortunately, this involves killing loved ones, brutally murdering and torturing people, etc. etc. etc. Women's "strength" is represented by being as violent, horrible, abusive, and brutal as the men around them are.
It's kind of like in STUBER where Kumail Nanjiani goes to a male strip club and the female who runs the club is verbally abusive to the strippers, saying things to them like "No one is going to want to see a big dick if it is attached to a flabby, disgusting sack of fat." She also turns on Kumail when he comes to the male dancer's defense, accusing him of mansplaining and being a disgusting macho sexist. This is exactly what I'm talking about. A woman is running a male strip club, and thinks this is empowering. She can abuse and degrade men both verbally and physically and that makes her 'powerful.' She is 'only doing what men have been getting away with for centuries.' But just like I am filled with disgust when I see a man treat women this way, I am filled with disgust when I see women treat men this way. It's disgusting no matter who is doing it. It's not 'reclaiming power' or 'being a strong woman.' It's just being a piece of shit. The filmmaker was making a point, but I'm not sure Masters is self-aware enough to be making this point. Is he? Is the message of the book: "Well, every single person is a piece of shit, so you might as well become a piece of shit in order to get your piece of the pie?"
I balk at the idea that these three women come into their own power by murdering people and torturing them and extorting money from business owners etc. Instead of becoming powerful, I see them as becoming weak.
I know what Masters is saying: these women were property of their husbands. They weren't allowed to earn. They weren't considered people by their husbands or by other men (mobsters). By murdering and torturing people, they become their own agents. The men around them start treating them like human beings with agency instead of possessions. That's what the book is trying to say. But the reality is very ugly and not truly empowering IMO.
TL;DR - Who knows how the movie will turn out? I'm doubtful now that I've read the book. I doubt it will be anything great if it is based on this book. Just depressing and sick. Some people compare this to WIDOWS, but WIDOWS (for all its violence) is a stronger, more powerful idea.
NAMES IN THIS BOOK: (view spoiler)[ Tony m Raven f Kathy f Freddie m Jimmy m Owen m Jack m Johnny m Angie f Rob m Franky m Tony m Nicky m Tommy m George m Martin m Heather f Alfonso m Nicky m Herb m Larry m Sonny m Paulie m Jennifer f (hide spoiler)]...more
(view spoiler)[My son moved his hand toward the mail slot in the door. That was when I noticed it was being pushed open from the outside. There were F(view spoiler)[My son moved his hand toward the mail slot in the door. That was when I noticed it was being pushed open from the outside. There were FINGERS there. My heart leaped at the sight of them. Four thin, pale fingers, poking through among the spidery black bristles, holding the mail slot open.
He looked around the room, weighing again the emptiness of his existence. There was nothing to him. He was a man made of air. A life with no heft. There was nothing good in his past that could be saved, and nothing in his future that was worth trying to. pg. 188
This is normally a book I would never touch. Child-focused-serial-killers are NOT my idea of a good time or an idea of entertainment for me. But for a spooky Halloween book, this fits right in.
We really have two main characters - Detective Pete Willis, sober-but-still-fighting, deadened by the child-murders he's seen and the now-incarcerated serial killer who keeps toying with him.
And Tom Kennedy, an author whose wife dies so he moves them to a new town for a new start, not realizing the evil lurking beneath the towns quiet facade. His seven-year-old, Jake, is eerily prescient and prone to talking to himself. Or is it himself he's talking to? ...
Let's break this down.
ANALYSIS
The book is a mix of horror (supernatural) and horror (human). Tom and his boy move to a town where a serial killer murdered five little boys around Jake's age twenty years ago. He was said to have befriended his victims by standing outside their bedroom windows and whispering to them. The serial killer was caught and is in prison, but the body of his last victim was never found.
As the book opens, a second serial killer seems to be starting the Whisper Man thing up again. We know it can't be the first serial killer, because he is in penitentiary. Is this a copycat?
Adding to the human horror, we have Detective Pete being a sober alcoholic. We have the fact that Jake came home from school to find his mom's dead body. And we have the existential horror throughout the book of parents feeling burdened, trapped, and angry at their children. I'll come back to this theme later, it's a huge theme.
So most of this horror is human. Human weakness, human anger, human murderers. But there is also a (rather unexplained) supernatural bent to the book, with (view spoiler)[Jake being able to speak to the dead. You actually spend most of the book wondering if he can really speak to the dead, or if he just has an active imagination, and it's not quite clear. My theory by the end of the book is that YES, he can talk to the dead. But I have no idea if that was North's intention or not, IMO he never really clarifies stuff. He muddles things. I'm not even confident in my final conclusion. What the fuck do I know? Maybe there's nothing supernatural about the whole book.
Either way, Jake is a different and weird little boy, although a lovable and sweet one. Kind of don't know whether to think he has supernatural abilities or not, which leaves me kind of up in the air as to how to take this book. (hide spoiler)]
WRITING STYLE
North has a simple, straightforward writing style. That's good - in the area of being able to understand him and understand who is saying what and when.
However, it's not a very emotional book. I felt like it was creepy, but only mildly creepy. A serial-killer and (view spoiler)[child communicating with the dead (hide spoiler)] novel should be more than just mildly creepy IMO. North is not good at writing or conveying emotions. He cannot really convey true horror (or chooses not to?) in the way someone more complicated like King can.
This is good for people who don't really want to read a child-killer novel. That would be me. Even though North could have written things in a more detailed, complex, emotional and creepy way... I would probably have to stop reading the book. I hate thinking about violence against children. But even someone as easily revolted as ME can read and enjoy this book. Take that as a criticism, if you want to. It's mild. It's pulling punches. North does not really focus on the murders or the horrible darkness that must lie inside a person who does something like that, nor does he seem to want to. Everything is glossed over.
This makes it easy for someone who is not into 'dark reads' to enjoy this, but it doesn't make it gutting, pulse-pounding suspense either.
Don't get me wrong, it was creepy and I was entertained. But I was far from sleeping with the lights on. And the fact that I can use the word 'entertained' to describe my reaction to a book about someone who kills children pretty much says it all.
And I appreciate the way North describes alcoholism, it's accurate. And I appreciate the way he talks about relationships, I think he makes some good points. But it is simplistic and not soul-punching. He seems to lack the skill to really turn you inside out about something.
FATHERHOOD - FATHER/SON
The whole entire book is actually about fatherhood. SPECIFICALLY being a father to a son. Father-son relationships dominate the whole entire book, paired with North's other huge theme - feeling burdened by your children and wanting to get away from them.
Don't get me wrong, women are in here. And I don't even think they are particularly ignored, but they are not part of the overarching central core of the book which is about exploring father-son relationships in about ten different ways. The book is OBSESSED with father-son relationships and how that colors a male individual's life FOREVER.
Parenting isn't an exact science IMO. But to be sure there are good parents and terrible ones. But North doesn't seem interested in exploring these relationships in depth or dissecting what makes a father act a certain way. He doesn't dive down into the recesses of these topics, merely brings them up and talks lightly about them before moving on. He's not good with in-depth psychological analysis.
ENDING
I didn't enjoy the ending, either. (view spoiler)[I was mad that North kills Pete and I was angry he gave Frank Carter a happy ending. (hide spoiler)]
TWISTS
By my count there are three twists, with Twist Three being divided up into Part A and Part B. Only the first twist and 3B surprised me. 1.) (view spoiler)[Pete being Tom's estranged father (hide spoiler)] Did NOT see this coming at all. Best spoiler in the book IMO. 2.) (view spoiler)[Karen being a reporter. I didn't call her being a reporter, but I sure as hell knew something was up. (hide spoiler)] 3.) A. (view spoiler)[The serial killer being Frank Carter's son. (hide spoiler)] I read things too carefully. I feel like this is not going to be a surprise to anyone who pays close attention to detail. B. (view spoiler)[ The serial killer being the TA George in the classroom. (hide spoiler)] I did not see that coming. But it was not as good as the first twist IMO.
