"TKAM" Sequel?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/03/harper-lee-novel_n_6603994.html

What you see above is a link to a news article reporting that 88-year-old Harper Lee, the "one-hit wonder" author of To Kill a Mockingbird has rediscovered a sequel she wrote to Scout's story soon after TKAM was published; she has now decided to release the book, titled Go Set a Watchman in July. TKAM is not merely a literary classic, it is also one of my favorite books (a rare 5-star review), an uncommonly unpatronizing tale of innocence at every age. I am very excited to know that Harper Lee will be back on the shelves of my local bookstore again and look eagerly toward July 14!

OH NO. #TheGiver

Some disturbing reports have reached me regarding the recent launch of The Giver (movie). I have a special place in my heart for The Giver (book). I also have a special place in my heart for Meryl Streep. I have a special place in my heart for book adaptations made with real fans. I have a super special place for pro-life media. In sum, I should have a special place in my heart for The Giver (movie). However, when news of the movie broke several months ago, I saw some red flags:

Red Flag #1: Thwaites... why is he in his 20s and playing a pre-teen? Oh... 'cause Jonas is 16 now? Uh-uh.

Red Flag #2: Meryl Streep is Meryl Streep. Why would you hire Meryl Streep as a minor character? Oh... 'cause the Chief Elder isn't a minor character anymore? Okay....

Red Flag #3: WHAT IS WITH THIS CASTING? WHY IS EVERYONE TOO OLD AND TOO FAMOUS? #ExceptJeffBridges #Perfection

Red Flag #4: Fiona is a real person now and takes up half of the poster... Interesting choices.

And then the movie came out and an erudite Buzzfeed gang posted these articles: 1, 2. Then Cinablend put THIS up. And something called Vox.com had THIS. According to these sources, my worries and more have been realized. Despite this film having been made with the full enthusiasm of the author herself and by an über-fan (another shout-out to Jeff Bridges here), some Hollywoodizing may have hurt this film. One of the most gut-wrenching to hear about was the colorizing. However the high tech amp-up could be cool, and I kinda see why Jonas's relationships with Fiona and Cameron had to be altered (but when there is Jonas-Fiona "fan fic" out there, I kinda go green in the face), plus I think some of the changes in Jonas's relationship to the Giver (i.e. the altered memories and the stormy fights and the music) could be really good for the film. But the ending was changed? That was sacred ground. Messing with Fiona and Asher's jobs? Just take away half of their book characterization, why dontcha. I'll withhold judgement on this one until I've actually seen it... but I'm a little worried about doing that.

UPDATE
I have now seen the film. There are certain changes I am annoyed by (especially those age changes and that fluffy little romance and that chase scene at the end) but overall they did a pretty nice job respecting the idea of the story. It made Gabe appear to be a Christlike figure, which I'm pretty sure wasn't intended in the book, but Brenton Thwaites and Jeff Bridges killed it in their roles, as did the young woman playing Fiona (the most abused character in this adaptation). Would've liked to have seen an adaptation that was slightly more faithful to the original, but this will do.

JKR gossip

A lot has been said and passed around and gossiped over this weekend amidst rumors that JK Rowling (primarily known as the author of Harry Potter) regrets pairing Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger in her famous fantasy series. The full article has yet to be released, and MuggleNet intelligently (and with characteristic loyalty to JKR) reminds its readers to wait to read the real interview, conducted by Emma Watson, before passing judgment on Rowling.

The fandom buzz around this issue comes in two waves: first, it seems that JKR has decided that Hermione and Ron shouldn't have ended up together; second, she appears to think Hermione and Harry should have. To the first accusation, I can't help but agree at least a little. There's a lot of dysfunction waiting to happen in that relationship. To the second, I can't agree at all--Hermione and Harry would drive each other batty at least as quickly as Hermione and Ron would.

The bigger question though is not about the Harry Potter-verse, but about the larger phenomenon being exhibited here. Do authors have regrets about where their stories ended up? I had never actually thought about this possibility before, especially not for an author like JKR who always seemed to have her books figured out. Particularly in light of how stories are twisted and manipulated for adaptations in plays, movies, and fanfic, I wonder how frequently authors think they made a mistake in their writing. Whether it's something relatively large--at least to a fandom--about pairing off your main characters, or something smaller (like whether Austen's Mr. Collins is tall and gawky or short and awkward), do you think authors often think their stories should be changed after it's already too late for the fans to get the memo?

