Updates, and a rant about The Jungle

At present, I’ve claimed a very, very satisfactory seat on a generously-sized couch in a quiet, out-of-the-way corner. It surprises me still that people don’t think to come here for the afternoon, but I’m not complaining. Sometimes, a person needs a quiet little space where she is comfortably out of reach of the crowd, to think, to write, to listen to some seriously beautiful and epic music.

As far as books are concerned, I’ve been keeping busy, even though the state of my blog seems to reflect otherwise. (Sometimes, I wonder if I’ll ever NOT be apologizing every few months for an unplanned hiatus.) Since last checking in, I’ve finished Michael Hainey’s After Visiting Friends—which I hope to write a post about; it’s quite a good read—and Neil Gaiman’s Neverwhere, which I liked overall despite some reservations. I also started George R. R. Martin’s Game of Thrones series, and I’m properly addicted. I haven’t gotten very far, not even 10 chapters in, but I’m loving the story so far. The world of Westeros is so real, and the characters believable and human. But then again, I’ve seen nearly two dozen clips from the HBO adaptation, and I’m listening to the lush score from Season 1, so I may be ever so slightly under influence.

Prior to Game of Thrones, I started Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, but I’ve since put an indefinite hold on further reading. As much as I wanted to like the book for its social commentary, I couldn’t stomach any further the relentless, pornographic approach that Sinclair seemed to take in exposing the deplorable corruption that plagued the Chicago slaughterhouses of the 1900s. It’s one thing to submit your characters to trials and conflicts—as a means by which to get your audience thinking and talking—but it’s another issue entirely to drown both plot and character development with a deluge of social ills. And that’s the vibe that I got from Sinclair in The Jungle. Towards the end of my reading, I was no longer surprised by anything that happened to Jurgis and his family. I kept on thinking: of course they got injured on the job. Of course they got sick. Of course they have no money to pay for the doctor. Of course their house is sitting on top of a cess pool that’s poisoning them all. Of course they don’t have proper winter clothing. Of course they got swindled. The book was little more than tragedy porn, in my opinion, the story not so much about an immigrant family as it was Sinclair playing chicken with his readers, seeing how much pain he could inflict upon his characters before his readers ran away unbearably squeamish.

And yet, I also wonder if it’s just my discomfort talking. Certainly, the book was meant to be an uncomfortable reading experience. It’s not meant to reassure you that life is rosy and all the world is just. It’s a slap in the face, saying, “Hey, there’s some gross and unjust shizz going on in America, and we all need to do something about it because it’s sure not gonna fix itself.”

I dunno.

SNIPPETS : #11 — A man of paper

I discovered the scrapbooks when I’m eight, wedged in a cabinet beneath the bookshelf. They are my father’s life, created by his mother. The books stop when he marries my mother. From boyhood to newspaperman, his mother kept the evidence of a life lived. First-grade report card. Cub Scout awards. Elementary-school class photos. Ticket stubs for football games (the scores noted on them). Birthday cards. Mother’s Day cards he made for her. High school prom photographs. The first stories he wrote for the Tribune. Stories about him from the Omaha-World Herald [...].

What will be left of us when we are gone? My father? Bits of faded newsprint amid sheaves of crumbling construction paper. Serrated-edged black-and-white photographs shot by Kodak Brownies. A boy of six, on his back porch, hugging his black dog, squinting in the great American Dust Bowl sun of 1939. A book of scraps. Brittle pages. It was left to me to reassemble him. I learned to make sense of the remnants, to find meaning in the missing pieces. A man of paper.

After Visiting Friends, by Michael Hainey

I couldn’t help but see the double meaning in Hainey’s words, a man of paper. His father, to whom Hainey is referring, was a newspaperman—a journalist of the written medium. As a child, Hainey’s father dreamed of writing for the newspapers. As an adult, he wrote for the newspapers. Now, deceased, his life is preserved by paper—by the pages of a scrapbook, by photographs, by clippings of articles that he had penned. His life, from birth certificate to death certificate, was defined by paper. He truly was a man of paper.

Whitechapel (Series 1)

I don’t remember how or when exactly I came across the series initially. It must have been sometime last year and somewhere online. But I do remember being instantly intrigued. The premise was promising, and I was eager to see Rupert Penry-Jones in another role. (I liked his performance in ITV’s Persuasion.) But after the first fifteen minutes of the first episode, I had to hit the stop button. I like to think that I’m not squeamish. I can handle the sight of blood, both on the screen as well as in the real world. But Whitechapel was unlike anything that I had previously watched. It wasn’t excessively gory, but it was downright creepy. I watch TV to be assuaged, not stressed, so I dropped it.

