I purchased Look Again by Lisa Scottoline in March, hoping it would be a book club selection. My wish came true in August! The 373 pages of the 5x7" paperback-like novel did not disappoint.
The book poses the question, what would you do if the face in a missing child photo was your son's?
After she received the postcard in the mail and sees the uncanny similarities, journalist Ellen Gleeson can't let the thought go even though she knows that the adoption of her son was legal. She recalls visiting the hospital every day for another story and seeing the little one year old boy recovering from heart surgery with no family members around to support him. She looks into his beautiful blue eyes, falls in love, and adopts him.
Fast forward two years to the cold winter morning she received the postcard in the mail. From that day forward, she couldn't let go of the fact that the child in the postcard looked a lot like her three year old son, despite the fact that the child in the postcard was a computerized composite-aged sketch. To find out more about the woman who gave up her son for adoption, Ellen contacted the lawyer who drew up the adoption papers only to discover she had committed suicide soon after the adoption was finalized.
Ellen hits another dead-end in her attempt to find out if her son Will is really the kidnapped boy Timothy from the postcard when her next lead suddenly dies of a suspicious overdose. Ellen takes things into her own hands and flies to the missing boy's hometown and essentially stalks the boy's grief-stricken parents in an attemot to somehow get DNA smaples from them without their knowledge.
All of this is happening as the newspaper for which she works is laying people off because of the economy, and she and her handsome single Latin editor deny their feelings for one another.
Her search for the truth endangers her life and that of her son's. There are a couple of surprising twists in the storyline, although one of the "surprises" was predictable. But in this case, I'll let it slide.
Look Again brings up many good questions, and is a novel that will leave a parent thinking for a long, long time.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
The Rules, part 2
Let's talk about sex, baby!
Now let's get to the important part of The Rules...what everyone wants to know. When can you have sex? The Rules depends on your age and personal feelings. The book reads, "If you're eighteen and a virgin, you will want to wait until you are in a committed relationship. If you're thirty-nine, waiting a month or two can be fine." (This four-page chapter doesn't have any suggestions for those aged 19-38.)
The authors tell you that you shouldn't be surprised if a man gets angry if you don't invite him into your apartment for a drink after the second date. They say, "he has probably been spoiled by other women who slept with him on the first or second date and now he feels denied this pleasure." (pg 78). Don't worry, the authors say, because anger indicates interest.
Woah. Wait a minute. Let me get this straight. Anger = interest. Wow. Wouldn't women's advocates and special victim units across the country like to get a hold of the women who wrote that statement?!! Ummm, how about if he gets angry because you won't f*ck him on the second date, that you ditch his sorry ass? How about that?
Next the book asks a question many of you are asking yourself: But what if you like sex a lot too, and denying yourself is just as hard as denying him? The answer is still no. "You will just have to exercise a bit of self-restraint and character building here," the authors state. (Character-building?! Why is a woman who loves sex lacking in character?)
The authors continue, "Why risk having him call you easy when he's talking to his buddies in the locker room the next day?" (The locker room? Is this book for high school girls?)
Argue all you want, the authors say; tell yourself that you don't mind if he doesn't call again after you have sex; lie to yourself, because you DO care that he calls again.
Once you're ready to have sex The Rules say that you must "stay emotionally cool no matter how hot the sex gets." (Evidently you should lay there silently during your missionary-style sex.) Don't talk about your needs during sex or after sex; don't demand that he do this or that--being in bed with you should not be difficult or demanding." (pg 80)
In other words, if you're receiving no pleasure from the experience, that's OK because it's all about him and his needs. You can let him know how to please you after he falls in love with you. That's what the book is all about, right? Finding a man to fall in love with and marry you.
Also, "don't bring anything--red lightbulbs, scented candles, or X-rated videos--to enhance your sexual experience. If you have to use those things to get him excited, something's wrong." Furthermore the authors add, don't cling to him if he has to leave that night or the following morning. (I'm picturing a grown woman clinging to the man's leg as he drags her across the floor like a small child to a parent.)
The chapter goes on to say, "don't try to keep him there longer by suggesting brunch or sweet rolls and coffee in bed. If you do, he'll porobably run to the nearest coffee shop for breakfast."
