Short Cuts

by Raymond Carver

Actually, the book is a collection of short stories from Carver's other collections which were selected for inclusion based on their use in the Robert Altman movie Short Cuts, in which he interwove nine stories into one rambling movie.

Which may sound like a pan on the movie - it's not. As I recall, I liked the movie, even though it seems that none of my contemporaries did - I think they all said it was boring or something like that. However, I enjoyed watching how one character walking down the street would pass by another character, completely oblivious to how their paths interconnected in the stories of whatever was happening to them at the time. The only critique I had of the movie was that I kept waiting for the dinner party in "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" which, unfortunately, was not one selected for inclusion.

The ones which were are here in this collection, and they are actually a pretty good representation of Carver's work if you've never been introduced to him. All told, I'm really on the fence with Carver's stories. They are not the best and they are not the worst. What really impresses me about them is that he totally pulls back that veneer of the 1950's "Father-Knows-Best" and "you could leave your door unlocked" nostalgia that all of us (even those who weren't alive then!) have of that era. Carver not only touches things like adultery but also murder, suicide, depression, alcoholism, abuse, and all sorts of moral malfeasance. He does it simply and plainly, and generally lets the story speak for itself. Occasionally he seems to suffer from a lack of subtlety, as though he's not sure we're gonna "get it," but overall he seemed to write about people as they are - with all their frailties.

Overall, I think Carver's place in our literary canon is about where he should be: he's not as famous as the other authors (i.e. Hemingway, Flannery O'Connor, et al) but he's not entirely overlooked either.

He's rather like settling for a Budweiser when you'd rather have a German Lager.

VG

The Witches

Roald Dahl

written in 1983 (The Twits written 1980 and Charlie Choc Fac 196 . .. 4??)

anyway, quite note that I noticed about this book is that while I thoroughly ENJOYED it, somehow it didn't seem quite like Dahl wrote it. Almost as though he plotted it and gave it to an understudy to write it, or else it was a very good imitation of his style.

As I was reading I thought that perhaps it was one of his first books, and that his style hadn't completely developed yet. One example is that his occasional alliteration for impact didn't seem to have the same "kick" that it did in books, such as, James and the Giant Peach, for example. Now that I see that this book was written after the others, perhaps I'll have to check more closely into his age and see if it was written at a time perhaps when his production was slowing. Or who knows, maybe he did have a ghoster (although I am shamed to think so!!!)

Regardless, it's a great story and the most fascinating to me and the idea that makes me think that I'm blending two fields: I kept seeing this as a movie - as one of those movies such as Stuart Little, set in a seaside English hotel - with a thoroughly English cast (except for Grandmamma and the head witch, of course - who will be Norweigan and Vampyrric respectively!) but if you read it, perhaps you will see as well that this story lends itself to one of those wonderful movies where the only CG is the moving lips on the talking mouse, and a movie which the children will love, because even though it's not overdone with special effects and action, it does have an honest straightforward story, delightfully told.

VG




Postscript 11262007: Imagine my chagrin as I was looking through the aisles of my local Blockbuster the other day and saw on the shelves a film version of - yup! - The Witches. With Angelica Houston cast as the Head Witch - not a bad choice, all in all, excepting of course that the head witch is supposedly beautiful (sorry Angelica!) Be that as it may, what it all means is that the screenplay that I was going to shop to the Hollywood producers is now in the trash can, and I haven't even had the heart to rent it - just to see the people who stole my idea . . . 17 years before I had that idea!!

VG

The Twits

Roald Dahl

(this is two of three - I just read all these to my youngest son over the past few weeks, so I'm listing them together now!)

Simply utterly one of the best by an always excellent writer. The Twits are chock full of delightful nastiness: Mr and Mrs Twit are simply the most deplorable and mean characters ever to grace the pages of children's literature. Their despicability (is that even a word?) is so complete and thorough that you can almost smell the bits of dried food in Mr Twit's beard or feel Mrs. Twit's old bones stretch as she's pulled toward the sky by the balloons. And this couple, with their hateful antics against each other, they certainly keep you turning page after page, and truly the only problem with this book is simply that it isn't long enough.

You must you must you must read this book.

Now, go!

VG

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Roald Dahl, of course.

Simply a classic. I think this should be taught in every grade school, as a book necessary to be read before the little tykes can graduate 5th grade.

No time to really go into it now, and although this is generally anathema to me, I can't help but read the book and think about both movies. While the new Tim Burton movie starring Johnny Depp follows the book almost word by word (until that woefully inadequate ending they tacked on), the original movie starring Gene Wilder indeed shows how a good book can be (with a little tweaking) be made into a great movie.

Points: the fizzy-soda burping Charlie/Granddad - only a sidenote in the book but transformed into the movie to make the major character foible and thus more well-rounded.

Points: the goose that laid the golden egg in the original movie were indeed a better twist and used much more effectively to authenticate the greed of Veruca Salt as opposed to simply wanting a squirrel, as used in the book.

Need to delve into this further at a later date, because it's a fascinating thought - how the screenplay evolved from the book, took its ideas, and made it a great movie. Side point to discuss whether if it was the screenwriter's idea or Gene Wilder's idea to evolve the Wonka character into the wonderfully mythic eternalchildscientist.

Again, these are notes for future discussions. Feel free to discuss them among yourselves and even post comments if you like.

VG

Beyond This Horizon

Robert A Heinlein

haven't read anything by RAH in a very long time but he was always, and still is, my absolute alltime favourite SF writer, hands down, no talking back, now.

Except for this one - I think this would probably be my least favourite RAH book, probably b'c it's not very well plotted, a little lopsided actually, which two major characters but others that could be put to better use, but aren't.

Actually, this novel feels like RAH simply wanted to outdo Huxley's Brave New World and knocked this book off in a few months. And I feel like I've probably hit closer to the truth than I would have ever expected.

Written 15 yrs after Brave New World, this one has the "perfect" society, with those who are disgruntled, and it also has the "savage" in the form of a man who was frozen cryogenically since 1920 (but like BNW, not much of the plot is really furthered by this almost throwaway character), and other similarities.

Not a very interesting read, and I wouldn't suggest using this one as your first foray into the wonderful world of Heinlein. Start with Glory Road, or Have Space Suit Will Travel - you'll be hooked, I promise.

But this is definitely one for the diehard fans, who can appreciate the ideas that he was exploring when he really wasn't in the mood to tell a true story.

VG