But then came last weekend. I was chatting with a friend, who had recently finished the Whitechapel series. Watch it, she said, it’s really good. And I figured, why not. I don’t have anything on the docket, and I really did enjoy the series—all fifteen minutes of it, before I chickened out. So I watched it. And I don’t think I regret it.

The first series opens in modern day London. It is evening, the 31st of August, and two significant events are happening simultaneously. Detective Inspector Joseph Chandler is at dinner with the big boys of Scotland Yard, tuxed up and charming, and at the verge of a promotion. On the other side of town, a community support officer witnesses a woman’s gruesome death. The victim’s throat is slashed, and she is drowning in her own blood. These events come together when Chandler takes up the DI position at Whitechapel, and subsequently the case of the murdered woman—the final stepping stone, he is told, to his big promotion. The case seems straightforward at first—a “simple domestic”—but Chandler soon finds himself over his head. His team, under Detective Sergeant Ray Miles, is anything but the polished men he was expecting to work with. “Has anyone heard of a shower?” he demands angrily one night, when their unruly attitude and slovenly habits become too much for him. On top of that, the investigation is going nowhere. Once warm leads turn up cold, and quick, and forensics have nothing concrete to provide.

Headway is provided, however in the least likely of forms: Edward Buchan, a cozy, tweed-wearing chatty type who, despite his amateur credentials, prides himself on being the foremost expert on Jack the Ripper, the infamous killer that once stalked the streets of Whitechapel two hundred years ago. Buchan offers a theory: the woman’s murder is a copycat kill of the Ripper. The similarities between the two cases are uncanny, he argues, nearly identical, down to the injuries, placement of the bodies, and the dates & times of death. DS Miles irritably writes Buchan off as just one more overeager local fishing for a contemporary connection to Whitechapel’s sordid history. Chandler, on the other hand—partly out of sincerity, partly out of desperation—believes the theory worth pursuing. His suspicions are confirmed when two more murders surface; each, as Buchan predicted, nearly identical to the subsequent canonical victims of the Ripper.

What follows is a desperate cat-and-mouse chase. Armed only with historical records and grit, Chandler and his team race against the clock to prevent history from repeating itself. If the killer is truly a copycat, there will only be three more murders—three more chances to catch him before he disappears, his true identity spirited away like the Ripper.

Although memory has a funny way of altering itself, I do think that the series was as creepy as I remembered it. Again, it’s not so much the bloody bodies that gets me as the atmosphere of the show. Much of it, I think, is product of the Ripper legend. Even now, just thinking about it makes me tense up. There’s also the chilling sound effects (good grief, those shrieks), the horror-esque camera work, and the eerie score. Working together, they make quite the masterful blend of creepiness, which I find discomforting and yet intriguing. Something to boast about, I think, since mystery series are about as plentiful as vampire books in the YA section, and crime, at the end of the day, is a crime is a crime is a crime.

Creepy aside, I also liked the characters. Penry-Jones makes a easily sympathetic DI Chandler, a man whom you only THINK you’ve got figured out when he pulls up at the crime scene in a tux and posh car. A fast-tracker, a “paper policeman.” And maybe he was at first. But the case changes him, and for the better. He no longer cares for the promotion, the glitzy title, the cushy office. All he wants, in the end, is for the murders to stop, for the killer to be caught. “Do you even know [the victims'] names?” he spits at Anderson, when he realizes that the senior officer’s only concern is politics and standing.

Phillip Davis plays a sharp and delightfully crusty DS Miles, whose initial antagonism towards Chandler is anything but unreasonable. He has thirty years’ experience to Chandler’s middling handful, not to mention the post of command for a good long while. To give up the helm, and to someone he deems as totally unworthy, is a hard reality to swallow. But as the series progresses, his begrudging attitude towards Chandler melts by degrees; almost imperceptibly, until the two of them are sitting, dog-tired and unshaven in a Middle Eastern restaurant, and Miles starts talking about his carp, and you realize, this is the beginning of a new Holmes & Watson, and by Jove it’s gonna be awesome.

