The Great Gatsby: Introductory (Chapter 1)

In reference to the latest movie adaptation of The Great Gatsby which will be released this month, I am now re-reading the book together with some friends (you are welcomed to join, only this is not a formal read along). My first reading was last year when I read the Indonesian translation. Last October I have won Adam’s giveaway, and I picked the Penguin Classics edition of The Great Gatsby, hardback with lovely cover—thanks Adam! ;).

So here I am now, very eager to finally reading Great Gatsby in its original version. I’ll be doing it for my Well-Educated Mind Self Project, and that’s why you may expect to see posts after posts about Great Gatsby for at least one or two weeks. But it’ll only heighten our expectation for the movie, right? Now here is my first chapter post….

Chapter one is where Nick Carraway introduces us to what he’s going to narrate about, his own background and some hints about the Buchanans.

What is Great Gatsby all about?

Having been grown up in Midwest, Nick Carraway always believes in good morality, doesn’t criticize others, and tries to be tolerant. He moves to the east to start a new and promising life, however he left it that summer of 1922 in terrible disgust of moral decay of the people he met. Gatsby is the only one who escaped Nick’s severe criticism; Nick admires him for his strong optimism.

Meeting the Buchanans, a glimpse of Gatsby, and the first metaphor

Living in a huge mansion in East Egg, Tom and Daisy were extremely wealthy, but snob and indifferent; they enjoyed life leasurely without thinking much of others. Tom is a strong and dominating person; mentally as well as bodily (he hurt Daisy’s knuckle!). First hint of his corrupted moral are his opinion about how the whites should dominate the coloureds, and his having a mistress. Daisy is an empty-headed woman, likes to talk silly and irrelevant things, likes to be adored, and just like her husband, there is a hint of moral corrupting in her (her saying that ‘the best thing for a girl is to be fool’ when talking about her own daughter).

The slight glimpse of Gatsby is enough for Nick to see him as a man with firmness, self-esteem and strong determination. And Nick gives us the last clue of what we’re going to find in this book by describing how Gatsby stood facing the bay in the dark, stretching his quivering arms towards the green light on the far away dock across the bay (the first metaphor has appeared…).

Highlighted passages

The first two pages is the most engaging part of chapter one, where Nick foreshadows what is going to happen throughout the story. My favorites are what Nick believes about human morality and personal judgments.

“Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone, just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had.” –I think this is one of universal bad habits we often come across. Nick’s father advice should remind us to always consider before judging!

“Reserving judgements is a matter of infinite hope.” –I think Fitzgerald wanted to say that by not judging people, we have a hope or positive thinking that people might be good; until it’s proved otherwise.

“A sense of the fundamental decencies is parceled out unequally at birth.” –Fitzgerald believes that we were born each with different quality of ethics or morality. I can judge something to be right, while you might believe it is wrong. This one bit of sentence makes me thinking ; tell me….do you agree with it?