Brunch? *pause* Brunch?! Who goes out to brunch? And who randomly has sweet rolls in their kitchen? But wait -- the best is yet to come!
"Instead, go quietly about your business--brush your hair and your teeth, do some sit-ups and stretches, brew coffee--and chances are he'll start massaging your shoulders and suggesting morning sex or a great brunch place."
LMAO. Are you KIDDING me?! Is he massaging me as I do sit-ups or does he wait until I'm stretching? Seriously?! Women believe this shit?
Oh, and if a man doesn't suggest sex in the morning with his already erect penis, than THAT my friend is a problem. What man is going to wait, laying in bed with a hard-on while you busily go about your morning routine of brushing your hair and your teeth, do some sit-ups and stretches, and brew coffee? Please. Show me a man with a hard cock and I'll show you a man who wants sex! Screw "brunch"! I have your brunch right here, baby!
Now that we know we should wait two months before having sex (unless of course we're an 18-year-old virgin), the book advises that "it's only fair that if you're dating a man for a month or two and don't plan to sleep with him for a while to let him know. Otherwise, you're being a tease." BUT, the authors continue, if you're more into sex than he is, The Rules say "if you don't want to feel insecure, then don't initiate sex."
Let me understand. If I am someone other than an 18-year-old virgin, I can have sex in a month or two, but if I don't plan on having sex with him within those two months, I should let him know. Furthermore, if I love sex and he's not that in to it, I should keep it to myself. Tell me again why I'm with a man who doesn't like sex? I don't think I've met a man yet who doesn't love sex. Do they exist? My next question is how did I get to the sex part? On the first three dates I shouldn't look at him or say much of anything, and on the fourth date I should show more of myself, but I must be attentive, a good listener and let him lead ALL conversations. Isn't he bored with me? I would be!! Let's not forget that I also shouldn't tell him what others think about our relationship; that I was a mess before I discovered seminars and gurus; or that he's the first man to treat me with respect. I shouldn't ask about his past relationships, say "we've got to talk," or "overwhelm" him with my career triumphs. In other words, "don't plague him with your neuroses!!"
Ummm, wow. That's a lot of assumptions. I've been on four dates with a man and I'm telling everyone I know, including my personal trainer and mechanic that we're in a "relationship". And evidently I was a complete and utter mess before I met him and was treated disrespectfully by every man that came into my life. Wow. In four pages the authors' summed up my entire life. Are you SERIOUS?!
Let's get back to the sex. So, I'm not supposed to have sex with him too soon, but I shouldn't wait too long either, and I shouldn't initiate sex even if I love sex. And all of this spans a one or two month period but happens after four dates. Got it. THEN when we do finally have sex I should lay there, say nothing, and guide him in no way as to what I like in bed. This will make him fall in love with me and ask me to marry him. Ummm, OK. And after sex I should let him leave if he chooses to, or if he spends the night in my apartment I should wake up and go about my usual business of brushing my hair and teeth, and doing sit-ups and stretches while he lays in bed. OK. Got it.
And the most important portion of this four-page chapter is written in the last paragraph: "whenever you do have sex, always use a condom."
Got it.
Seriously??? Are these women for real?!
Now let's get to the important part of The Rules...what everyone wants to know. When can you have sex? The Rules depends on your age and personal feelings. The book reads, "If you're eighteen and a virgin, you will want to wait until you are in a committed relationship. If you're thirty-nine, waiting a month or two can be fine." (This four-page chapter doesn't have any suggestions for those aged 19-38.)
The authors tell you that you shouldn't be surprised if a man gets angry if you don't invite him into your apartment for a drink after the second date. They say, "he has probably been spoiled by other women who slept with him on the first or second date and now he feels denied this pleasure." (pg 78). Don't worry, the authors say, because anger indicates interest.
Woah. Wait a minute. Let me get this straight. Anger = interest. Wow. Wouldn't women's advocates and special victim units across the country like to get a hold of the women who wrote that statement?!! Ummm, how about if he gets angry because you won't f*ck him on the second date, that you ditch his sorry ass? How about that?
Next the book asks a question many of you are asking yourself: But what if you like sex a lot too, and denying yourself is just as hard as denying him? The answer is still no. "You will just have to exercise a bit of self-restraint and character building here," the authors state. (Character-building?! Why is a woman who loves sex lacking in character?)