Then there's the whole "Is there a supernatural aspect to this story?" thing which I don't really consider a twist. Also, it's unclear IMO.
Some stuff in here doesn't make sense. (view spoiler)[Why is sometimes Jake willing to help the 'monster,' and other times he seems terrified of it? Why does he say weird shit to his dad about wanting to make him scared? Sometimes I just could not understand what was going on with this kid and North did not really clear things up. It was lazy. It added to the creepiness, but not telling us what was going on by the end was lazy. (hide spoiler)]
TL;DR - If I can enjoy a book about a serial-killer who targets children... well. That means that the author is pulling punches (or is unable to deliver punches) in a major way. I'm squeamish about murderers.
But this book is creepy but not frightening. Might make you tingle a bit but you will sleep fine. Good, enjoyable book. Just not heavy-hitting or deep or complex. North just skims the surface of things like unwanted children and destructive father-son relationships. He does not do the heavy lifting. He is not inclined to open up the hood and look at the engine. The car runs fine. Why would he go deeper?
He gets in a few good twists. The book isn't sloppy. The writing is concise. The plot makes sense. The twists make sense. No one is OVERTLY stupid (maybe slightly stupid sometimes, but that's very difficult to avoid in a thriller). The book chugs along at a good pace. It's not boring. It's not dumb. It's entertaining and slightly spooky. It's NOT what you would expect when you pick up a book about a serial killer who targets children.
If you want great horror, read King. If you want a great horror that deals with a male child, try The Boy Who Drew Monsters. You can also check out my horror shelf for more suggestions.
I'll end with another sample of North's writing:
Glass smashing.
My mother screaming.
A man shouting.
"Daddy."
I jerked awake from the nightmare, disoriented, aware only that Jake was calling me and so I needed to do something.
"Hang on," I shouted.
A shadow at the end of the bed moved, and my heart leaped. I sat up quickly.
Jesus Christ.
"Jake, is that you?"
The small shadow moved around from the foot of the bed to my side. For a moment I wasn't convinced it was him at all, but then he was close enough that I could recognize the shape of his hair. I couldn't see his face, though. It was occluded entirely by the darkness in the room.
"What are you doing, mate?" My heart was still racing, both from what was happening now and from the residue of the nightmare it had woken me from. "It's not time to get up yet. Absolutely nowhere near."
"Can I sleep in here with you tonight?"
"What?" He never had before. In fact, Rebecca and I had always held firm on the few occasions he'd suggested it, assuming that relenting even once would be the beginning of a slippery slope. "We don't do that, Jake. You know that."
"Please."
I realized that his voice was deliberately quiet, as though there were someone in another room he didn't want to hear.
"What's the matter?" I said.
"I heard a noise."
"A noise?"
"There's a monster outside my window."
I sat there in silence, remembering the rhyme he'd told me at bedtime. But that had been about the door. And anyway, there was no way anybody could be outside his window. We were one floor up.
"You were dreaming, mate."
He shook his head in the darkness.
"It woke me up. I went to the window and it was louder there. I wanted to open the curtains but I was too scared."
You would have seen the dark field across the road, I thought. That's all.
But he sounded so serious that I couldn't say that to him.
"All right." I slipped out of bed. "Well, let's go and check, then."
"Don't, Daddy."
"I'm not scared of monsters, Jake."
He followed me into the hall, where I switched on the light at the top of the stairs. Stepping into his room, though, I left the light off, and then approached the window.
"What if there's something there?"
"There isn't," I said.
"But what if?"
"Then I'll deal with it."
"Will you punch it in the face?"
"Absolutely. But there's nothing there."
And yet I didn't feel as confident as I sounded. The closed curtains seemed ominous. I listened for a moment, but there was nothing to hear. And it was impossible for anybody to be out there.
I pulled the curtains open. pg. 60
NAMES IN THIS BOOK (view spoiler)[ Jake m 7 Rebecca f Neil m Pete m 56 Amanda f Frank m Carl m Sharon f Colin m Jane f Tony m Dominic m Miranda f Alan m Claire f Sally f Karen f Adam m Tom m George m Owen m Josh m Hasan m Tabby f Victor m Mary f Louise f Norman m Stephanie f John m Morris dog Derek m Anne f Julian m Chris m Roger m Liam m Francis m David m Brian m (hide spoiler)]...more
This book is more of the same for the series. Children may like it, but I find it difficult to enjoy as an adult reader. Every other word is PolynesiaThis book is more of the same for the series. Children may like it, but I find it difficult to enjoy as an adult reader. Every other word is Polynesian. The 'characters' are one-dimensional, flat props. It's hard to understand what exactly is going on.
R.L. Stine is better. I would read a child Goosebumps over this any day of the week. But for children with a weakness for Bionicles, this might appeal....more
"I am Oz, the Great and Terrible. Who are you, and why do you seek me?" pg. 92
What a charming little classic. If you are an adult, and have only seen "I am Oz, the Great and Terrible. Who are you, and why do you seek me?" pg. 92
What a charming little classic. If you are an adult, and have only seen the film, you are in for a treat IMO. This is really a fairy tale. A 'modern fairy tale' as Lyman Frank Baum would describe it. Only he called it "a wonder tale." Still holds up today, still fun to read to children today. Still has this sense of whimsy and humor that I think makes it a good choice to read to children, even though it was published in 1900.
Let's look right at the beginning of the book, where Baum describes Kansas:
When Dorothy stood in the doorway and looked around, she could see nothing but the great gray prairie on every side. Not a tree nor a house broke the broad sweep of flat country that reached the edge of the sky in all directions. The sun had baked the plowed land into a gray mass, with little cracks running through it. Even the grass was not green, for the sun had burned the tops of the long blades until they were the same gray color to be seen everywhere. Once the house had been painted, but the sun blistered the paint and the rains washed it away, and now the house was as dull and gray as everything else.
When Aunt Em came there to live she was a young, pretty wife. The sun and wind had changed her, too. They had taken the sparkle from her eyes and left them a sober gray; they had taken the red from her cheeks and lips, and they were gray also. She was thin and gaunt, and never smiled, now. When Dorothy, who was an orphan, first came to see her, Aunt Em had been so startled by the child's laughter that she would scream and press her hand upon her heart whenever Dorothy's merry voice reached her ears; and she still looked at the little girl with wonder that she could find anything to laugh at.
Uncle Henry never laughed. He worked hard from morning till night and did not know what joy was. He was gray also, from his long beard to his rough boots, and he looked stern and solemn, and rarely spoke.
It was Toto that made Dorothy laugh, and saved her from growing as gray as her other surroundings. Toto was not gray; he was a little black dog, with long, silky hair and small black eyes that twinkled merrily on either side of his funny, wee nose. Toto played all day long, and Dorothy played with him, and loved him dearly. pg. 12
As you can see, the writing is charming and lends itself well to fables. I always thought the part where Dorothy traveled from her world of black-and-white and stepped into a world of Technicolor was a film-gimmick. Little did I know it was an accurate interpretation of what Baum wrote in 1900!
You probably think you know the story of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, and it's true that the movie keeps a lot of the elements. But there's a whole bunch more here that isn't mentioned in the movie: different lands and creatures Dorothy and her friends come across.
Baum is also funny! I was surprised. He definitely puts in some great passages in here that will make any adult reader laugh out loud along with the children!
"I cannot understand why you should wish to leave this beautiful country and go back to the dry, gray place you call Kansas."
"That is because you have no brains," answered the girl. "No matter how dreary and gray our homes are, we people of flesh and blood would rather live there than in any other country, be it ever so beautiful. There is no place like home."