For me, I always believe that when we are born, we carry the good and the bad inside us. The one that we nurture after that is going to define what we are going to be. The nurturing process would be influenced by our parents, our society, our environment, our culture, and other more complex circumstances that is stretched during our growing up towards adultness. So, I don't really agree with Fitzgerald here, because the 'unequal sense of the fundamental decencies' should be formed after birth. If we already carry it with birth, then what would be the use of free will that God grant us? It would be as if we are robots that are created of what we are, and can only be what we are meant to be. What do you think?

~~~~~~~

Maggie Tulliver in The Mill on The Floss: Character Thursday (61)

The Mill on the Floss tells us the life span of Maggie Tulliver, a rebellious and imaginative young girl who—unlike any ordinary girls of her age—appraised books and knowledge. Her imagination was broadening by the books which influenced her way of thinking. Maggie grown up to be a young woman who was hunger for being loved and cared, especially by her brother Tom. She was disappointed when Tom could not understand her and even angry with her.

Maggie was a woman who was misplaced and misjudged. She was being prejudiced by others, but she could bear it in silence only if Tom agreed with her and continued to love her. Unfortunately she didn’t get that from Tom. Nonetheless, Tom was her center of life, and neither Philip Wakem nor Stephen Guest could replace his position in Maggie’s heart. And this is unusual, because Tom had never been an attentive brother to Maggie since they were small children. So, I think it’s because Maggie had unconsciously idolized Tom. Maggie found in Tom everything she wanted to have but couldn’t: freedom and independence. Maggie always wanted to show off to Tom that she was also capable to do what people expected from boys, and she needed that recognition from Tom, to make him regarded her as his equal.

Emily Watson as Maggie Tulliver

During the second half of the book I kept questioning, whom that Maggie loved the most: Stephen or Philip? I believe Maggie loved Tom more than those two, but now I also think that above them all, Maggie loved freedom, independence and recognition. She could not make decision of whom she would choose for a husband, because she felt none of them brought her freedom. In Philip, she felt that they have a special bound since children, and her conscience ‘forced’ her to pick him. On the other hand, Stephen forced her to think about her love to him. If I were Maggie, I would leave everything behind, and accept the job offer as a nursemaid somewhere far away from home. But then, freedom is supposed to be free choices with all the consequences.

If only Maggie lived in this modern era, at least…we, women, have more freedom to decide what’s best for us.

That is my Character Thursday of this week, an analysis of book character of my choice, who is yours?... Just put your post URL in the linky below. Do you like to join us in discussing characters from books you read? Seethe details of Character Thursday first.

Zoladdiction Wrap Up

I must say that Zoladdiction is probably one of the most successful events I have hosted so far. Being a less famous classics author compared to Dickens, Austen or Shakespeare, I doubted at first that Émile Zola will create a magnet to attract readers when I had the idea to host this event. But surprisingly I found no less than 18 people has signed up to this event (not including those who might have not signed up but read and reviewed Zola anyway :D). Actually 18 people might not be what you’d call a crowd, but their excitement to start reading Zola (for first readers) amazed me, and their eagerness to read more of him really pleases me; and it only confirms that Zoladdiction has successfully brought the new addiction to read Zola!

As for me, these are what I’ve been doing during Zoladdiction:

Reading and reviewing….

The Masterpiece

La Bête Humaine

Character analysing….

Claude Lantier of The Masterpiece

Pierre Sandoz of The Masterpiece

Jacques Lantier of La Bête Humaine

Capturing the beauty from books I read….

Sunset Views From Zola's The Masterpiece

La Lison in Snow From La Bête Humaine

Talking about Naturalism and Impressionism....

Turn of the Century Salon post

Adding to my collection…

The Earth

Nana (still on the way from TBD)

Blogging….

Tidying up a bit my Émile Zola Blog

And of course, a lot of….

Blog walking….

To participants’ posts and read their thoughts and stuffs on Zola, and often find interesting point of view of books I haven’t read. Now I know which books I’m going to grab next! If you want to follow my step, this linky will help you. :)

Overall, I’m really satisfied this month; as usual with Zola books, the story would be echoing long after I have finished the book. And I have picked the right book at the right time, I began with The Masterpiece—which is not as poignant as the others—and ended with La Bête Humaine which turned out to be very thought-provoking!

That’s it! I wish Zoladdiction wouldn’t end so quick, but life must go on, and there are still many more authors and classics I want to read. So, au revoir Monsieur Zola, and I wish you all have a good time with him! What do you think, should I host another Zoladdiction next year? Would you consider participating again? :)

A special thanks to o (Delaisse) for her support and ideas, and to you, all participants who have share your excitements, ideas, and thoughts about Zola during the month!... :)

Let’s Read Plays: Check-In #2

Dear LRP-ers… I feel rather guilty for abandoning our yearlong reading event. My excuse will be that I’ve been very busy with my reading schedule and other reading events (classic excuses, I know!). Now we are in the end of the 6^th month of Let’s Read Plays, meaning that we have been through a half of the challenge. Let’s get to this check-in straight away….

You are invited to answer these questions in the comment box, or if you’d like to write a dedicated post, please feel free to leave your link in the comment box. You’re not obliged to answer all questions, and you can share your thoughts freely.

How have your Let’s Read Plays been during these six months, still exciting, or a bit boring? Did you read all the monthly themes, or did you miss several ones?

So far I only missed one, the Shakespeare’s History for February. But I am not going to abandon Richard III (the history play I planned to read); I’ve re-scheduled it for June (this time I’m going to make sure I would make it!). As for the rest, I could read every theme though not always in time. I’m still excited to read those famous plays, although I don’t think I’m going to be a big fan of plays in the end. But reading it every month really helps me to challenge myself.

What has been your favorite, or your failure (if any)?

Julius Caesar is the first play I have read for LRP, and it turns out to be my most favorite, along with Anthony and Cleopatra. See… I am always a fan of historical plays and anything about ancient Rome!

Which play are you expecting the most in the next six months?

Richard III; being another historical play, and I’m going to read it for my WEM self-project as well. I’m also anticipating to get back to Oscar Wilde again, he’s always hilarious and witty; An Ideal Husband is waving at me right now, though I must calm him down for a while until June :). And I’m excited to try George Bernard Shaw too, whom I pick for next freebie theme in September; Saint Joan (another historical theme…) would be my choice.

Have you been participated in Let’s Read Plays memes? Are you excited to participate more in the future?

Just to remind you, we have two memes for Let’s Read Plays. One is Listra’s Play Monthly Meme, with different topic each month. May’s would be music, one of the most interesting aspects in plays, I think, worth to expect very soon! You can read all the topics here.

The other meme is Character Thursday for Let’s Read Plays. You can write about character(s) from plays you read, and post it on Thursdays. You can put the linky in my Character Thursday for the week. At the end of Let’s Read Plays, each CT post would be counted as an entry for my Giveaway! You can check our characters collection here. And for you who have posted your CTs, please kindly check whether your posts have been added into the list. Poke me if I have missed it! :)

Let’s continue to have fun with plays, and see you again at our next check-in around July….

[Classic Movie] Les Miserables

Actually I’m not a fan of musical movies. The only one I was really satisfied with is The Phantom of The Opera (in Bahasa Indonesia). However, being the latest adaptation of one of Hugo’s masterpieces, and with a numerous talented actors/actresses playing here, I was intrigued at last to take a try on this Tom Cooper’s production. This is not a movie critic, it’s just how I thought of the movie, and it might be somehow biased.

Castings

Right after the first scene was on screen, Russell Crowe had drawn my attention. And I kept wondering during the film, wouldn’t Crowe be the more suitable casting for the constantly-brooding Jean Valjean, while Hugh Jackman could play the ever enthusiastic law servant Javert? I still think that would be more interesting. But anyway…I’ve never been in the movie industries…so, it’s just my personal opinion. But I was constantly admiring Javert slightly more than Valjean throughout the film—it’s perhaps because Crowe is so adorable and carries charismatic air in his uniform! Oh, just ignore my fangirling here… :)

 

The rest of the castings are pretty OK, although I still really don’t understand why Monsieur and Madame Thénardier must be made like a pair of clowns in Disney’s movies. Really!.... It’s only Éponine who is not as I’ve expected. She is lovelier than what I remember from the book, and I think her character here is indeed different from the book; she is sweet here, while in the book she is more bitter and determinate, do I remember correctly? But for me, in this film, Samantha Barks (who plays as Éponine) sings most beautifully among the females (and actually more beautiful and “live” than Cossette—played by Amanda Seyfried—who seems meek and unreal). Éponine’s dying scene in Marius’ embrace is the only one that had shed my tears.

Story and Plot

From what I vaguely remember of the book, the story follows the original story quite well. The plot is similar, but of course you cannot make a 1 hour 20s minutes film to cover the original 1000+ pages’ story! The adaptation is less engaging, and there are many parts that is missing, but what more can you expect?

Setting and Costumes

Both the setting and costumes are satisfying to me. The designers have done their homeworks by presenting the working class of France in 19^th century.

Crowe looks good in this
costume, eh?

All in all, this movie is quite entertaining, although sometimes I got bored when the song is too long. My favorite scenes are the opening scene when the convicts singing “Look Down”; Russell Crowe’s “Stars”—I just love the song and Crowe’s sexy voice ;)—and Samantha Banks’ “On My Own”.

Seven to ten stars for this movie!