Steve Pemberton plays the exuberant Edward Buchan, and I really think he should get some sort of award for the performance because he gives Buchan such depth for a side character. While borderline obnoxious at times, and mildly bumbling, Buchan is no dunce, and he is anything but disingenuous.

The remainder of the crew, although minor characters certainly, are equally memorable. DC McCormick is a big goof at heart with an amiable brogue. DC Fitzgerald is unsavory. DC Finlay Mansell is somewhere between Jason Statham’s Handsome Rob and a douchebaggy older brother. Dr. Caroline Llewellyn is team coroner, whose sense of humanity remain refreshingly untouched by her work. Rounding out the line-up is DC Emerson Kent, the baby of the team whose near-instant loyalty to Chandler warmed my heart. One of my favorite moments is when Kent walks into the incident room with a tailored suit, an unspoken deference to the boss’ new dress code, when everyone else sported ties stamped with questionable phrases like, “I Only Fire Blanks.”

To close what has become an unexpectedly long post, I don’t know if I would recommend Whitechapel. It’s definitely a good show, well-made. But it’s also dark, especially this first series. Not to mention, fodder for panic because … well, the Ripper copycat was someone’s neighbor, and OMG HE LIVED IN AN APARTMENT COMPLEX JUST LIKE ANY OTHER JOE HOW SAFE ARE WE REALLY DO WE REALLY KNOW OUR NEIGHBORS. And honestly, all the good stuff that goes on in the show, like the dry, dark humor—”Sir, she was stabbed 39 times. She couldn’t really say.”—can’t scrub away the creepy imagery that I’ve inadvertently retained in my memory, try as I have. I guess it boils down to your own personal constitution and tastes. If you like horror, then go for it. This stuff is right up your alley. Otherwise, tread cautiously. Or skip the first series altogether, and start from the second, which is far more tame.

As for me, I’ll continue to follow the series. I was impressed by the third series, and can’t wait for the fourth one set to come out later this year.

Whitechapel, Series 1 is currently available on Amazon Instant Video and Netflix.

Image credits: screencaps by me

THE WEEKEND REPORT : Confessions of a former ebook hater

Apologies for the sudden silence! I got sick again last week, and have been recovering ever since. The worst of the relapse came over the weekend, with some lovely flu-like symptoms. I am feeling much better now, although I’m still taking pills—of the anti-histamine variety, that is. Seems Zyrtec is doing a much better job of declogging my sinuses than the meds that I was popping before. So… I guess that means I had allergies, not a sinus infection? Doesn’t feel like it, but okay.

Without further ado, The Weekend Report … a few days early. Er, late. Er, whatever.

* * *

Two years ago, my sister came up to me in the living room and asked, rather out of the blue, how I felt towards Kindles.

“I would throw them out the window,” I replied, not batting an eyelash. And I was mostly serious. I did not like the whole ebook thing at all.

“Really?” she asked as I typed away at my laptop. “Even if someone bought one for you for your birthday?”

“Yup.”

She paused thoughtfully for a moment, and walked back down the hall.

A few minutes later, I get a text from a friend, which went something like: WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU’LL THROW IT OUT THE WINDOW???

It was then that I realized two things: 1) my sister is REALLY good at hiding ulterior motives; and 2) I should steel myself, because in the next few minutes I will either resign myself to the fate of receiving a totally useless gift, or lose one of the only friends that I have. And it wasn’t going to be the former.

Two years later, I’m happy to say that I managed to avoid both outcomes. The Kindle was returned, a nifty pattern book was gifted in its place, and my friend did me the kindness to not ditch me for being overly zealous about my book preferences. But I can’t help but laugh as I look back, because last Friday I did the previously unthinkable: I bought myself an e-reader.

I know, I know. WHYYYY, right? Frankly, it’s the convenience. I came to the realization earlier this year that my lifestyle has changed since my more fanatically anti-ebook days—not drastically, but enough to make carrying a physical copy of a book or two a task I don’t relish doing, even if the book is a paperback novel. I’m more on-the-go now, and my bags are more often chock full than not. The reduction of space that an e-reader would provide was tantalizing, too tantalizing, for me to refuse, at least not without some serious reconsideration.

There was also the cool factor. I got up close and personal with a NOOK over the holidays and I was impressed by what I saw. E-ink technology, I have to say, is really cool! I mean, yeah I’ve heard that it’s supposed to look like ink on paper, BUT IT REALLY DOES LOOK LIKE INK ON PAPER. I guess it’s different once you actually see it for yourself.