The Scarecrow sighed.
"Of course I cannot understand it," he said. "If your heads were stuffed with straw, like mine, you would probably all live in the beautiful places, and then Kansas would have no people at all. It is fortunate for Kansas that you have brains." pg. 36
LOL LOL LOL
How about this enlightening conversation?:
"It is my great sorrow, and makes my life very unhappy. But whenever there is danger my heart begins to beat fast."
"Perhaps you have heart disease," said the Tin Woodman.
"It may be," said the Lion.
"If you have," continued the Tin Woodman, "you ought to be glad, for it proves you have a heart. For my part, I have no heart; so I cannot have heart disease." pg. 52
It made me laugh when Dorothy struggles to describe her dog to the cowardly Lion. Even though there are LOTS of animals in Oz, it appears there is no such thing as a dog. Everywhere she goes, people are fascinated by Toto.
"What is that little animal you are so tender of?"
"He is my dog, Toto," answered Dorothy.
"Is he made of tin, or stuffed?" asked the Lion.
"Neither. He's a - a - a meat dog," said the girl. pg. 52
A MEAT DOG!!!! LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL That one had me in stitches.
Unlike the movie, the journey takes several weeks. And in the book, the land of Oz is real, not a dream as is purported by the film. You have to wonder how long Dorothy is missing from Kansas. Her aunt and uncle must have been out of their minds with worry.
Baum creates some fantastical creatures in this book that will thrill and delight children. We have Kalidahs - monstrous beasts with bodies like bears and heads like tigers and with claws so long and sharp that they could tear me in two... and Hammer-Heads. etc.
There are also delightful creatures like helpful storks and helpful mice and the winged monkeys, of course, who really aren't so bad.
The joke of the book is that even though the Scarecrow believes he has no brains, he is the smartest of the group and always coming up with clever ideas. The Tin Woodman believes he has no heart, but he is very tender,
During the rest of that day there was not other adventure to mar the peace of their journey. Once, indeed, the Tin Woodman stepped upon a beetle that was crawling along the road, and killed the poor little thing. This made the Tin Woodman very unhappy, for he was always careful not to hurt any living creature; and as he walked along he wept several tears of sorrow and regret. These tears ran slowly down his face and over the hinges of his jaw, and there they rusted. When Dorothy presently asked him a question the Tin Woodman could not open his mouth, for his jaws were tightly rusted together. He became greatly frightened at this and made many motions to Dorothy to relieve him, but she could not understand. The Lion was also puzzled to know what was wrong. But the Scarecrow seized the oil-can form Dorothy's basket and oiled the Woodman's jaws, so that after a few moments he could talk as well as before.
"This will serve me a lesson," said he, "to look where I step. For if I should kill another bug or beetle I should surely cry again, and crying rusts my jaw so that I cannot speak."
Thereafter he walked very carefully, with his eyes on the road, and when he saw a tiny ant toiling by he would step over it, so as not to harm it. The Tin Woodman knew very well he had no heart, and therefore he took great care never to be cruel or unkind to anything.
"You people with hearts," he said, "have something to guide you, and need never do wrong; but I have no heart, and so I must be very careful, When Oz gives me a heart of course I needn't mind so much." pg. 53
However, this is much negated by all the animal-murder the Tin Woodman commits without a second thought throughout the book. He's very fond of chopping creatures' heads off with his axe, and murders ~45 animals in this book. I guess in 1900 there were 'bad animals' and 'good animals,' based solely on, I don't know, whether they were predators or not? and it was just OK for Dorothy and her friends to kill spiders, wolves, bees, crows, and wildcats without a second thought because they were 'bad.' Leaving aside the fact that all these animals can talk and are sapient. o.O Which makes it even more horrible IMO.
The cowardly Lion, is, of course, not really cowardly. The whole point of the book is that these three had the qualities they seek inside them all along. Only Dorothy has a real problem - being unable to return to Kansas.
Slavery is also a pretty big theme in the book. It seems like the difference between "good witches" and "bad witches" focuses mainly on whether they desire to enslave populations or not. Dorothy wanders through Oz freeing whole populations from bondage. In this way she and her friends have quite a warm reception everywhere she goes and everyone is willing to help them and do them favors.
I was impressed by how practical Dorothy was. She is a very practical little girl. She's got a great head on her shoulders, and never lets Oz overwhelm her despite its craziness.
TL;DR Actually a charming little book. I would advise shopping around (in your bookstore or library) to get the book with the most pleasing illustrations. Some editions have much better illustrations than others, and some are very beautiful. Of course the illustrations really add when you are reading books to children! And it's funny. You will be sure to get at least a few laughs out of it, perhaps not as many as the children, but I see Baum's sense of humor in here. It's not written in a style that is incomprehensible to children. It flows very quickly and the chapters are short and you can easily read a chapter a night before bedtime.
If the children like it, there's plenty more Oz books by Baum to enjoy when you are done! The book aims at a young audience. Maybe 6-9 although of course the older children can listen in if it pleases them.
NAMES IN THIS BOOK (view spoiler)[ Henry m Em f Dorothy f Toto – dog Boq – m Oz m Gayelette f Quelala m Glinda f (hide spoiler)]
"Well, in a few minutes I shall be all melted, and you will have the castle to yourself. I have been wicked in my day, but I never thought a little girl like you would ever be able to melt me and end my wicked deeds. Look out - here I go!" pg. 117...more
Ostensibly this is a romance between two young men (18 or 19?). Although nothing romantic really happens until abouI found this book very frustrating.
Ostensibly this is a romance between two young men (18 or 19?). Although nothing romantic really happens until about two-thirds of the way through the book.
What frustrated me is that Ari, the character who is working in his dad's bakery, is a selfish, self-absorbed, whiny, immature, pouting little brat. And I'm supposed to think Hector falls in love with him!!!!
When they finally kiss, I'm like, "NOoooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!! Don't kiss him, Hector!!!!!!!" And that's bad. That's not how you should feel when reading a romance. You should think the two people falling in love are cute, good people, and deserve each other.
Literally the only reason I can see for Hector "loving" or "caring about" Ari is because he thinks that Ari is handsome or has a good body. That's it. Full-stop. There's literally NOTHING attractive about Ari's sniveling personality. He has no work ethic. He has no drive. He hangs around shitty people who say shitty things and doesn't stand up for himself or others. He's passive-aggressive. He's whiny. He's pouty. He's like a child - and not a happy child! A depressed, needy child prone to crying jags.
I'm all for the idea of this plot - baker's son wants to break away from a future of spending his whole life working in his dad's bakery, falls in love with a new-man-in-town who is a strong, responsible, hard-working, good person - but it falls apart because the baker's son is weak, pathetic and insufferable.
Really baffled by this. I can't believe I'm supposed to rejoice in this 'love story.' Instead, it left me feeling like Hector could do WAY better than Ari, deserved WAY more than Ari, was going to end up in a relationship where he had to do all the heavy lifting, had to do all of the emotional work, had to baby and 'take care of' his boyfriend, has to hold his boyfriend's hand through every little thing, has to deal with Ari's snits and whiny, crying passive-aggressive trash behavior,... Who has TIME for this shit? Does Hector, who actually functions as an ADULT MAN, want to yoke himself to this CHILD?! WHY?!?!!? The only possible conceivable answer is that he feels lust for Ari and wants to fuck him. That's not what the book says, the book says Hector 'cares about' Ari, but for the love of Pete I don't see how!!!!
TL;DR I know people are all trying to write these cutesy, uplifting little romance graphic novels now. I understand it's a thing. But I need the two protagonists in the romance who fall in love with each other to both be good people whom I like. People who may be flawed, but have enough good, strong personality traits for me to be rooting for them. And when two people end up together, I want to feel HAPPY, like both of them have achieved a GOOD THING, and be happy about their pleasant future together, NOT feeling like one has just been sadly burdened with a partner who is emotionally fragile, very insecure, very weak, and whom he will have to delicately and gently 'care for' and 'look after' for their whole entire relationship. JFC. Poor Hector.