~~~~~~

I watched this for Books Into Movies Monthly Meme #3

The Mill on The Floss

George Eliot is the third Victorian female author whose novel I’ve ever read. The first is Louisa May Alcott (which I have failed), then Anna Sewell. And I have to confess sadly that Sewell is the only one so far I could get on very well; meaning that The Mill on The Floss did not quite impressed me like I have expected. I can blame it on Zola, for I confessed that I haven’t completely moved on from La Bête Humaine before I took The Mill, but I think it’s just me.

The Mill on the Floss is about the Tullivers who owned Dorlcote Mill on the bank of Floss River. There Tom and Maggie Tulliver had a happy childhood and formed an intimate bond as brother and sister. Until one day the Tullivers lost their fortune, land and mill from bankruptcy. Tom must drop out his education and were forced to finance the family on very early age, while the whole family was suffering from humiliation. Meanwhile Maggie met Philip Wakem, the son of Tullivers’ enemy, a hunchback and deformed young man who fell in love with Maggie. Inspired by the childhood sentimental friendship and out of pity, Maggie met Philip secretly.

Years later Tom successfully restored the family honor by paying the debt. While Philip was once again trying to renew his approach to Maggie, the girl found herself attracted to Stephen—her cousin’s fiancée—who returned her feeling. Now Maggie was in a dilemma between love and conscience. Which one should she accept: the man she didn’t love but she couldn’t hurt the heart; or the man she’s in love with, who belonged to her beloved cousin?

Actually this book is rather flat to me especially in the early pages, which I often skipped whenever the story switched to the nonsense Gleggs or Pullets. And although the ending is unexpected—but quite cliché—Eliot has failed to grab me deep into the story.