Suggested reading:
The article that introduced me to this literary nightmare--http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/85367803.html
The Hypable article I'm only including because Andrew Sims used to be THE MuggleCaster and must feel similarly to me about this issue--http://www.hypable.com/2014/02/01/jk-rowling-ron-hermione-relationship-regret-interview/
The MuggleNet article that's a lot less reactionary than other sources--http://www.mugglenet.com/app/news/show/7697


Always,
Your Bibliomaniac

Citations:
"The Trio Harry Potter WD." The Quad. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Feb. 2014. .

A Very Happy New Year, All!

Happy 2014, friends! I hope 2013 has been excellent for you, your family, and your friends and that the new year will bless you even more. Here's my annual summation of popular literary awards if you're interested. Enjoy!

National Book Awards:
http://www.nationalbook.org/nba2013.html#.UsXH-RZLrww
•I have not read or heard of any of this year's winners, runners-up, or longlist nominees. Sad :(

National Book Critics Circle Award nominees:
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/01/national_book_critics_circles_2013_awards_announced
•The fiction award here was presented to Ben Fountain's Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk. Deemed "the Catch-22 of the Iraq War," I'm really excited to look further into this. It also made the finals for the NBA (that first award up there, not the basketball league) which is promising.

The Newbery and Caldecott Awards, both for young fiction:
http://www.ala.org/alsc/awardsgrants/bookmedia/newberymedal/newberymedal
http://www.ala.org/alsc/awardsgrants/bookmedia/caldecottmedal/caldecottmedal
•All interesting winners and nominees, but none that are calling my name.

The Pulitzer Prize:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Pulitzer_Prize
•The multiple literature and writing award winners all look interesting, but The Black Count (drama winner) looks by far the most promising. 4000 Miles also looks intriguing (history winner).

The PEN/Faulkner award nominees:
http://www.penfaulkner.org/2013/03/06/congratulations-2013-penfaulkner-award-finalists/
•Again, nothing I've heard of.

The Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded to the contemporary writer Alice Munro, whose page on the Nobel Prize website can be found here:
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2013/munro-facts.html
•She has been acclaimed for her short stories (which aren't really my thing), which is a little unusual.

*The Bibliomaniac Book of the Year Award this year goes to Les Misérables by Victor Hugo.* It ran a hard race against The Karamazov Brothers by Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Doing the Truth in Love by Fr. Michael J. Himes, CSC but ultimately came out on top (maybe because I can sing along to this book). All are excellent books: find their reviews here, here, and here.

God Bless Always,

Your Bibliomaniac

Girls Who Read

For all you reading girls out there (and all you reading guys who like reading girls) I hope someone has already shared this video with you. If not, I am now.

http://youtu.be/lmEbF2uhsZk

Always,
Your Bibliomaniac

Unpublished JD Salinger stories leaked online

(I know I'm a few days late on this story, but it's big enough that I wanted to have my facts straight before posting anything. Details are still sketchy and I'm having trouble researching while avoiding the leaked stories which would just be too tempting to read, so please let me know if you find any errors here.)

Last Wednesday, three stories by JD Salinger (none of which had never been published) were leaked online. They come from treasure troves of unpublished Salinger materials gifted to Princeton University and the University of Texas around the time of Salinger's death in 2010. Much of this material reportedly revolves around the characters and themes of The Catcher in the Rye and experiences Salinger had in the Armed Forces. The stories were not to be published, at Salinger's request, until 50 years after his death. Yet three have escaped their hallowed (and really heavily guarded) reading rooms and been anonymously published online.

Of these three short stories, the most interesting one to literature lovers might be "The Ocean Full of Bowling Balls," which is about the death of Kenneth (who you probably know by his later name, Allie), Holden Caulfield's brother, and therefore elaborates on a lot of Holden's backstory in The Catcher in the Rye.

According to one Collier's editor, it "contains the greatest letter home from camp ever composed by man or boy." To further your desperation to break into the reading room it is held in and read every scrap of paper Salinger donated to Princeton, you should know that a lot of the short stories and brainstorming bits there are about Holden and Co. So new bucket list item: go to Princeton's library and read everything Salinger stored there... legally.

While "Bowling Balls" was stored at Princeton's Firestone Library, the other two leaked works ("Paula" and "Birthday Boy") were held at UT, Austin. No word yet on what these stories were about. All three were allegedly taken from a small, legal London run of the works in 1999, but it's more likely that they were just copied (longhand or by more tech-savvy means) by a heartless patron who doesn't respect dead authors.

Always,
Your Bibliomaniac

Works Cited:

• Haggin, Patience. "Unpublished J.D. Salinger Story Kept in University Library Leaked Illegally Online." The Daily Princetonian. N.p., 1 Dec. 2013. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
• "J.D. Salinger." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., n.d. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
• "The Ocean Full of Bowling Balls." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., n.d. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
• RulerofNothing. "Holden Caulfield Thinks You're A Phony." Red Bubble. Redbubble Pty. Ltd., n.d. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.