The authors continue, "Why risk having him call you easy when he's talking to his buddies in the locker room the next day?" (The locker room? Is this book for high school girls?)
Argue all you want, the authors say; tell yourself that you don't mind if he doesn't call again after you have sex; lie to yourself, because you DO care that he calls again.
Once you're ready to have sex The Rules say that you must "stay emotionally cool no matter how hot the sex gets." (Evidently you should lay there silently during your missionary-style sex.) Don't talk about your needs during sex or after sex; don't demand that he do this or that--being in bed with you should not be difficult or demanding." (pg 80)
In other words, if you're receiving no pleasure from the experience, that's OK because it's all about him and his needs. You can let him know how to please you after he falls in love with you. That's what the book is all about, right? Finding a man to fall in love with and marry you.
Also, "don't bring anything--red lightbulbs, scented candles, or X-rated videos--to enhance your sexual experience. If you have to use those things to get him excited, something's wrong." Furthermore the authors add, don't cling to him if he has to leave that night or the following morning. (I'm picturing a grown woman clinging to the man's leg as he drags her across the floor like a small child to a parent.)
The chapter goes on to say, "don't try to keep him there longer by suggesting brunch or sweet rolls and coffee in bed. If you do, he'll porobably run to the nearest coffee shop for breakfast."
Brunch? *pause* Brunch?! Who goes out to brunch? And who randomly has sweet rolls in their kitchen? But wait -- the best is yet to come!
"Instead, go quietly about your business--brush your hair and your teeth, do some sit-ups and stretches, brew coffee--and chances are he'll start massaging your shoulders and suggesting morning sex or a great brunch place."
LMAO. Are you KIDDING me?! Is he massaging me as I do sit-ups or does he wait until I'm stretching? Seriously?! Women believe this shit?
Oh, and if a man doesn't suggest sex in the morning with his already erect penis, than THAT my friend is a problem. What man is going to wait, laying in bed with a hard-on while you busily go about your morning routine of brushing your hair and your teeth, do some sit-ups and stretches, and brew coffee? Please. Show me a man with a hard cock and I'll show you a man who wants sex! Screw "brunch"! I have your brunch right here, baby!
Now that we know we should wait two months before having sex (unless of course we're an 18-year-old virgin), the book advises that "it's only fair that if you're dating a man for a month or two and don't plan to sleep with him for a while to let him know. Otherwise, you're being a tease." BUT, the authors continue, if you're more into sex than he is, The Rules say "if you don't want to feel insecure, then don't initiate sex."
Let me understand. If I am someone other than an 18-year-old virgin, I can have sex in a month or two, but if I don't plan on having sex with him within those two months, I should let him know. Furthermore, if I love sex and he's not that in to it, I should keep it to myself. Tell me again why I'm with a man who doesn't like sex? I don't think I've met a man yet who doesn't love sex. Do they exist? My next question is how did I get to the sex part? On the first three dates I shouldn't look at him or say much of anything, and on the fourth date I should show more of myself, but I must be attentive, a good listener and let him lead ALL conversations. Isn't he bored with me? I would be!! Let's not forget that I also shouldn't tell him what others think about our relationship; that I was a mess before I discovered seminars and gurus; or that he's the first man to treat me with respect. I shouldn't ask about his past relationships, say "we've got to talk," or "overwhelm" him with my career triumphs. In other words, "don't plague him with your neuroses!!"
Ummm, wow. That's a lot of assumptions. I've been on four dates with a man and I'm telling everyone I know, including my personal trainer and mechanic that we're in a "relationship". And evidently I was a complete and utter mess before I met him and was treated disrespectfully by every man that came into my life. Wow. In four pages the authors' summed up my entire life. Are you SERIOUS?!
Let's get back to the sex. So, I'm not supposed to have sex with him too soon, but I shouldn't wait too long either, and I shouldn't initiate sex even if I love sex. And all of this spans a one or two month period but happens after four dates. Got it. THEN when we do finally have sex I should lay there, say nothing, and guide him in no way as to what I like in bed. This will make him fall in love with me and ask me to marry him. Ummm, OK. And after sex I should let him leave if he chooses to, or if he spends the night in my apartment I should wake up and go about my usual business of brushing my hair and teeth, and doing sit-ups and stretches while he lays in bed. OK. Got it.