There’s also the annotations feature. I thought I wouldn’t like it, but after test-driving some ebooks last month on a phone app I discovered that I quite like it. It makes margin-writing faster, which in my current crunch for time absolute sweetness.

Oh, and the search feature? Gloooorious! You don’t know how many times I wished I could CTRL+F my textbooks in college.

Ebooks aren’t without their cons, of course. While convenient for sure, they don’t provide the same familiar experience of reading with something weighty and papery in hand. They’re also not very shareable, unless I lend the entire ereader, which I find is rather a risky venture, regardless of the lender in question. They’re also colorless—unless I’m reading them from a computer, or tablet, or phone—which isn’t that big of a deal, since the text is black & white anyway, but I do miss approaching a book and being greeted by a full-color cover.

But all in all, I’m quite satisfied with my new gadget. Will I stop reading real physical books? Don’t count on it. I’m too much in love with the printed word to do otherwise. So fear not, bookstores, I’ll still be around. That’s why I bought the Kobo and not the Kindle, after all. I want to be able to support you guys, even in the digital age.

SNIPPETS : #10 — Survival of the busiest

As “neurons that fire together, wire together,” the jobs we have and the company we keep are rewiring our frontal lobes—and these same frontal lobes are, in turn, making our decisions in the office and on Saturday nights. Back and forth it goes, as work and love and the brain knit together in the twenties to make us into the adults we want to be in our thirties and beyond.

Or not.

Because our twenties are the capstone of this last critical period, they are, as one neurologist said, a time of “great risk and great opportunity.” The post-twentysomething brain is still plastic, of course, but the opportunity is that never again in our lifetime will the brain offer up countless new connections and see what we make of them. Never again will we be so quick to learn new things. Never again will it be so easy to become the people we hope to be. The risk is that we may not act now.

In a use-it-or-lose-it fashion, the new frontal lobe connections we use are preserved and quickened; those we don’t use just waste away through pruning. We become what we hear and see and do every day. We don’t become what we don’t hear and see and do every day. In neuroscience, this is known as “survival of the busiest.”

— Meg Jay, The Defining Decade

As someone who is well into her 20s, working a dead-end job and feeling frustratedly stuck in life, I consider Meg Jay’s The Defining Decade to be an absolute godsend as well as a very startling wake-up call. (Not unlike Jimmy Kimmel’s by Michelle Obama.) Jay has thoroughly convinced me that the twenties are an absolutely foundational period in life, and as such should not be spent thoughtlessly as unfortunately so many of us do. (Myself included.) One of the most striking things that I’ve read so far is the passage above. Jay explains that much like an infant, a twentysomething’s brain undergoes a growth spurt. But instead of growing in size, it grows in neuron activity. This growth actually begins in adolescence, and fades by your 30s, which is why wise people have told us time and time again to take advantage of our youth by learning as much as we can during this time. While it’s true that the human brain is still capable of learning new things all the time, it’s unquestionably harder as we grow older. Jay underscores this when she says, “never again.” It’s also harder to change as a person when we’re older, as habits have solidified by perpetual practice during our ‘teens and 20s.

I admit, I was really emotional after reading the above this morning. But I’ve since calmed down, replacing my initial despair with the resolve to revitalize my life. I’m 26 this year, turning 27. I’ve already lost more than six years to laziness and distraction. But I still count myself lucky. I have a little more than three years left, and I’m going to use them well.

Some initial goals that I’ve drafted up:

Read widely & with purpose — Instead of reading purely for entertainment, which has been my mindset for many, many years, I will read with the intent to actively learn. I will include more non-fiction into my diet, as well as foreign fiction, and challenging novels that I used to shy away from.

Practice & improve my Mandarin — Although my boss thinks otherwise, my Mandarin really is atrocious. I wasn’t kidding when I tweeted that I firmly believe a 5-year-old Chinese native would be able to hold a better conversation than me. Since I can’t stand c-pop, I’m thinking of watching Chinese and Taiwanese films, as a way to give my ears more exposure to the language. I’ll also need to find people with which to practice. Parents, definitely. Friends, maybe.

♦ Embrace small talk — Ugh, small talk. I hate it. I never saw the point to it. But I do realize now that it’s necessary to engage in sometimes. Therefore, will need to embrace it and practice it. This is another motivation for consuming more non-fiction. There’s only so many questions that you can ask a person before the conversation begins to uncomfortably resemble an interrogation. And really, who the heck cares about the weather? We’re in California; it’s temperate year round! Better to say, “So, I was reading the other day…” and introduce some tidbit you mined from a book that you think might interest the other person. Boom, conversation! Plus, cool points for reading something interesting.

