The Gilded Bat (an Edward Gorey)

by Edward Gorey. (c) 1966. Dodd, Mead, and Company, New York. 1979.

Any review of any Edward Gorey book will probably be a carbon copy review of any other. Goery books are like Johnny Depp characters or Tim Burton movies: each has the same pervasive weirdness that is not truly frightening but always leaves you feeling uneasy. "Delightfully disconcerting" seems to be a good depiction.

For example, this one is about a woman who becomes a famous ballerina but apparently has a dull and uninteresting life, even though everyone around her is being sent to the madhouse and eventually she dies in a plane wreck caused by an unfortunate bird in the engine.

Truly now, you don't say!

Pluto, Animal Lover

by Laren Stover. Harper Collins, New York. 1994.

One of the blurbs on the back described the book as "an American Psycho for animal lovers," and I wished I hadn't read that blurb because now I'll never know if I would have come to that conclusion on my own or if I would always wondering what this seemed remarkably resonant of.

Because, yes, it certainly does seem that way - with the "almost" or "is he or isn't he" obsessive-compulsive narrator, who does feel that he has more of a "right" to make certain decisions regarding life and death than do other people. I've read megalomaniacal narrators many times before and they always are so entertaining; I think the best part about them is how much (or how little) can the reader trust their reality.

For example, the love interest - the narrator sees her reactions and pauses to certain statements that he makes as "being stunned by his brilliance," yet we as the readers know that she is most likely getting a truly BAD vibe off this guy. Yet, she continues to see him.

Actually, one of the best characters is the bird that our narrator trains to carry out certain "missions of deliverance." (my words there, you won't find them in the book, but if you read it you'll know what I mean.) Very interesting, you can just envision the bird, pecking open the shutters from apartment to apartment.

All in all, a very smoothly written narrative. The relations to American Psycho (after the blurb) will colour your impression of the narrator throughout the book - to both the detriment and enhancement of the reader's enjoyment. Because you'll appreciate the focus and yet criticise the ultimate lack of complete originality.

Overall - just read it. Have a good time. And I guarantee that for all you pet lovers, after you're done with the book, you will immediately go check on your pet to make sure they're OK.

Trust me!

VG

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

JK Rowling. 2005.

First and foremost - to this book I say:

No effing way.

Nope.

No sir, I don't believe it.

No effing way.

And that pretty much explains it - for those of you who've read it (and I can't imagine anybody reading this post who hasn't read it) you understand what I'm saying and for those of you chosen few who have not read this latest in the Harry Potter series, well this will be a giant spoiler for you:

I do not believe and I refuse to believe that Snape actually killed Dumbledore.

And yes, I can imagine that this probably causes a lot of late-night conversations among those who live and breathe Harry Potter and I'm certain that there are bound to be various theories about what REALLY happened and some discussion on how Rowling is going to write herself out of this one.

For me, I'm just going to wait. I've come to learn to wait years for each installment.

For me, the Harry Potter series is a growing lesson, and I have stayed with this series long after my own son has grown too "cool" for the books. However, this series for me will always hold a special place in my heart; therefore it is quite impossible for me to write an actual "review" of the book.

Suffice it to say that my personal favourite remains the Goblet of Fire, but I actually consider that one should take the entire series as a whole, such as Lord of the Rings, in which none ever states that they prefer Two Towers to the Return of the King, and so forth, but rather you like it or you don't. Sort of the same as the Chronicles of Narnia - you may like Lion better than Dawn Treader and so forth, but you either like the series as a whole or you do not.

And the reason why I mention these series is that I believe that the Harry Potter series will eventually join the canon of British Fantasy that includes the other aforementioned works. In fact (and I'd need to look this up again) but it seems to me that last year or the year before I read some review by some pretentious prat who absolutely lambasted Rowling for her terrible writing style. For that particular prat, however, nobody had written a sentence worth a damn since Roth's Portnoy's Complaint.

Balderdash. Rowling may not be an elevated "Homme des Lettres" but by God this is a fantastic series, and any series in which each book can force me to read it until I fall asleep at 3 or 4 in the morning is damn good writing with damn good characters that I damn well have grown up with.

In short, I feel passionately about this series in a way that very few other works have, and this brings me back to my two earlier points: One, that I can't write an objective review about this book and Two, that I cannot allow myself to believe that Dumbledore died in such an ignominious fashion, especially after he had so staunchly defended Snape against all his detractors.

It's a set-up. Something will happen. I have faith.

Other than that, I'll simply say that it's a very good book, and if you're already a Harry Potter fan then it's just the thing for you and if you've never read a Harry Potter book before, then don't start with this one, go back to the first, or even the second, and have fun reading them all straight through.

and let me know what YOU think!!!!

VG

Greendale

by Neil Young (Illustrations by James Mazzeo). Sanctuary Publishing Ltd, United Kingdom. 2004.

I've come across Greendale in steps and in stops and starts - it's actually quite odd, especially since Neil's a musician, that I should encounter this work in the two other, although approximate, artistic mediums.

Actually, I have the DVD of Greendale, which I found in the back of Old Man Johnson's barn (I don't know where the guys gets this stuff, honestly!) but I brought it to the house and the DVD is shot like a home movie, but it follows the songs - no dialogue - just like a long video, fascinating . . .

but how does that relate to the book, you ask? Well, let me tell you. The book is like a visual representation of the film. Mazzeo's illustrations are pen and ink representations of the gritty camera shots of the characters. It's almost like a puzzle, wondering which came first - did Mazzeo take the inspiration for the illustrations from the film or did the director of the film find characters to match the illustrations?

The simple answer for that, of course, would be for me to watch the film in its entirety, instead of just the first ten minutes, like I did. Oh well . . . check for that posting on my other award-winning blog a little later.

From what I did understand of the songs, though, this book is more than just the lyrics illustrated. In front of each, Young has expanded upon the stories with more details about the characters - their methods, their reasons, their family history, etc. These little snippets are also good writing about the creative process as well, for in them, Young also describes how he had been knocking these songs around for several years, yet, while he and the band were recording them, certain changes happened in the story line. I love that description of the creative process: the admission that characters do indeed have lives of their own, and quite frequently, they do things that surprises even their creator.

I'm assuming that, to understand the full oeuvre, one will have to own the DVD, the book, and the CD (if there is one - I think I spotted an overpriced copy at Sam Goody's). As far as the book is concerned, however, it has additional maps of the town, and several illustrations by Mazzeo that apparently have something to do with Greendale but for the life of me I can't figure out quite what.

Last note, however - the lyrics pretty much . . . well, suck. They don't seem to have any life/energy - not even rhythm. When sung, however, they come alive.

However, that's the thing about Neil, as anybody who likes Neil Young will tell you. He is never and has never been anybody but himself. He's not afraid to put out a trashy product if it happens to entertain him at the time. But at least, you know, as an artist, he's honest - and true to his vision, however unpolished.