And the most important portion of this four-page chapter is written in the last paragraph: "whenever you do have sex, always use a condom."
Got it.
Seriously??? Are these women for real?!
The Rules, part 1
My friend was in a book store a few weeks ago, and while waiting in line she picked up and read a few pages of The Rules by Ellen Fein and Sherrie Schneider. She immediately called me to share the ridiculous writings. Rule #1 - Be a "creature unlike any other." WTH? We chatted as she left for her appointment and decided that if the book was under $10 and/or we found it at Half Priced Books, it would be worth purchasing for entertainment purposes. And that's what she did! She bought the book and we read portions of it during our Burger Quest evening and could not stop laughing.
What are The Rules? As the book states, "They are a simple way of acting around men that can help any woman win the heart of the man of her dreams."
Rule #9 informed readers "How to act on dates 1, 2, and 3." Well, not really because dates 2 and 3 are mentioned only briefly at the end of the three-page chapter. The booked instructs the reader to not think of him [your date] before he arrives because "it isn't necessary for the first three dates." You're supposed to be busy right up until the minute he "buzzes you from downstairs."
One, I find it amusing that they assume everyone lives in an apartment, as that reference is mentioned throughout the book. Two, I wonder how one doesn't think about her date before the date? Is it possible? And "be busy until the minute he arrives." Busy doing what, exactly? Fear not -- the book has suggestions! Go to the gym, take a long hot bubble bath, see a movie (a comedy; no romances, it warns), get a manicure or pedicure, shop for clothes or a bottle of perfume, take a nap, or read a book or the newspaper. The author adds, "If you're busy all day, you won't be so needy and empty when he picks you up." Wow. Needy? Empty?? This book is full of assumptions about single women.
Next, it says, all you really have to do on the first three dates is "show up, relax, [and] pretend you're an actress making a cameo appearance in a movie." Don't tell him about your day; don't be too serious, controlling, or wifey; don't mention the M word; be sweet and light; laugh at his jokes; smile a lot; and don't feel obligated to fill up the lulls in the conversation. (Wifey? What does that even mean...?)
The authors instruct you on thinking as well: "If you have to think about something, think about your date with another man that week." And always end the date/phone conversation first, if you like him (to leave him wanting more, of course!). The authors even have timelines to follow; two hours for a drink date and three or four hours for a dinner date, and suggest that you end the date by saying, "Gee, this was really great, but I've got a really big day tomorrow."
The first three dates are about dressing nice, being nice, saying good-bye, and going home (alone, of course). Period. You want to get married, afterall. Anyone can have a one-night stand!
Rule #10 has information on "How to act on dates 4 through commitment time." On the fourth date you can show more of yourself. You can look at him (which you cannot do on the first three dates), be attentive, and be a good listener so that he knows you would "make a supportive wife." He must take the lead on all conversations.
According to The Rules, here's a list of don'ts that, should you do them, will surely lead you to be lonely for all of eternity.
"Don't tell him what your astrologist, nutirtionist, personal trainer, shrink, or yoga instructor thinks about your relationship with him.
"Don't tell him what a mess you were before you discovered seminars and gurus, as in, "My life was such a mess before The Forum (or est).
"Don't tell him he's the first man to treat you with respect. He'll think you're a loser or a tramp.
"Don't give him the third degree about his past relationships.
"Don't say, "We've go to talk" in a serious tone, or he'll bolt from the bar stool.
"Don't overwhelm him with your career triumphs. Try to let him shine.
"Don't plague him with your neuroses!!"
The book adds that you won't have to keep such things to yourslef forever; just for the first few months until he says he's in love with you. It's then you can be more of yourself. It further states that "letting it all hang out too soon is counterproductive to your goals." (Which is marraige, in case you forgot.) (pg 64)
The book goes on to say that many women are CONDITIONED in therapy to open up very soon. That's another theme seen throughout the book -- women being "conditioned" by therapists. The Rules, they say, are about opening up slowly so that men aren't overwhelmed by us. Furthermore, "it's rather selfish and inconsiderate to burden people with our whole lives on a three-hour date." (Evidently it's NOT selfish for a man to talk about himself the entire date.)