Points for the art and for trying. But it's a failure. I did not support this couple and thought Hector was making a HUGE mistake....more
Dini tackles the radical idea of superheroes addressing normal human issues.
Did you ever wonder why Superman doesn't tackle world hunger? Or why WondeDini tackles the radical idea of superheroes addressing normal human issues.
Did you ever wonder why Superman doesn't tackle world hunger? Or why Wonder Woman doesn't end world poverty? This book addresses issues like this, and it is refreshing.
[image]
SUPERMAN: PEACE ON EARTH
Superman is a mensch. This makes him one of my favorite superheroes. In this issue, he decides to tackle world hunger. After saving a starving girl during the Christmas season, he does some research.
The photos, however, I stare at for a long time. It's ironic. I don't need to eat. I will never know hunger. I don't know what victims of starvation feel. I can't decide if that is a blessing or a curse.
I think back to my father. As a farmer, he had a natural understanding for the earth. I remember him telling me this world is capable of providing for all its creatures. Even now, with so many more people, there exists enough food for everyone.
"The problem," Pa used to say, "is people. As far back as we go, we've always had problems with sharing. Seems everyone's too busy holding on to what they've got to care how their neighbors are doing."
Pa said it would take a special individual with no personal agenda to make everyone realize what the world has to offer.
Someone who could put his own needs aside to help the greater good.
I don't pretend to think I am that person, though I have always tried to be there for others.
I look upon my powers as a gift, not mine alone but for anyone who needs them.
Like I said, mensch.
So Superman stands before Congress and asks to take America's surplus and transport it to those in need. ...as I can reach in one day.
Congress approves, but things aren't so easy.
Examples: Superman unable to look a child in the eye when the child asks if he will be back tomorrow; corrupt governments trying to take the food and 'distribute it themselves;' people who are too scared to come out and receive food (I found this one hard to swallow, wouldn't they just come out after Superman leaves?); people throwing rocks at Superman; evil governments who would rather blow up the food or poison it rather than allow the starving to eat...
In the end Superman admits he cannot solve world hunger, but he encourages humans to help each other. It's very touching. It was an emotional issue with some great writing.
Some of the art is beautiful, like Superman appearing above Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro, looking like a Messiah himself.
[image]
[image]
[image]
BATMAN: WAR ON CRIME
Batman's story is pretty different. Mainly because Batman is all about terror and petty crime in a dark city rife with evil.
To much of the city I am a ghost. An urban bogeyman often discussed but rarely seen. More vivid in rumor than reality.
Glimpsed fleetingly in shadow, possessed of seemingly inhuman powers, I have become, through imaginations and nightmares, a creature to be avoided.
The aura of fear that I project is my most potent weapon. It triggers panic, giving me the advantage in my attack.
It acts as a barrier, warning the innocent and the curious to keep their distance.
Even those who fixate on challenging the "Bat-Man" recoil in horror when I finally confront them.
But in this issue, Batman attempts to understand why people might turn to crime and exhibit compassion for them. Batman considers how different his life could have turned out if, instead of turning to vigilantism and justice after his parents were murdered he took to crime.
To illustrate this, the story loosely follows a boy whose parents were gunned down by thugs (apprehended by Batman) as he turns to a life of crime. Can Batman convince him this is not the best path? This sounds corny, but it's really not - Dini does a great job.
Another excellent thing about this issue is the rare, seamless examination about how Batman moves through Gotham as a dark vigilante, intelligently manipulating criminals and biding his time and spying. But also, he is moving through Gotham as Bruce Wayne, a privileged white billionaire who can make or break buildings, companies, careers... This issue brilliantly illuminates how rich, evil, corrupt people might think Bruce Wayne is 'one of them,' only interested in seeking more wealth, not caring about the poor or who he hurts. Wayne plays them, he manipulates them, then he crushes them - not violently as Batman, but with his money and power.
So often Batman comics only focus on Batman. Not Wayne. On what Batman does - fight crime, imprison criminals, save people from physical danger. Here, Dini explores the ways Wayne is a hero as well, not just his alter ego. Bruce Wayne has different 'powers' than the Batman. He can also use these powers for good. He also is moving through and crushing an evil, disgusting element as Bruce Wayne - not the gangs, drug dealers, thieves and murderers in Gotham - but the slimy, corrupt, life-ruining rich and powerful people who consider themselves 'above' other people and don't concern themselves with anything but money and power.
It's very good. You get to enjoy both a powerful and intelligent Batman fighting violent crime, and a powerful and intelligent Bruce Wayne fighting corporate greed, corruption, and dirty evil rich people.
There's a scene where Bruce exercises shirtless that I enjoy, not only because I like to look at shirtless Batman, but because being Batman has taken such a physical toll on Wayne's body and I think it is nicely illustrated here. He's fucked-up. You wonder how long he can keep this up. I know they briefly address this in one of the DC movies... was it Justice League? But it's interesting to see his scarred and battered body and realize this isn't some super-powered human or some alien with healing powers. There's no way Batman can keep this up long-term, despite what some comics would have you believe. No one's body can resist that level of punishment for over a decade and still be an amazing, top-shape fighter, something has to give. I wonder what his doctor has to say!
Great illustrations, as usual.
[image]
[image]
SHAZAM!: POWER OF HOPE
Shazam! is a totally different animal. Billy Batson's joy and youthful exuberance is much different from the vibes of both Batman and Superman. When the radio station Batson works at starts receiving letters from people in need, a bunch of letters from a children's hospital catches Billy's eye.
Instead of using his powers as 'a quick solution,' he starts to realize there is good he can do that doesn't involve rescuing people at the last minute. He regales the children with stories of his adventures. He flies over a specialist from Japan to perform surgery on a blind girl. He takes the kids on some adventures. It's great. I thought the story was fun and touching.
[image]
WONDER WOMAN: SPIRIT OF TRUTH
I was really looking forward to Wonder Woman's comic, but I found myself a bit frustrated and disappointed.
Wonder Woman is getting rejected, hated and feared by all sorts of people. The comic is very unclear as to why.
It seems to be saying that she's not 'relatable' and that she's 'too powerful.' I think this is a misogynistic message. Everyone else can be a superhero and run around doing superhero stuff, but when Wonder Woman does it it's 'threatening and scary.' 'No one can understand or relate to her.'
People are ungrateful little jerks. Wonder Woman is great. I felt sorry for her. What the fuck was people's problem? This issue shows even people WW has saved from death being terrified of her and hateful to her. It just made me sick.
Then she has to call SUPERMAN for HELP. *Carmen spits on the ground* What the fuck is this shit?! And he tells her she is 'too beautiful and strong' and that makes people unable to relate to her. WHAT THE FUCK.
So she starts wearing disguises to go everywhere, which in my opinion makes no fucking sense. I suppose Dini was trying to say she 'gets the perspective of average people,' but I was upset.
Of course eventually she has to fling off her disguise and fight as WW, but people are not much more understanding. They still hate and fear her.
The End. What a fucking disappointment. Misogyny. WW was unable to shine like the other heroes in this collection, which makes me sad and angry. :( >.<
[image]
[image]
[image]
JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA: SECRET ORIGINS
This kind of loses the thread of the collection. The Justice League teams up to defeat a virus. Although it tries to fit in to the human aspect of the collection, with all the heroes together taking on a rather supernatural element the comic fails at capturing the human spirit of the previous issues.
It does touch on it when it addresses how the heroes have to fight not only their enemy, but humans who are fearful, stupid, and reckless. Humans don't act smart in crises.