Travel — This is more of a wish than a goal at this point, since the bank account right now can’t exactly afford the luxury, but I’m putting it here anyway.

Get back into the hunt — For jobs, that is. My work situation isn’t going to change until I change it. And I can’t change it if I don’t put in the necessary elbow grease. It’s tedious, yes, and discouraging most times, but I have to do it, and I have to KEEP on doing it. No buts.

* * *

Readers — Have you read The Defining Decade? If so, what did you think? Or has there been anything that has really challenged you, or changed the way you’ve thought about something?

THE WEEKEND REPORT : Chasing the sun

I didn’t think that I would ever become the sort of person who would spend even her free time ruled by clock and planner. I was always more of a free spirit outside of the rigid structures of school, work, and extracurriculars, doing what I felt like doing when I felt like doing it—my brand of retaliation, I suppose, to externally-imposed restrictions. But there comes a point in your life where you realize that sort of whim-indulging lifestyle isn’t going to cut it any more. It may have worked for you as a kid, and as a teenager (so long as you brought home straight As), and as a collegian (so long as you didn’t flunk out of your classes), but it just doesn’t fit into the life of a working adult with a long list of responsibilities that only seems to grow longer with each year. Things, simply put, need to get done. And they sure aren’t going to get done by you spooning mouthfuls of melting Häagen-Dazs while you watch reruns of Grey’s Anatomy in last night’s pajamas.

But recently, I’ve learned—or rather, have been reminded—that with rigidity and discipline, and the never-ceasing task of chasing after hours and minutes and seconds, there must also be rest, as well as a degree of flexibility. Planning is good; so is sticking to your those plans. But at the end of the day, things do happen: interruptions, delays, unexpected naps in the sun… and it’s OKAY. Take them in stride, and make adjustments as best as you can. Also, to-do lists are tools; they’re to help us make each day count. They’re not the end all be all of life.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

Much of Saturday afternoon was spent convalescing in the wake of a very stubborn headache. Managed to go to lunch with friends, but collapsed shortly after. Re-surfaced from depths of very accommodating down comforter around dinnertime. Head and eyes were still pounding, but the discomfort was manageable enough for me to potter about the apartment, catching up as much as possible with my to-do list.

One of the things that I managed to complete was finishing Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. I admit, I sort of skimmed the last chapter; but I’ve BEEN skimming the book for the last dozens of chapters, and honestly I just wanted to be done with the book. I haven’t been enjoying it. The book seriously lacks in suspense, which I just can’t forgive because BY JOVE THIS IS A MYSTERY NOVEL AND WHAT IS A MYSTERY NOVEL WITHOUT SUSPENSE. And while reading it, I didn’t feel that much was at stake, even though I intellectually recognized that there was much at stake. (For crying out loud, there’s a Soviet mole running loose in the top tiers of British Intelligence!) No one really freaks out, no one makes a scene—I suppose they’re all too pro to do that—they just calmly, matter-of-factly address the problem, threading us along through a series of somewhat bewildering interviews with past Intelligence agents, conducted in paragraphs chock full of Intelligence lingo that, sure, added to the atmosphere of the story but had me feeling more lost than impressed. There was also the issue I had with Jim Prideaux’s stint as a school teacher. Cute, and humanizing, and humorous, but otherwise tangental.

Still, I appreciated the subtlety of Le Carré’s writing. Which I realize undermines everything that I’ve just said. But I guess one can appreciate something without liking it, right? I thought it was neat that he introduced the characters through dialogue and details made offhand by the narrator. It was tiring, keeping track of everyone and where they all stood in relation to each other, but different. And subtle. And I like subtle. I also liked George Smiley. He reminds me a lot of CSI Foyle from Foyle’s War, with his dry humor and understated intelligence. He was a good lead character: strong, smart, and someone you could trust.

I’ll conclude with the trailer from the recent film adaptation starring pretty much every single male big name in contemporary British cinema: Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, Benedict Cumberbatch, Tom Hardy, Ciarán Hinds, Toby Jones, John Hurt, Mark Strong… After reading the book, I can say that the movie was incredibly faithful to its literary original. Definitely give it a watch, if only for the star-studded cast.