Catching Fire movie opens strong, some commentary.

Hey-hey Tributes! (Okay, not sure how I feel about that title for the Hunger Games fandom, but it'll do.)

As many of you know, this past weekend was the biggest November box office opening ever and it was for The Hunger Games: Catching Fire.

NOTE: This was a bigger November opening than any of the Twilight sequels. That is a lot of excitement.

Anyway, the movie had a ton of great reviews and everyone I know who saw it thought it was wonderful. This movie trilogy is becoming known for staying very true to the books, which we Bibliomaniacs love. And the film has sparked some interesting attention to the book series itself (see this NPR article as an example), which is always nice to see. I just hope the people who see this movie also get around to reading/have read the books 'cause they're sorta great.

----
I get excited when thought-provoking books (like those in this trilogy) make headlines for any reason. It reminds me just how powerful the written word by itself can be: like, powerful enough to inspire these incredibly successful movies. And when it is a movie or other adaptation that is giving a book hype, it makes me think particularly about how these spiffed-up versions of the original written story change that story (get excited for my upcoming article on this topic: "A Million and One Sherlocks").

For instance, there are two scenes from the Harry Potter series that I saw clearly in my head above and beyond any of the other beautiful images JKR helped me dream up while reading her books. One is the scene when Hermione sees Ron kiss Lavender and she runs off, only to have Harry find her in an empty classroom conjuring twittering birds above her head. In my head, I see her sitting cross-legged on a wooden teacher's desk at the front of a classroom, a dark stained-glass window characteristic of the magical castle she studies at set several feet above her head, deep in the vaulted classroom ceiling. The birds she has pulled from thin air are bluebirds and cardinals, flapping around her head as she bravely, resolutely looks up at them with halfhearted concentration, twirling her wand and leading them in a slow halo around her nest-like poof of brown hair. Her robes are slightly askance and her Gryffindor tie is wrinkled. She does not notice Harry enter the classroom. The second scene is the sequence in the green-glowing seaside cave Harry and Dumbledore brave in search of the locket Horcrux. The cave walls are jagged, vertically layered and crumbling slate. A green light seeps from the slime covering the walls and shines into its crevices. Even the sand leading to the water has a green sparkle to it. The water itself is ghoulishly discolored: it reminds me of an oil slick, or the River of the Dead in the Disney version of Hercules. The sand is wet and Dumbledore and Harry both walk unevenly on it, Dumbledore adjusting to the terrain like a man one-quarter his age, Harry slightly awkward in his movements. A thick mist lays over the water and shrouds the Stonehenge-like landscape of the island they must cross to. Neither of these visions is precisely the same in the Warner Brothers films, and I've had to work hard to preserve my pet images of these scenes since seeing the movies.

Similarly with the fantastical Hunger Games series, everyone who has read the books must have a few special scenes, locations, characters, or sounds they envisioned especially clearly when reading the books that the movies will necessarily change. For me, Effie has never been the same character since the first movie was released--she's more Lolita-styled in the movies than I ever pictured her to be while reading. There's a great quote passed around in the radio station I work at--"Radio: It's like TV, but the pictures are better." I think the same can be said of the written word as the spoken word. As gorgeous as the Hunger Games film franchise (and/or Josh Hutcherson and Liam Hemsworth and that new guy playing Finnick) may be, the book trilogy can be even more beautiful in my head. These integrations of multiple forms of the same story make for a dynamic, richly textured understanding of the core of the story at hand.

So whether you read or view first--have fun piecing together all of the little metaworld bits you can from all adaptations of The Hunger Games. You may just get closer to the fine details of the story than you ever expected. When I saw the movie, I was stunned by what a different take on Katniss I came out of the theater with--not one that the author would disapprove of either. Seeing Katniss from another dimension gave me a view that made me love her, sympathize with her which I didn't usually do in the books. Also, seeing the Capitol and the desperation in the arena afresh and in a new light is a powerful reminder of what a terrible thing absolute power can be. I saw the film with a friend who dozed off: she apparently didn't find the film as frightening as I did. We, after all, live in a world where governments and rebels and desperate organizations carry out awful crimes every day--whether against a few select "Tributes" or massive numbers of unfortunate, innocent people. This is a series to think about. That is why I like seeing it make headlines.

For some interesting info on how the final book of the trilogy, Mockingjay, might be difficult for filmmakers to stay true to, check out this Buzzfeed article!