This is also the only comic that uses dialogue, which breaks the feeling of the collection which up til now had only been narrative.
At the end of this comic, I was kind of fed up. Humans are so stupid and violent and impulsive. The heroes are around to protect them from others and from themselves, but in real life no one is here to save you. It's a wonder the League doesn't get fed up with humanity and just let them destroy themselves.
At the end they even have to present themselves to the United Nations and explain their actions! UGH. It's surprising more heroes don't become anti-heroes or even villains.
There are some iconic images in here, like Superman holding up a falling building.
Martian Manhunter is the real stand-out in this comic, giving us a touching and relatable perspective as an immigrant to earth.
[image]
TL;DR Overall a great and pretty touching collection from DC. Strong writing and wonderful from-life illustrations. Dini screwed over Wonder Woman IMO and the Justice League comic broke the overarching theme of the book. But it was definitely enjoyable and worth reading, I'd highly recommend it. ...more
The wind on my face, the sky opening, my heart torn from this earthly ribcage. My soul ignited, my spirit rising and...
This issue opens with Batman slThe wind on my face, the sky opening, my heart torn from this earthly ribcage. My soul ignited, my spirit rising and...
This issue opens with Batman slitting an infant's throat.
No, for real.
Rather grim opening, I thought. In case you think Batman is now a babykiller, it's to save the baby's life.
- Alfred turns out to be a reader, telling Batman about The Crying of Lot 49 by Thomas Pynchon which Alfred describes as "rather good, actually." But Alfred lets us know he prefers Anthony Burgess.
- VOCABULARY FOR YOUNG READERS: penultimate, tracheotomy, labyrinth, tattoo - as in "the rain beating a slow tattoo on my cloak," predecessor, danse macabre
- Dark, gothic tale involving demons, Satan, human sacrifice, etc.
- Interesting and clever of the Riddler to get Batman to perform rituals preparing himself for demon sacrifice. Creative, I liked it.
- Batman is actually kind and respectful to someone. Of course, it's to a dead woman, so... but still. Nice to see him actually practicing compassion.
- Batman's life is saved by Alfred.
- Gotham is a demon. No shit.
- Batman contemplates whether he should allow himself to make a funny face at an infant. I wish I could see that, but alas, Milligan declines to show us this part.
TL;DR Poetic, gothic issue. Clever. Good writing. I'm going to have to give this one a thumbs-up. ...more
Flash gets kicked out of Keystone for 'attracting trouble.' He moves to Santa Marta, which really rolls out the welcomTHE FLASH - Flash of Two Cities
Flash gets kicked out of Keystone for 'attracting trouble.' He moves to Santa Marta, which really rolls out the welcome wagon for him. They put him in a huge house, everyone loves him, and they even offer to pay him for his services (he declines).
Flash has a good sense of humor and he talks to himself a lot.
But Flash's girlfriend, Linda Park, makes it clear dating Flash is not all roses. He only eats fast food, apparently, and doesn't believe in taking his woman to sit-down restaurants. She also says he never tries anything different. She seems to have fallen out of touch with her female friends since picking up with Wally. Bad sign.
Something about a 'ghost' T-Rex attacking. Something about Mr. Frost, who is a real dick boss. I think he may be putting neural implants in his employees. He's definitely working them to the bone, not allowing breaks, and putting their lives in danger.
I like when Linda Park is threatened by her boss and she gives as good as she gets. He tells her that her reputation will suffer if she's seen talking to The Flash, and she tells him she knows about him cheating on his wife with an escort once a week. Is this for children?
TL;DR I think you'd probably have to read the arc. This comic doesn't really stand on its own. That being said, I didn't suffer. It was enjoyable. ...more
I couldn't take the plot too seriously as there were plenty of jokes. The basic thrust is that the world's humaGERM WARFARE, or Hunting the Manhunter!
I couldn't take the plot too seriously as there were plenty of jokes. The basic thrust is that the world's human population is being turned into brain-dead tools of "something." The Justice League themselves end up getting brainwashed - all except Martian Manhunter who appears to be immune to this particular threat.
NOTES:
- Guy Gardner is SO obnoxious and Batman basically has to keep his foot on Guy's neck for the whole issue. Batman's checking Guy every 10 seconds in this. And by 'checking' I mean keeping him in his place.
- Batman is a jerk. He's not kind, easygoing, or compassionate. He's bossy, demanding, and always insists on things being done his way. If I were another member of the Justice League, I would be fed up. He's so fucking condescending and full of shit. And when others try to call him on his shit, he just pretends like he was slumming so that the others could keep up - really he's a super-genius! HA!
I can now understand why LEGO Batman Movie went the way it did. Very funny. He's so fucking bossy and full-of himself. Look at this conversation:
BATMAN: "Identical occurrences in four different locations. No apparent links, and yet... Manhunter... come take a look at this. What do you think, J'onn? Is this League business?"
GUY: "Well, I'll tell you what I think..."
BATMAN: "NOBODY ASKED."
MANHUNTER: "The computer was programmed to bring possible crisis situations to our attention. A the very least, we should investigate."
BLUE BEETLE: "Yeah. For all we know this could be some kind of temporary phenomenon... Some weird coincidence that - "
BATMAN: "Good point, Beetle. Mister Miracle - you programmed the computer. Could this just be some odd coincidence or - "
MISTER MIRACLE: "Absolutely not. The computer will compensate for random ocurrences. If this wasn't a genuine threat - "
BATMAN: "It wouldn't have come up. Yes. I know that."
BLACK CANARY: "So why are you wasting our time talking about it?"
BATMAN: "I wanted you all to feel included in the decision-making process."
Oh, yeah, great save, Batman. Sure.
BLACK CANARY: "Well, if that's the case, here's what I think we should do."
BATMAN: "I said I wanted you to feel included in the decision-making process, I didn't say you should usurp it."
BLACK CANARY: "But..."
BATMAN: "Now here's what we'll do..."
Wow, what a DICK. JFC, who knew Batman was such an ASSHOLE? Something needs to be done about this.
- Here's a joke:
BLUE BEETLE: "Mmmmm. That's why Batman's sending me out to La-La Land. As Ted Kord, I am "Kord Industries."
MISTER MIRACLE: "So how do you find the time for super-heroing?"
BLUE BEETLE: "Hey - this is the 80s! A guy can be an executive AND a super-hero AND have a personal life AND - "
MISTER MIRACLE: "How do you do it?"
BLUE BEETLE: "Nervous breakdowns every second Sunday."
LOL
There's also a joke about the prevalence gay sex in L.A. Not sure what that is about? They just assume children won't pick up on this? IDK.
- Booster Gold keeps hitting on Black Canary. She gently reminds him she's not to be fucked with.
BOOSTER: (after tons of banter about holding her in his arms and not wanting to let go) blah blah
BLACK CANARY: "One of the first things you learn in this game is that the quieter things are - the worse they're probably going to get."
BOOSTER: "Beautiful - and wise, too. Wowser - what a combination!"
BLACK CANARY: "I'm also really good at breaking limbs."
BOOSTER: "I'll keep that in mind."
So: life as a female superhero in 1987 - Batman tells you to shut up, he's not interested in your opinion. Then you get constantly hit on. Joy. /s And in 1987 a lot of people were saying, "Why do we need feminism anymore? Men and women are equal now!" LOL And then you take a look at 2019 and realize we still have so far to go.
- The villain didn't come from outer space. I'm baffled as to why the GR summary suggests that.
TL;DR - Kind of a bizarre plot. I couldn't take it too seriously. Manhunter was the winner and the key player here. Batman is an asshole. Being a woman on the League in 1987 comes with a lot of problems. >.<...more
I have a lot of things to say about this! Batman in Detective Comics "Cats" #612 March 1990.