Back to ending the date/phone call first. Chapter 11, titled "Always end the date first" says, "ending the first date is not so easy when you really like him and want to marry him, and you're both having a great time." It goes on to say that not ending the date first is bad enough, but what's worse is prolonging the date once it should have been over. Moreover, it should be the man trying to prolong the date. Ummm, wow! On your first date you know you want to marry him. Really? How does *that* work?
I guess if I had been following The Rules, I wouldn't have stayed with my recent ex as long as I did, as rule #12 states that you should stop dating him if he doesn't buy you a romantic gift for your birthday or Valentine's Day. I received nothing from my recent ex on both occasions. Hmmmm... perhaps THIS rule is worth following. *wink*
The book reads, "you might as well call it quits because he's not in love with you and chances are you won't get the most important gift of all: an engagement ring." (pg 69) It goes on to say that when men are in love, they give love objects even if they are on a tight budget. "As most women know, the time a man spends on anything is virtually priceless." If a man is crazy about you, he will give you all kinds of things all the time because you're always on his mind. The chapter ends with, "It's about determing whether a man is truly in love with you and, if not, going on to the next. If you end up marrying a man who gives you a briefcase instead of a bracelet on your birthday, you may be doomed to a life of practical, loveless gifts and gestures from him such as food processors, and you may spend thousands of dollars in therapy trying to figure out why there's no romance in your marriage."
Wow.
What are The Rules? As the book states, "They are a simple way of acting around men that can help any woman win the heart of the man of her dreams."
Rule #9 informed readers "How to act on dates 1, 2, and 3." Well, not really because dates 2 and 3 are mentioned only briefly at the end of the three-page chapter. The booked instructs the reader to not think of him [your date] before he arrives because "it isn't necessary for the first three dates." You're supposed to be busy right up until the minute he "buzzes you from downstairs."
One, I find it amusing that they assume everyone lives in an apartment, as that reference is mentioned throughout the book. Two, I wonder how one doesn't think about her date before the date? Is it possible? And "be busy until the minute he arrives." Busy doing what, exactly? Fear not -- the book has suggestions! Go to the gym, take a long hot bubble bath, see a movie (a comedy; no romances, it warns), get a manicure or pedicure, shop for clothes or a bottle of perfume, take a nap, or read a book or the newspaper. The author adds, "If you're busy all day, you won't be so needy and empty when he picks you up." Wow. Needy? Empty?? This book is full of assumptions about single women.
Next, it says, all you really have to do on the first three dates is "show up, relax, [and] pretend you're an actress making a cameo appearance in a movie." Don't tell him about your day; don't be too serious, controlling, or wifey; don't mention the M word; be sweet and light; laugh at his jokes; smile a lot; and don't feel obligated to fill up the lulls in the conversation. (Wifey? What does that even mean...?)
The authors instruct you on thinking as well: "If you have to think about something, think about your date with another man that week." And always end the date/phone conversation first, if you like him (to leave him wanting more, of course!). The authors even have timelines to follow; two hours for a drink date and three or four hours for a dinner date, and suggest that you end the date by saying, "Gee, this was really great, but I've got a really big day tomorrow."
The first three dates are about dressing nice, being nice, saying good-bye, and going home (alone, of course). Period. You want to get married, afterall. Anyone can have a one-night stand!
Rule #10 has information on "How to act on dates 4 through commitment time." On the fourth date you can show more of yourself. You can look at him (which you cannot do on the first three dates), be attentive, and be a good listener so that he knows you would "make a supportive wife." He must take the lead on all conversations.
According to The Rules, here's a list of don'ts that, should you do them, will surely lead you to be lonely for all of eternity.
"Don't tell him what your astrologist, nutirtionist, personal trainer, shrink, or yoga instructor thinks about your relationship with him.
"Don't tell him what a mess you were before you discovered seminars and gurus, as in, "My life was such a mess before The Forum (or est).
"Don't tell him he's the first man to treat you with respect. He'll think you're a loser or a tramp.
"Don't give him the third degree about his past relationships.
"Don't say, "We've go to talk" in a serious tone, or he'll bolt from the bar stool.
"Don't overwhelm him with your career triumphs. Try to let him shine.
"Don't plague him with your neuroses!!"
