When Love Is Gone… (A Quote From Little Dorrit)

While this quote I picked from Dickens’ Little Dorrit might not have any greater values, it was such a beautifully written piece that I can’t just leave unquoted. This narration followed a poor gentleman in this story, who had been unlucky in his love adventure.

Here’s the previous narration…. ‘When he had walked on the river’s brink in the peaceful moonlight for some half an hour, he put his hand in his breast, and tenderly took out the handful of roses (a farewell present from the girl he has been in love with). Perhaps he put them to his hearts, perhaps he put them to his lips, but certainly he bent down on the shore, and gently launched them on the flowing river…’

And this is the beautiful-touching quote I picked for my Weekend Quote this week, and which inspired me to find a beautiful image that suits it:

“While the flowers, pale and unreal in the moonlight, floated away from the river; and thus do greater things that once were in our breasts, and near our hearts, flow from us to the eternal seas.”

Well I think it’s not just about lovers, everytime we lost something dear to our hearts (it could be a friendship, a big opportunity, or anything we value the most in life), the above metaphor of the roses flowed from us to the eternal seas could describe perfectly our feelings, don’t you think so?

This can be regarded as my 16^th Weekend Quote, a meme hosted by by Half-FilledAttic. Feel free to join. You can:

• Give the context of the quote
• Give your opinion whether you agree or disagree with it
• Share your experience related to the quote
• Share similar quotes you remember
• Or anything else. Just have fun with the quote.

My Growing Relationship With Dickens (Featuring “Hereafter”)

You know, I have a crush on Matt Damon since The Bourne series. Ever since, I’ve been going through some of his movies. So, when I saw the DVD of Hereafter on a sale last year, I grabbed it at once. Now, I have watched it twice, and loved every scene of it! Hereafter is indeed a good movie, but what amazed me most is when I found Dickens there. The protagonist, who is a handsome psychic—played by Matt Damon—is a huge fan of Dickens. I found it out first at the scene when he was lying down on his bed listening to his recorder after being distressed over something. The lulling voice from the recorder was reading something, and although I didn’t recognize the text, I vaguely think about Dickens; I don’t know, maybe it was the style. Let me quote part of it here:

"We might have gone about half a mile and my pocket handkerchief was quite wet through, when looking out, to my amazement, I saw Pegotty burst from a hedge. She jumped up into the carriage. Not a single word did she speak…. I noticed one of her button rolling around on the floor. I picked it up and treasured it as a keepsake for a long time."

I still did not recognize what it was until the second scene where he (again) was listening to the same kind of reading. And this time I caught a specific word: “Mr. Micawber”. And there it was, no doubt that it was Dickens’ David Copperfield readings that he was listening to. Wow…I always found it amazing when a book or a movie discussed about a book or an author that I like to read. I mean, like Matt Damon..oh..I mean the character he played :), I am a fan of Dickens too, though I can’t say “huge fan”, because I don’t know whether I can listen to a reading of his book without falling asleep (the sound was soothing indeed!).

Anyway, the next scene was more interesting, rather funny in fact… The psychic’s girlfriend came to his apartment for the first time. She looked at his childhood pictures while having the ‘oh…how cute you were’ kind of conversation. Then she turned to another room and, pointing at something on the wall, suddenly said: “Who is this? Is this some kind of ancestor?” Just a second before the camera moved to the picture, I already knew who that would be; it was the picture of Charles Dickens! I only imagined, if my boyfriend did not know Dickens and had mistakenly identified him as my ancestor, he won’t look attractive to me any more… :)

And what did Matt D (let me use that name, OK? I love the name, and I forgot the character’s name anyway…) say to her about Dickens? “You know, people go on and on about Shakespeare, and it’s great, of course, but Dickens….” (he did not continue, but I know what he meant, I feel the same way too—Dickens is something special, although it’s difficult to explain the reason just in one sentence, you gotta read his books and find it by yourself).

Still more….there was a scene where Matt D went to a house, and I soon realized that it was Dickens museum—the 48 Doughty Street museum where Dickens lived with Catherine and their children! Matt D has joined a city tour, and together with him I felt like I went there myself. The house was surprisingly quite smaller than I thought. I don’t know how twelve people can live together under that roof? The tour guide brought us to see Dickens’ first copy of A Christmas Carol and The Mystery of Edwin Drood, and his working room, his desk and the famous painting, Dickens’ Dream. If you could only see Matt D’s face, he seemed to be at his own home, where people he loved used to stay there, he touched the desk, the painting, as if he could remember every happy and sorrow memories in the past radiating from the materials.