Picture it: It's 1990. Our comic opens with a little old lI have a lot of things to say about this! Batman in Detective Comics "Cats" #612 March 1990.
Picture it: It's 1990. Our comic opens with a little old lady getting robbed in the park at night by a bunch of young teenage boys skateboarding. She's looking for her missing cat.
Which is appropriate: cats are the major theme here and this issue features Catman, Catwoman, a tiger, and some unscrupulous cat-hating young men who are capturing stray cats to sell to research labs for nefarious purposes.
I didn't even know there was a Catman. o.O
Some things I want to comment on:
- Batman berates the old woman for being out in the park at night and implies that it's her fault she got mugged. Disgusting.
- Catwoman leaves her apartment simply to get revenge on a newswoman who is spreading rumors about her being a murderer: she hangs her upside-down from a tree. Catwoman is scary-looking in this. She looks like an emaciated, militant Soviet gymnast or something. I have no idea how Batman looks because Breyfogle never shows me his face. Catwoman doesn't have to be sexy, of course, but I'd just thought I'd mention it since she's known as such a seductive beauty. In this one she looks more like 'The Evil Lady Torturer' as Bill Murray would say.
Catwoman also attacks Catman for which I have to say: Good for her. Go get him!
- Cat joke: A robber finds a cat on the roof of "Hottin Roofing Inc." Ha ha. Would the children (?) reading this even get that joke? The robber is even wearing a little robber-eye-mask and everything. So silly-looking.
- Second cat joke: The sadistic young men who are gathering cats to sell are driving a van labeled: Schrodinger Delivery. Again, not sure if kids would get this.
NAMES IN THIS COMIC Sara - f Ayesha - cat Rasputin - tiger Thomas - m T.C. - m Corky - m Dawson - m Ernie - m
Advertisements for NES and Atari. Ah, the pre-Columbine era. Look at this copy: After a hard day at school, have you ever just wanted to go home and break a few heads? Destroy a couple of cities? Or just blow up the entire universe? Of course you have. And now you can without getting grounded. Just plug in any one of these four smash arcade hits on your Atari 7800 system.
And get ready for the fight of your life.
Winners don't do drugs.
Actually, drug use is addressed in the best section: the Detective Comments, which I love to read. People were concerned about evil drugs in 1990. One reader writes: Someone has finally attacked the greatest villain society has ever seen, and it's all too unfortunate that this villain can't be confined to the fictional pages of a comic book. The villain, if you haven't guess by now, is DRUGS, and I can't applaud you enough for having the Batman try to do something about them.
It would be silly to think that any comic-book character could single-handedly wipe out a problem this big, but it's nice to see ol' Batsy try. And the way he said, "No crime is too small for me, especially when it involves THIS trash!" just made my spine tingle.
Being a teen-ager in a typical American high school, I'm much closer to the drug problem than I'd ever like to be, but it helps to know that Batman's on my side. I'd like to see you guys keep mentioning the drug issue every once in a while, and maybe in some of your other fine titles, too - the more attention we can bring to this issue, the better. It's about time we all got involved.
Name, Location
P.S. Also an interesting "From the Den" in #608. Lost liberties may not be funny, but I'll gladly give up some of my basic rights if it'll help conquer the drug crisis we've got on our hands.
O'Neil points out that twenty years ago, the unfortunately named "Speedy" (Green Arrow's ward) was a heroin addict.
What's also super-fascinating to me are Denny's closing remarks in "From the Den." Look at this:
Marv gestured down the slope toward Los Angeles. "We're above the smog line here," he said. "You can actually see it."
And I could - a layer of haze floating over the city. It explained why my left eye had been bloodshot when I'd awakened that morning and why, a day later, I was breathless after only ten very easy minutes on the motel's exercise bike. But by the end of my six-day visit to Southern California, my body had adjusted to the local version of air and I wasn't noticing anything amiss.
Then I returned to New York, where the atmosphere isn't much better, and read the front page of the New York Times which told me that nobody official seemed to be concerned with the problem of the greenhouse effect - the global warming trend caused by pollutants in the atmosphere.
Unfortunately, most world leaders have managed to pretty much ignore the disruption of the environment.
I suppose they think they have better things to worry about.
I think they're wrong. If we have no air to breathe, no water to drink; if our DNA is being broiled by hard radiation leaking through holes in the ozone layer; if the temperature rises to the point where ice caps melt and agriculture is impossible - if any of that happens, then everything else becomes irrelevant.
A while ago, after I'd typed for a few minutes, I got up and opened the big window to my right. I was uncomfortably warm. It is mid-November.
Dennis.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
TL;DR - Very interesting to take this walk into the past. :)
I find him sexually exciting due to his mensch-ness. Gentle, kind, compassionate. Yum.
I have some questions, though. This coSuperman is such a mensch.
I find him sexually exciting due to his mensch-ness. Gentle, kind, compassionate. Yum.
I have some questions, though. This comic shows a boy coming down from another planet. They suspect he is Kryptonian. My friend and I always joke around about Clark bringing other Kryptonians home to be raised by his elderly parents, as if they have nothing else to do. This comic cements that, to our vast amusement.
I also like when Superman gets all worked up, and he certainly does here. Very sexy. ;)...more
Seems to imply Thomas Wayne was murdered because he was running for mayor. Alfred Pennyworth and Thomas Wayne served overseas together in 'the desert.Seems to imply Thomas Wayne was murdered because he was running for mayor. Alfred Pennyworth and Thomas Wayne served overseas together in 'the desert.'
Shows Batman giving cash money to a homeless person begging him for mercy....more
COP: "What kind of person gets arrested at a five-year-old's birthday party?"
CORDELIA: "The magician, obviously."
COP: How the hell does that even happCOP: "What kind of person gets arrested at a five-year-old's birthday party?"
CORDELIA: "The magician, obviously."
COP: How the hell does that even happen? You're supposed to be in there making balloon animals and shit."
CORDELIA: "Well, I guess it all took a turn for the worse when the mother caught me fucking her husband in the kitchen. She threw a punch. I hit her back. Next thing you know, we're wrestling on a bouncy castle and some kid's having an asthma attack. I think the moral of the story is never pour vodka on your breakfast cereal when you run out of milk."
Not for children, obviously. Secret organization of wizards protects the world from bad things (demons, etc.) without their knowledge. But it's less Avengers and more Mafia. For instance, the comic opens with a wizard taking control of a little child and sending the child into his parents' bedroom to cut his father's throat with a butcher knife.
You know. That sort of thing.
Looks dark, but has promise. We'll see.
I hear Netflix owns it and has rated it M for Mature. LOL...more
Even worse than the whiteout was the agony of his eyes when he tried to see through the snow. The fine hard pellets blew into his eyes and made them wEven worse than the whiteout was the agony of his eyes when he tried to see through the snow. The fine hard pellets blew into his eyes and made them water. Walter cried and the snow mixed with his tears until it formed a crust between the upper and lower lids. Instinctively he reached up to brush the crust away with the back of his hand. Soon his eyeballs were inflamed, which further distorted his vision. The pain became so acute that it felt better to let the ice crust build. Tears and blowing snow melded together and sealed his eyes shut tightly. There was no way to break the seal except by tearing the tender skin.
Once Walter's eyes were gone, the rest of his face went fast. A mask of ice covered the exposed skin of his face except for holes at the nostrils and mouth. Snow penetrated his clothing and froze into an armor of ice around his body. All of this happened in moments. pg. 136
Entertainment Weekly describes this as "Heartbreaking... This account of the 1888 blizzard reads like a thriller." I don't think that is accurate. Yes, it is emotional. I would agree with that. "Reads like a thriller" is a bit of a stretch IMO. Laskin tries his best to be dramatic, which is uncalled for IMO, but it doesn't read like a thriller.