Always,
Your Bibliomaniac

Works Cited:

• Holmes, Linda. "What Really Makes Katniss Stand Out? Peeta, Her Movie Girlfriend." NPR. N.p., 25 Nov. 2013. Web. 28 Nov. 2013.
• The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. Advertisement. Free Fever. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2013.
• Smith, Grady. "'Hunger Games: Catching Fire' Breaks November Record." EW. CNN Entertainment, 25 Nov. 2013. Web. 28 Nov. 2013.
• Vary, Adam B. "9 Moments from 'Mockingjay' That Could Be Very Depressing On Film." Buzzfeed. N.p., 25 Nov. 2013. Web. 28 Nov. 2013.

Some of the Most Delightful "Harry Potter" Commentary I've Seen in a While

For all you Potterheads out there, I warn you: do not read this post unless you are prepared to become obsessed with a new Harry Potter fan theory. Don't say I didn't give you adequate time to back away.

You can just close this page right now.

I mean, the theory's really good, but you can totally turn away: you have will power, right?

Just delete your browser history and finish your homework. Pet your dog. Call your mom.

Are you still here?

Good. Because this is literally literary genius.

If you are prepared to go a little crazy over HP and you have the time for some literary contemplation, please read this article: Why Neville Longbottom is the Most Important Person in Harry Potter.

I also would like to retract what I said about Neville in

my original review of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone--he deserves

all the attention JKR gave him.

Always,
Your Bibliomaniac

Works Cited:

• Asher-Perrin, Emily. "Neville Longbottom Is the Most Important Person in Harry Potter—And Here’s Why." TOR.com. Macmillan, 19 Nov. 2013. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. .

Litographs.com

If there is one website you visit today (besides your very favorite, yourbibliomaniac.blogspot.com), let it be litographs.com. Why? Because this is a website that makes seriously awesome posters, T-shirts, and tote bags for seriously awesome readers. The company hires artists to draw a simple (but really cool) design representative of a classic book like The Great Gatsby, the Bible, Pride and Prejudice, Leonardo DaVinci's notebooks, etc. This image is then created using text from the book it was designed for.
1) Yes, that was difficult to explain.
2) So here's an example:
One of the Jungle Book Ts:

And a close-up so you can see the text the design is made from:

With over 30 books represented, and more coming out all the time, you are sure to find one of your favorite classics available on this site! GO. THERE.

Always,
Your Bibliomaniac

Facebook's social marketing IS relevant!

Today I found out that Facebook's [annoying] ads are actually useful!

I've been dying to read Mindy Kaling's new book of memoirs, Is Everyone Hanging Out Without Me? (And Other Concerns) since it came out last fall. Not only was she hilarious as Kelly Kapoor on The Office (best evidence that could be found on YouTube here), but she also wrote and directed several episodes of the show and has a new show of her own show, The Mindy Project (which has gotten great reviews). Clearly an intelligent and witty woman, I'm excited to read her observations of daily life.

When I saw that Audible.com had the book narrated by none other than the comedienne herself, I thought maybe I'd give it a try. Has anyone out there had good (or bad) experiences with audiobooks, or with Audible? I haven't listened to an audiobook since I was about six so I'd like to hear some older readers' thoughts of the experience.

Always,
Your Bibliomaniac

Bibliography:

• "Is Everyone Hanging Out Without Me? (And Other Concerns)." Audible.com. Audible Inc., n.d. Web. 1 Aug. 2013. .
• "Kelly Kapoor Is Awesome." YouTube. N.p., 10 Feb. 2010. Web. 1 Aug. 2013. .
• "Mindy Kaling." Wikipedia. WikiMedia, Inc., n.d. Web. 1 Aug. 2013. .

The Magic of Reading Awakens... and then falls asleep

The Steimatzky book store is, according to Wikipedia, "the oldest and largest bookstore chain in Israel." Recently, they released a new ad campaign which I saw on BuzzFeed yesterday that illustrates the enchantments of reading in a very imaginative way. Here's a little taste of the magic:

 Check out more of these sensational ads here!
Always,
Your Bibliomaniac


Bibliographic info:

• "New Bookstore Ads Capture The Magic of Read." BuzzFeed. N.p., 26 July 2013. Web. 28 July 2013.
• "Our Clients." Segmarketing. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 July 2013.
• "Steimatzky." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., n.d. Web. 28 July 2013.

Another bit of literary news for you all... about "Mary Poppins!"

Before Mary Poppins was this:

Or this:

It was this:

   Yes... long before Julie Andrews made those little turned-out, airborne feet iconic, or the song "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" had its own Wikipedia page (not kidding: look), Mary Poppins was just a 200-some-page children's book by a relatively prolific Australian author called P.L. Travers. Eventually, the single book became a small series. Mr. Walt Disney's daughters, it seems, enjoyed the book so much that they made their father promise to make it into a film. The author, however, wasn't so sure Disney had what it took to make her beloved story a big-screen success... at least not on her terms.