On another scene, Matt D was visiting a Dickens live-reading by Derek Jacobi (Jacobi played himself in this movie) in London book fair. You should see Matt D’s face when he’s listening attentively to it (this time it’s Little Dorrit), and when the reading finished, Matt D applauded with almost childish amusement; his eyes lit up, and he seemed to be forgotten his surround. Wow…I have never encountered such adoration for certain author, that when one listen to the story told by someone else, he/she would react that way. It makes me think, have I the same level of adoration for my favorite author? Or in other way, which author have I given such adoration to? Sadly I must say…none—until now. :(

One of my favorite authors is Charles Dickens. My first Dickens’ encounter was on April 2011 when I read Oliver Twist. I know not whether it’s being a translation (to Bahasa Indonesia) or the story itself, that the book didn’t amazed me as I have expected. Eight months after that I read A Christmas Carol, and this time I think I began to admire Mr. Dickens for his writing style. Then 2012 came as the bicentennial of Dickens; and together with Melisa, I hosted a Dickens event for Indonesian Classics Reading Community (Baca Klasik) during February. I read A Tale of Two Cities for that event, and my liking of Mr. Dickens had been growing a lot since that, that I decided that Dickens has become one of my favorite classics authors. On that month also I ordered my copy of Charles Dickens: The Dickens Bicentenary 1812-2012.

That book then inspired me to dedicate a separate blog for Dickens’ life and works, containing facts from the book and other sources, my reviews of Dickens’ books, and my analysis of Dickens’ book characters. I created All About Dickens on April 2012, and invited Melisa to co-manage it. It’s still far from perfect and complete, as it serves as a diary in my journey with my dear Mr. Dickens.

After that I am officially a Dickensian. Last year I had savored Sketches by Boz, The Old Curiosity and Great Expectations, and became more in more in love with Mr. Dickens. :) His writing style is unique, as Matt D tried—but failed—to explain to the girl; it’s difficult to explain, other than I just love Dickens because he is Dickens; I love him because his writings are always enjoyable; it’s like reading tales when I’m a child, but with much more deeper meaning and reflection. Dickens can sometimes be witty and cynical, but at other times he can be emotionally touching.

And now I am really excited to read ALL of his novels for The Classics Club Project. But meanwhile, I am still in the process of collecting his books. So far, here are my collections of Dickens:

 

my special collection, bought in 2012

printed cards (among other stationery) included in
Charles Dickens' Bicentenary 1812-2012 book

Oliver Twist reading script booklet (among other stationery) included in
Charles Dickens' Bicentenary 1812-2012 book

Not so impressive collection, but I keep working on it….

This post is published as my gift to Charles Dickens, who is celebrating his 201th birthday today, February 7^th, 2013. Happy birthday, Mr. Dickens! For you—I wish you love my birthday present although I’m not as good as you in words crafting, and for me—I wish to get YOUR book as a birthday present, Mr. Dickens! We share the same birthmonth, you know… :)

Earl of Kent in King Lear

The Earl of Kent (or we can simply call him ‘Kent’) was one of the protagonists in King Lear with a good sense from the beginning. As an Earl, Kent served King Lear; he has become one of his trusted friends. Kent was clever and brave. When King Lear has emotionally banished his daughter Cordelia because she could not express her love to her father properly, Kent openly confronted his King to reconsider his decision. King Lear was enraged by this and banished Kent as well.

Kent was also the most loyal servant of King Lear. Despite of being unfairly banished from the Kingdom for criticizing his master, Kent never hated him and never stopped serving him. He was willingly to put a disguise as a poor peasant and humbly asked King Lear to be his servant. When King Lear was being kicked by his daughters; poor and homeless, Kent followed him and protecting him anywhere the King went. The ending was rather absurd, perhaps, for modern people; when Duke of Albany offered Kent and Edgar to rule the Kingdom, Kent refused it by saying:

“I have a journey, sir, shortly to go;

My master calls me, I must not say no.”

Kent (right) was banished by King Lear (left)

from: The Tragedy of King Lear - 2002

presented by: The ActorsNet of Bucks County

Considering that Kent’s sole master was King Lear, and King Lear—at the time he said it—was just dead, we can only assume that Kent’s journey was a journey to the death, where he believed the dead King Lear “calls” him; or in other word, Kent was going to commit a suicide. For us it might be absurd and silly, even for people at the era of this story, but that act only made Kent’s loyalty very subtle, and confirmed his nobleness.