Perhaps it would if Laskin would stick to the blizzard itself, but instead he wants to give us a clearer and more comprehensive picture. That's good, but it doesn't make for a seamless, exciting read that I would expect when I hear the word "thriller."
I think this book can pretty much be summed up with one phrase: plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. The more things change, the more they stay the same. The parallels between 1888 and now are incredible.
Let's take a look at what Laskin is doing in this book.
ONE: IMMIGRATION
The Norwegians, the Schweizers, the Ukranians... people were immigrants coming to the United States. Why were people leaving Norway? Because they were poor.
Beauty was abundant and free in the countryside of Tinn – but you couldn't eat beauty, and the beautiful farms were yielding less and less while the population steadily grew. But they were comparatively lucky in Tinn. Elsewhere in Telemark the farm fields had become so small from repeated division that farmers had to harvest the hay that grew on the thatch of their roofs and grow vegetables by spreading dirt and manure on top of rocks. It was a sad, haunted country for all its beauty. Men in the prime of their lives built their coffins and stored them inside until they were needed. pg. 11
The Schweizers, another immigrant group discussed in this book, were hated for their religious beliefs.
Rather than baptize their infants a few days after birth, the Schweizers waited until they were old enough to choose baptism as a “confession of faith.” They advocated complete separation of church and state and refused to serve in armed forces or fight in wars. For these beliefs, particularly the last, they had been crammed into the prisons of Bern, sold as galley slaves to Venetian merchants, branded, flogged, burned at the stake, and hounded through Europe. pg. 14
Nowadays people also come to the U.S. of A. because they are poor or because they are fleeing persecution.
The immigrants were brought to the U.S. of A. on stinking, filthy ships.
Of his own quarters belowdecks, Osten mentioned only that he and his mother were shocked to find “nothing more than hard boards – and... plenty of lice,” but one can imagine the squalor of the unventilated bunk rooms packed with 650 immigrants. pg. 18
Immigrant children often died and the scary possibility of being separated from your kids was looming.
A harrowing story was told by Finnish immigrants of one of their countrywomen who went into labor just as her immigrant ship anchored off the Battery. The woman was taken to a hospital on shore and forced to leave her baggage and her two-year-old daughter unattended on board the ship. While she was in the hospital, the ship returned to Europe. pg. 24
Immigrants were treated like shit. Laskin tells one story of a train that refused let the immigrants buy food at stops, this was only stopped by a Mennonite rebellion.
Children were told they would be beaten if they spoke German in school.
Before the fall term started, Wilhelm and Catherina warned Lena that no German could be spoken in school. Only English. Sometimes children were beaten if they spoke a foreign language. The teacher might even change her name. Woebbecke might be too hard for Stella Badger to say. pg. 33
Almost all the immigrants change their names from their German, Swiss, Norwegian and Ukranian names to "American" names. Both last names and first names are changed. The pressure to conform and to fit in was great.
These people were living in sod houses and in poverty.
It was all they could do to tear enough sod off the prairie to make shelters for themselves. It took half an acre of Dakota sod for a decent-sized sod house. The soddies leaked when it rained (“I would wake up with dirty water running through my hair,” wrote one pioneer), gophers and snakes sometimes popped from the walls, dirt got ground into clothes, skin, and food, but they kept the families alive and relatively warm when winter arrived – which happened far earlier and far more savagely than any of the Schweizers had anticipated. pg. 34
They watched their children die.
All winter long as the supply of food dwindled away, Anna looked at her son, Johann, her only child, grow thinner and more transparent. There were many days when they got by on burnt flour soup – flour scorched in the pan and then mixed with water, salt, and pepper. A poor diet for a growing child. A poor diet for a baby, if they had a baby to feed. Even had Peter survived the crossing to New York, he surely would have perished that first terrible winter. Would it have been worse to chisel a grave for the child in the frozen ground under the sod than see his body tossed into the sea? pg. 36
It was a dangerous place, summer or winter.
They got down to work so quickly they didn't have time to figure out the vagaries of soil and climate, the cycles of the seasons, the fickle violent moods of the sky. Deprived of both the folk wisdom born of deep familiarity with a single place and the brash abstractions of the new science, the pioneers were vulnerable and exposed. There hadn't been time to put up fences. Children waded into tall grass and vanished. Infants were accidentally dropped in snowdrifts. Infections flourished in the primitive, unsanitary claim shanties. pg 3
We haven't even gotten to the blizzard yet! I truly enjoyed how Laskin painted the life of immigrants trying to raise their families on the prairie. I wonder if certain people have completely forgotten about this: what it was like. To be a poor immigrant in a new country. To be hated for being poor and not being able to speak English. To be treated like trash because you weren't born here. To watch your children suffer. It's not 2019 - It's 1888.
THE BLIZZARD
Here, Laskin breaks off into a few threads. Some threads are more interesting than others. Let's examine them!
1.) THE STORM
This is fascinating. It's hard to understand the magnitude of the storm and it's terror, especially from a modern perspective. Laskin does an amazing job illustrating it for readers.
One moment it was mild, the sun was shining, a damp wind blew fitfully out of the south – the next moment frozen hell had broken loose. The air was so thick with find-ground wind-lashed ice crystals that people could not breathe. The ice dust webbed their eyelashes and sealed their eyes shut. It sifted into the loose weave of their coats, shirts, dresses, and underwear until their skin was packed in snow. Farmers who spent a decade walking the same worn paths became disoriented in seconds. pg. 6 ...
An impenetrable crust formed on top of the re-frozen slush. Cattle desperate for food cut their muzzles on the shards of ice that covered the sparse grass. Steers bled to death when the crust gave way beneath them and the ice sliced open their legs. …. Cattle had drifted hundreds of miles before they froze to death or died or exhaustion or suffocated from the ice plugging their nostrils. Some herds were never found; some where found in riverbeds or ravines, heaped up like slag; some were so badly frostbitten that ranchers were reduced to salvaging their hides.
Come spring, when the snow finally melted, flooded rivers carried the carcasses of thousands of cattle that had frozen to death during the winter – raging torrents choked with dead animals wedged between ice floes. pg. 62 ...
It's hard to fathom how children who walked to and from school a half mile or more every day became exhausted to the point of collapse while walking a hundred yards that afternoon. Hard to fathom until you consider the state of their thin cotton clothing, their eyelashes webbed with ice and frozen shut, the ice plugs that formed in their noses, the ice masks that hung on their faces. This was not a feathery sifting of gossamer powder. It was a frozen sandstorm. Cattle died standing up, died of suffocation before they froze solid. pg. 162
Laskin also offers good, long, brutal explanations of what happens to you when you freeze to death. It's fascinating and horrifying and he does a great job writing about this. It goes on for pages.
The horrors of the storm are legion.
The catalog of their suffering is terrible. They froze alone or with their parents or perished in frantic, hopeless pursuit of loved ones. They died with the frozen bloody skin torn from their faces, where they had clawed off the mask of ice again and again. Some died within hours of getting lost; some lived through the night and died before first light. They were found standing waist deep in drifts with their hands frozen to barbed-wire frences, clutching at straw piles, buried under overturned wagons, on their backs, facedown on the snow with their arms outstretched as if trying to crawl. Mothers died sitting up with their children around them in fireless houses when the hay or coal or bits of furniture were exhausted and they were too weak or too frightened to go for more. pg. 198
Laskin also does a wonderful job illustrating how you can't judge people for what actions you took. No matter what action you took, you could die. Stay in the school. Try to go home. Didn't matter - people died either way. Two people could take the same path and one could die and one could live. Two could take a different path - and the one you think will survive ends up dying horribly. There's no right answer. There's no 'smart thing to do.' Sometimes it seems like pure luck and chance are the only factors keeping certain people alive.
The survivors were never the same.