From the main characters, I did not find any favorite, Maggie is the least one. I felt there was a contradiction in her personality. In a way she was a smart girl with self-esteem, and person like this usually acts more from logic than from emotion. At first I imagined Maggie would grow up like Isabel Archer in The Portrait of A Lady; but the more I follow her story, the more I’m astonished to find Maggie turned to be sentimental and always in confused state. She kept changing her decision and could not be firm with what she has decided.

I think the main youngsters in this story were all selfish in their own ways—yes, even Maggie. Tom was the ‘best of the bad’ for me, for although he was selfish and narrow minded, he has been successful in fulfilling his father’s will. I can’t blame him too much because he had grown up with the fixed idea which his father, the families and the society have planted on him that family honor is number one. Tom has carried a burden too heavy for him; and in that situation, there’s no place for any imagination, and that’s why he kept carrying a straight purpose in life; because he saw that’s the only way he could survive.

Stephen Guest was a pure egoist man. He was born and grown up as the son of a rich and honorable family; he always got what he needed. I think there were a lot of examples of his kind. Philip Wakem was the most annoying one for me. I know that it’s hard to live as a half-crippled man, but that didn’t give him the right to force others to make him happier or make his life easier. It was selfishness too; and I always dislike people who pity himself and make his weakness as an excuse. Life is hard for everyone, but our Creator gives us the mean to survive. To be different with others doesn’t mean we are weaker than them. Wake up Wakem! Don’t just drown yourself in romantic love, there’re many other things in life you can pursue!

And last but not least there is Maggie, the so called ‘heroine’. Maggie was a person who always longed for love, she needed to be treated passionately and be forgiven from her faults, but she never tried quite hard to repentant. Maybe it’s because she was careless and lived in her own dreams; but perhaps it’s because she was indifferent; she lived only for herself. Maggie chose to be with Philip because she didn’t want to hurt Philip and Lucy. That’s ridiculous because with that, she would hurt Stephen AND Philip, because she never loved him. Nonetheless, Maggie kept her decision, because marrying Philip would be a martyrdom kind of act of her love. Selfishness… or narrow-mindedness?

With The Mill on The Floss, Eliot would like to criticize people prejudices; and particularly prejudices which made women suffered. Maggie, with her different way of thinking than the society, have successively made infamous decisions which invited unfair prejudices from the society. Both Maggie and Stephen would be cheating to their supposed partners; but while people forgave Stephen, they judged Maggie severely. This only reflect where women’s position in the society was when Eliot lived—in 19^th century—as this novel was also a semi-autobiographical story of Mary Anne Evans, the real name of George Eliot.

Three stars for The Mill on the Floss.

~~~~~~

I read the Penguin English Library paperback version

This book is counted for:

Baca Bareng BBI 2013 (April – book about woman/written by a woman)

3^rd book for Read Big! Reading Challenge

5^th book for New Authors Reading Challenge 2013

42^nd book for The Classics Club

1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die

Jacques Lantier in La Bête Humaine

If we ignore the ‘human beast’ in him, Jacques Lantier is certainly an amiable young man. He was handsome, tall, with strong built muscles which his job as a train driver required. Despite of having born from poor parents, Jacques was well educated, and he was a skillful engineer and driver too. His manly appearance and his shy and polite manner attracted quite many women.

The most interesting side of our main character in this book (for me, at least) is his love for his train engine: La Lison (the name he gave ‘her’). Being that, Jacques could have been made example of man who really loves what he’s doing. Throughout the story Jacques was always discipline at work, and he disliked his fireman’s manner although he tolerated him as long as he did his job well. Unfortunately, Jacques had also a dark side; a compulsive behavior triggered by sexual passion that he could not control. It’s a pity, because he was genuinely a kind man.

I found Jacques was very attentive towards his aunt; he visited her whenever he was around, and he listened to her sorrows. No wonder, her poor aunty loved him even more than her only daughter. I was quite relieved by how Jacques could listen to his conscience when Séverine persuaded him to kill Roubaud. It only proved that Jacques was not a real murderer, he just had an illness, and could not control it when the seizure came.

In general, I think Jacques had a problem with his explosive passion, just like his brother Claude. So the cure would only be mildly taking everything in life and maintain the balance of his every aspect. It’s much easier to say than to apply in action, of course, not mentioning that Jacques was very attractive. In the end, there was not any good choices for Jacques’ future, and I think what Zola made him in the end is the best for him. Poor Jacques…..

That is my Character Thursday of this week, an analysis of book character of my choice, who is yours?... Just put your post URL in the linky below. Do you like to join us in discussing characters from books you read? See the details of Character Thursday first.