However, sometimes Kent could be temperamental and blunt, that put him in trouble. The obvious example was when he insulted Oswald—Goneril’s attendant—and even attacked the man because he had once been impolite towards King Lear. His action resulted in a humiliating punishment by Duke of Cornwall and Regan. Although he had done it out of his being nobleman and his loyalty to the King, nevertheless he shouldn’t attack a messenger who did not do anything to him personally.

Kent (left) in stocks for a punishment

from: The Tragedy of King Lear - 2002

presented by: The ActorsNet of Bucks County

Apart from his bluntness, Kent was a tender-hearted man too. Perhaps it’s only Kent who could see how Cordelia actually loved her father dearly, her lack of love declaration didn’t reflect her deep and tender love. Kent saw the proof in King France’s tent when Cordelia was attending the sick King Lear, and his tender heart was touched by the scene.

Cordelia:

O my dear father! Restoration hang

Thy medicine on my lips; and let this kiss

Repair those violent harms that my two sisters

Have in thy reverence made!

Kent:

Kind and dear princess!

Books On France 2013 Reading Challenge

Still another reading challenge… :) This time Words and Peace invited us to read anything on France; French authors, French setting, or other French themes. I picked up the…

2^nd Level = beaucoup (‘much’ in English)

And will be reading during 2013:

Candide by Voltaire

The Masterpiece by Emile Zola

La Bete Humaine by Emile Zola

The Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas (re-read)

Cinta Sejati (translated short stories collections) by Guy de Maupassant

Saint Joan by George Bernard Shaw

King Lear

This is the third tragedy I read from Shakespeare; but unlike the previous two (Julius Caesar and Antony & Cleopatra), I did not find King Lear as I’ve expected. My biggest problem was the language. Being a non-English-native-speaker reader, I’m just beginning to get familiar to Shakespeare’s plays at Let’s Read Plays event. In two of three plays I’ve read since November 2012, I must sometimes consult the No Fear’s Shakespeare; only with The Merchant of Venice I read the whole play without any difficulties. With King Lear, unfortunately, I spent most of my readings with NFS. :(

King Lear is all about deception; it criticized how people like false, wordy and flowery declarations than true and honest confessions, and outer appearances rather than inner affections. The irony was that the elders—who are supposed to be wiser—were the worst victims of their children’s deception.

The play is about King Lear and Earl of Gloucester, and interestingly, both had had a similar faith. King Lear was going to divide his Kingdom to his three daughters, so he demanded them to declare their love level to him. The more they loved him, the bigger their share. Goneril and Regan both announced their exaggerated love declaration, while Cordelia—who deeply loved her father—could not find words to describe it. King Lear appreciated Goneril and Regan’s declarations, and granted them each along with their two husbands, half part of the Kingdom; while—being enraged with Cordelia who he thought didn’t love him—he banished the youngest princess.

On the other hand, Gloucester had two sons, a real one and a bastard one. The bastard Edmund—being hurt of how people talked about him as a bastard and envied his brother—accused his brother (Edgar) as a traitor. Gloucester—digested the case without further consideration—was enraged, that Edgar was forced to runaway in disguise. When the crimes were then revealed, both King Lear and Gloucester lost their insanity out of deep rage and regret—enraged to the traitors and regretted for bad treating the innocence. And just as typical tales, when King Lear and Gloucester were at their hardest times—both children they had rejected came to rescue them with a tender heart and forgiveness.

Besides that main plot, King Lear was also about loyalty vs infidelity. Kent, who had been serving the King, was banished when he defended Cordelia from his father’s banishment. However, instead of revenge, he return in disguise to serve King Lear as a lower attendant, while secretly was closely in contact with Cordelia about King Lear’s condition. Meanwhile Goneril and Regan had had affairs with the same man, Edmund. Goneril even asked Edmund to kill his husband, Duke of Albany, whom was a generous man, thus was different from his wife.

What confused me is the war between France and England. Was that really a war between two nations? Or was it merely Cordelia’s intention to set her father free, that King of France decided to send troops to England?

Actually I picked this play for its high ratings in Goodreads and positive reviews from others. I read it with high expectation, but left slightly disappointed, for the story was quite typical and ordinary. In fact I was wondering, is this play going to be enjoyable to be performed on stage? I feel that this play would be much better written as a novel than as play. I was also surprised at the vulgar comment about women here, which I found quite insulting.

“Down from the waist they are centaurs, though women all above. But to the girdle do the gods inherit; beneath is all the fiends'. There’s hell, there’s darkness, there’s the sulfurous pit— burning, scalding, stench, consumption!”

Three stars for King Lear. Not my favorite so far, and I’m now looking forward to Shakespeare’s history theme for February.