Johann set the rock-hard bodies on the floor next to the stove. Anna looked at her dead sons and began to laugh. She couldn't help herself. Her husband and her two little boys turned to her in disbelief but Anna didn't stop. It would be days before they could get the bodies into coffins. Anna laughed. pg. 232 ... Dowling's frostbite was so advanced that he lost both legs below the knees, his left arm below the elbow, and all the fingers and most of the thumb on his right hand. But Dowling was a fighter. He lived on to became [sic] a teacher, a newspaper editor, and eventually speaker of the house of the Minnesota State Legislature. “It is what one has above the shoulders that counts,” he always told fellow amputees. pg. 59
There's no pat ending. People suffered and died. They end. There's no gold at the end of the book here, no note of triumph. The people involved who did survive more often than not had sad endings to their stories anyway. Don't expect an uplifting book. Even the survivors usually came to a miserable end one way or another.
2.) WEATHER
Laskin focuses a whole entire (IMO) boring section on weather forecasting. He explains what a shoddy system the U.S. of A. had for predicting weather in 1888. It wasn't so much that the technology was shit, it was that the people running it (Signal Corps) were corrupt. They let 'distinguished visitors' try their hands at predicting weather if they came to the station. They had a lot of in-fighting and corruption. They only cared about themselves and their own positions and pocketbooks and not about saving lives.
This is a good and important point, but unfortunately not a very interesting one. And Laskin devotes dozen's of pages to the in-fighting which, frankly, is boring as hell.
The main important point is that in December 1889, President Benjamin Harrison took the privilege of weather reporting away from the Army Signal Corps and gave it to the Department of Agriculture.
WHY? Not because hundreds of poor immigrants and little children froze to death on the prairie on January 12, 1888. Honestly, NO ONE GAVE A FUCK that some immigrants died. Not the Army, not the government. And children's lives were not valued and DIDN'T MEAN SHIT in 1888. No, the reason Harrison made that decision was because RICH, IMPORTANT people who lived in NEW YORK CITY were dying, and money-making stopped on March 11-14, 1888. Heaven forbid RICH PEOPLE were in danger or inconvenienced. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. 1888 or 2019?
Today a “surprise” storm that killed over 200 people would instigate a fierce outcry in the press, vigorous official hand-wringing, and a flood of reports by every government agency remotely involved, starting with the National Weather Service. But in the Gilded Age, blame for the suffering attendant on an act of God was left unassigned. pg. 254
If it weren't for the blizzard that affected NYC, probably nothing would have changed. Immigrants were considered trash whose lives didn't matter, and children in general were seen as workhorses and not human beings.
They called it “The School Children's Blizzard” because so many of the victims were so young – but in a way the entire pioneer period was a kind of children's disaster. Children were the unpaid workforce of the prairie, the hands that did the work that no one else had time for or stomach for. The outpouring of grief after scores of children were found frozen to death among the cattle on Friday, January 13, was at least in part an expression of remorse for what children were subjected to every day – remorse for the fact that most children had no childhood. This was a society that could not afford to sentimentalize its living and working children. Only in death or on the verge of death were the young granted the heroine funds, the long columns of sobbing verse, the stately granite monuments. A safe and carefree childhood was a luxury the pioneer prairie could not afford. pg. 269
Yes, but this was the case for any time in the past. Not really unique to this situation. Laskin wants to make this about immigrant children in 1888, but urban or rural, forced to work on farms or forced to work in factories, children were considered a burden and free labor. For most of history this was going on. It's not specific to this time or place.
William Klemp, a newly married Dakotan in the full vigor of young manhood, left his pregnant wife at home and went out in the storm to care for their livestock. He never returned. A few weeks later, Klemp's wife gave birth to a son. It was spring when they found his body in a sod shanty a mile from the house. Klemp's face had been eaten away by mice and gophers. pg. 199
TL;DR What can I tell you about this book? Is it worth reading? I thought it was. Unfortunately, weather is a bit of a pet interest of Laskin's and he does tend to go on and on about weather forecasting and the inner politics of the Signal Corps. I think this could have been shortened considerably.
But the book has a lot of strengths. Great descriptions of the storm and how it killed. Clear illustrations about how a storm could kill someone (it might be baffling to modern readers how SO MANY people could have died). Laskin makes it easier to understand - we are talking about a different time.
Countless witnesses wrote that visibility was so poor at the height of the blizzard that you couldn't see your hand in front of your face. It's tempting to dismiss this as hyperbole or a figure of speech – but there is in fact a meteorological basis for these claims... the snow that day was as fine-grained as flour or sand... a woman froze to death with her key in her hand just steps from her door. pg. 135
Wonderful analysis of what freezing to death is like and interesting tidbits about the science of freezing to death.
Before paradoxical undressing was identified, police routinely mistook hypothermic women with torn or missing clothing for victims of sexual assault. The reaction explains a disturbing incident in military history. After a brutal three-day storm in January 1719, hundreds of Swedish soldiers were found stripped and dead in the field in the wake of a disastrous campaign against Norway. At the time it was assumed they had been plundered by their comrades, but now doctors believe that they tore off their own clothes as their minds and bodies went mad with cold – a mass outbreak of paradoxical undressing. pg. 194 ...
People freezing to death sometimes find they are unaccountably happy and relaxed. They feel flushed with a sudden glow of well-being. They love the world and everything in it. They want to sing. They hear heavenly music. As the mind and the body amicably part company, the freezing person looks down on himself as if he's hovering overhead or already in heaven or a returning ghost. There is his body, lying miserable in the snow, but somehow he is no longer trapped in it. He is gazing at his corpse and walking on. He's telling the story of his miraculous escape. pg. 192
Laskin uses The Little Match Girl to illustrate this. You might be familiar with the story.
Laskin is less clear about how the NYC storm was the one that finally got things going. I did some research and found that stuff out. He mentions it in passing, but the actual idea is stunning. It takes rich people to be affected by something for any change about it to happen. Like now, back then the government and the society didn't give a fuck what happened to the poor. Natural disasters get a lot more press, action, change, repair and attention when they hit rich areas.
Reading the book really opened my eyes to just how little the world has changed since 1888. We'd like to think we've come so far and become so advanced as a society: but in reality we face a lot of the same problems. Often I was shocked with how similar 1888 was to 2019. Reading about white, European immigrants coming to America and being treated as trash. Of course - I knew about that, but the book illustrates it in a way that boggles you. The complete disregard for the lives of poor immigrants also really struck me. Everything seems to be about race nowadays - and race is a huge factor in hatred and dismissal nowadays, it's true - but this book illustrates that the rich have always hated and dismissed the poor and regarded them as disposable trash regardless of having the same skin color or not. Now people label Spanish-speakers as "filthy foreigners who don't speak English," but back then it was the Norwegians, the Germans, the Irish, the Ukranians. REMEMBER THIS.
I'd advise ANYONE to study this kind of thing. People say that in England they focus on class and not race and in America they focus on race and not class, but BOTH are important factors in how people are treated. TAKE NOTE....more
Bobo steals and "breaks" the zookeeper's flashlight. His annoying frenemy, Fifi the Koala, threatens to tattle on him, tells everyone what he did, tatBobo steals and "breaks" the zookeeper's flashlight. His annoying frenemy, Fifi the Koala, threatens to tattle on him, tells everyone what he did, tattles on him, blackmails him... I thought she was despicable.
[image]
I didn't find this story amusing.
[image]
Both of the characters are exhibiting bad behavior. Bobo steals something and breaks it; Fifi is a snot-nosed little gossip and tattletale and blackmailer. It's disgusting.
[image]
I can't really find any redeeming features.
[image]
I guess the illustrations are cute.
[image]
The book has a happy ending (ish) but it's not the first thing I'd pick up and read to children.
Loading...