   So this December, a film is being released (by Walt Disney Pictures) about the 14-year negotiations and multi-year filmmaking process that were needed to make Mary Poppins, the kid's book, into a major Disney film. And this, my fellow book fiends, is a must-see. Tom Hanks will portray Mr. Disney, while Emma Thompson will portray the "contradiction" of a woman who invented Mary Poppins. Very unfortunately, Julie Andrews is not slated to appear. Regardless, I'm excited for this exploration into the mind of an author and the clash of media industries.

Always,

Your [practically perfect] Bibliomaniac

Bibliography (I use Wikipedia, you can get used to it):

• "Mary Poppins (Odyssey Classics)." Wikipedia.Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., n.d. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. .
• Miller, Jenni. "'Saving Mr. Banks' First Look: Tom Hanks as Walt Disney." Moviefone. AOL.com, 10 July 2013. Web. 20 July 2013. .
• "P. L. Travers." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundations, Inc., n.d. Web. 20 July 2013. .
• Ren. "(Wedding) Fantasy Friday." Web log post. So Pretty Was She. Blogger, 27 July 2012. Web. 20 July 2013. .
• Silk, Chris. "Who's Going to See "Mary Poppins" This Week at the Barbara B. Mann?" Naples News. Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group, 14 Jan. 2013. Web. 20 July 2013.
• "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundations, Inc., n.d. Web. 20 July 2013. 

OMG Literary News of the Day: The Big Scoop on JKR's Secret Book

   Very, very much has happened in our world this week worthy of note. On this blog, however, only one thing matters--J.K. Rowling, the famed author of the Harry Potter series and a collaborator on several of the Internet's most magical websites* released a book this year and didn't tell anyone.
That's right: Mrs. Rowling, who once joked about releasing her next book under a pseudonym, but claimed she could never pull it off without the media calling her out, published a new book called The Cuckoo's Calling this April under the name Robert Galbraith. Supposedly, Galbraith was a debut mystery writer (the book is a detective story about a supermodel's untimely death), not a world-famous author who's made over $700 million off of her beloved fantasy books and spawned a multi-billion dollar movie franchise and countless pieces of fan fiction. She was ousted after an investigation by The Sunday Times. Apparently, the writing was too confident for a beginner and the newspaper decided to trace its real source.
   Here's the happy part: Rowling's other adult novel (that we know of), a family drama called The Casual Vacancy, didn't do so hot with reviewers after its release last September... but this book got rave reviews! Mainstream critics didn't give it much attention, but fellow mystery authors and the few smaller media outlets who reviewed it couldn't get enough. Publisher's Weekly praised it for, "[Combining] a complex and compelling sleuth and an equally well-formed and unlikely assistant with a baffling crime...A stellar debut." So after Rowling's unfortunate dip onto the B-list of authors, she's back on top.
   Rowling said today that she wishes she could've kept the secret for a little longer. She enjoyed publishing without the usual "J.K. ROWLING HAS A BOOK!" fanfare, she liked reading critiques directed toward an author without a legacy, and I suspect that breaking into yet another genre without anyone noticing removed a lot of pressure from the decision. Furthermore, she's already written the novel's sequel (Do we have a new Arthur Conan Doyle here? And how does this woman write so fast???) and wanted to publish it with her pen name remaining secret. She will still publish the sequel under Robert Galbraith, which I think is a good and predictable choice... it creates continuity, like in ghostwriter/Stratemeyer Syndicate system.
   I also find it interesting that JKR has a new pseudonym, especially since J.K. Rowling was a bit of a pen name in itself. When she published the very first Harry Potter, she created the name from her real own initial (Joanne) and her grandmother's first initial (Kathleen), hoping that the ambiguous-gendered name would help attract boys to her writing as much as girls (I actually feel it's a dominantly male name, reminiscent of J.R.R. Tolkien). And once again, she's chosen a masculine pen name (reasons unknown).

   Always,

      Your Bibliomaniac

*For some of the "most magical" websites JKR is partially responsible for, check out her website or Pottermore.


And my sources for this current events update (yeah, I use Wikipedia as a source):

• "The Cuckoo's Calling." Amazon. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 July 2013.
• "J. K. Rowling." Wikipedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 July 2013.
• Kellogg, Carolyn. "J.K. Rowling Secretly Published a Novel in April under a Pseudonym." LA Times. Tribune Newspaper, 14 July 2013. Web. 14 July 2013.