*I read the ebook version from FeedBooks dot com*

*This book is counted as*

January’s Freebie theme of Let’s Read Plays

2nd book for What's In A Name Challenge 2013

31^st book for The Classics Club

Celebrating Dickens – Master Post

UPDATE!

Celebrating Dickens is extended to March 3rd, 2013 at 11:59 pm (GMT +7)

It’s finally here!—Celebrating Dickens—the reading event to celebrate the 201^st anniversary of Charles Dickens. 38 participants have signed up since end of last year, if you haven’t, please do it at once. The sign up will be closed on February 5^th, after that you can still join us, but will lose the privilege to be entered in any giveaways during the event.

What will we do during February?

Read and review his works (books, short stories, poems, plays etc.) as well as books about Dickens, watch movies adaptations of his books, share thoughts about Dickens, analyze his famous book’s characters, or share how Dickens has been affecting your life. In short, during February you could post anything, as many as possible, all about Dickens. We will be celebrating Dickens the whole month!

Put your posts links in the linky below, but please don’t forget to check and follow the format before you click the ‘submit’ button :)

Is that all?

No! We are going to have more fun…

Dickens Mini Readalongs

Want to read Dickens with one or more friend(s) so that you can discuss it with them? I have created a Mini Readalongs. You can simply comment in the post if you'd like to join others or to create a new one.

‘Me and Dickens’ Meme & Giveaway

Birthday should get along with gifts! For Dickens' 201^st anniversary, you could join 'Me and Dickens' Meme which take place on February 7th, as your special gift to Mr. Dickens. The best part is, it comes with giveaway too (only for participants who sign up by latest February 5^th)

Character Thursday

Dickens has often been admired for his famous characters. If you are inspired to talk about these characters (either from books you’re going to read for this event or from any Dickens books), you are welcomed to join me in Character Thursdays. Post about your character(s) on Thursday(s) and add the link into the linky in my post on each week.

And still….

Another Giveaway!

My birthday happens to be in February too, so I feel rather generous to throw just another giveaway :), this time for all participants who sign up by latest February 5^th. All your entries in the linky below would be eligible to win….

Classics book(s) of your choice max. $10 from The Book Depository

I will randomly pick one entry as a winner on March 4th in my wrap up post for the event.

Well…what are you waiting for? Go grab your Dickens and start reading! :)  

P.S. If you have any question, you can comment here or mention me (@Fanda_A) on twitter. To discuss or to browse any discussion/updates on this event, simply use hashtag #celebDickens.

Santiago in The Old Man and The Sea

Santiago is the main character in one of Hemingway’s masterpieces: The Old Man and The Sea—he was the old man himself. As a fisherman, Santiago lived poorly in Havana. His main assets were his boat and some fishing equipment as old as himself. Living by himself in his humble hut without family, I can imagine how hard it was for Santiago to compete with younger fishermen with—perhaps—better equipment and strongly-built muscles. But he had an advantage of long experience and strong determination.

I guess living poorly has helped Santiago to have his determination; if you have been struggling for your entire life to survive, you’ll be familiar with hardship to know that you must not fall in desperation when facing problems. Santiago has been sailing for 84 days without catching one single fish. A boy who has been his assistant was forced to leave him by his parents because they thought Santiago was an unfortunate man. Not only that, young fishermen started making fool of him, while the old ones looked at him with pity. But Santiago kept sailing and hoping that today he might catch something if God permitted him.

Everytime he had trouble to work by himself, he would remember and miss the boy—if only the boy was here—but he would soon throw away those thoughts; he didn’t like daydreaming because it would only split his focus. He always said to himself to not thinking about what he did not have, but to think of what he need to do and make plans. This is one of the reasons why I admire Santiago, while working alone by himself, he never lost focus; he was very discipline to himself.

More than that, I admire Santiago for his love for God’s creations—nature, animals. Men need to kill animals for food, but it does not mean that men have rights to cruelly treat the animals. Men were the highest creature on earth, but it does not mean they can disrespect animals. Santiago haunted the big marlin for days, he would at the end kill it, but during the process he treated the fish like an equal enemy—even as a company in the journey. Just like a boxer wanted to conquer his enemy, Santiago learned the marlin’s facts and characters, then made plan and strategy.

And when he finally conquered the marlin and tied its body on the side of his boat, and sharks came quickly to eat its flesh, Santiago enraged. Not only because the sharks were robbing his catch, but also because he felt as if the sharks had torn his friend’s body. He felt sad about it and sorry that he could not protect the marlin. Isn’t that remarkable? Santiago was only a poor fisherman, but he taught us moral values of living as a dignified human being.