The book adds that you won't have to keep such things to yourslef forever; just for the first few months until he says he's in love with you. It's then you can be more of yourself. It further states that "letting it all hang out too soon is counterproductive to your goals." (Which is marraige, in case you forgot.) (pg 64)
The book goes on to say that many women are CONDITIONED in therapy to open up very soon. That's another theme seen throughout the book -- women being "conditioned" by therapists. The Rules, they say, are about opening up slowly so that men aren't overwhelmed by us. Furthermore, "it's rather selfish and inconsiderate to burden people with our whole lives on a three-hour date." (Evidently it's NOT selfish for a man to talk about himself the entire date.)
Back to ending the date/phone call first. Chapter 11, titled "Always end the date first" says, "ending the first date is not so easy when you really like him and want to marry him, and you're both having a great time." It goes on to say that not ending the date first is bad enough, but what's worse is prolonging the date once it should have been over. Moreover, it should be the man trying to prolong the date. Ummm, wow! On your first date you know you want to marry him. Really? How does *that* work?
I guess if I had been following The Rules, I wouldn't have stayed with my recent ex as long as I did, as rule #12 states that you should stop dating him if he doesn't buy you a romantic gift for your birthday or Valentine's Day. I received nothing from my recent ex on both occasions. Hmmmm... perhaps THIS rule is worth following. *wink*
The book reads, "you might as well call it quits because he's not in love with you and chances are you won't get the most important gift of all: an engagement ring." (pg 69) It goes on to say that when men are in love, they give love objects even if they are on a tight budget. "As most women know, the time a man spends on anything is virtually priceless." If a man is crazy about you, he will give you all kinds of things all the time because you're always on his mind. The chapter ends with, "It's about determing whether a man is truly in love with you and, if not, going on to the next. If you end up marrying a man who gives you a briefcase instead of a bracelet on your birthday, you may be doomed to a life of practical, loveless gifts and gestures from him such as food processors, and you may spend thousands of dollars in therapy trying to figure out why there's no romance in your marriage."
Wow.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Book review: Patty Jane's House of Curl by Lorna Landvik
Patty Jane's House of Curl by Lorna Landvik was not what I expected. When some people from the book club said they "loved" the book because "it was fabulous!", we thought, "Great!" After the previous book (the Bonesetter's Daughter) we needed an easy & fun read.
I'll give it "easy" but "fun" I'm not so sure. The book did have some humorous parts, but it was depressing, sometimes dark, and I have to say incredibly predictable. Don't worry, I won't give anything away. The book takes place in Minnesota so it was neat to "see" the streets and sites back in the 1960's. However, I don't think that non-Minnesotans would truly get the feel for the places the characters visited.
Patty Jane and her sister Harriet grew up in an alcoholic household and pretty much relied on one another to get through life. Patty Jane married a hottie and got pregnant on their wedding night. Thor, her hottie husband disappears days before the baby is born. I must confess that I was thisclose to not reading further until Thor ran head-on into a tree one icy winter evening. I read to find out what happened to him.
After Thor's disappearance and her depressive episode, Patty Jane opens a neighborhood beauty parlor to financially support her family. She soon decides that classes would be a great addition for the ladies who come to the shop, so she offers a variety of classes, ranging from art to Hollywood gossip. Her mother-in-law, now living with Patty Jane, bakes delicious Norwegian treats for the women to enjoy with theior coffee and tea, and Harriet, an incredibly gifted and multi-talented artist, sometimes plays harp. Of course the women in the beauty parlor gossip as well.
I must confess that I did get misty-eyed near the end of the novel, which means that Lorna Landcik did a great job in developing a few characters. I'll give her props for that. However, of all of the book club picks, this is at the bottom of the list for me. Sorry Patty Jane. You're just not my cup of tea (pun intended).
I'll give it "easy" but "fun" I'm not so sure. The book did have some humorous parts, but it was depressing, sometimes dark, and I have to say incredibly predictable. Don't worry, I won't give anything away. The book takes place in Minnesota so it was neat to "see" the streets and sites back in the 1960's. However, I don't think that non-Minnesotans would truly get the feel for the places the characters visited.
Patty Jane and her sister Harriet grew up in an alcoholic household and pretty much relied on one another to get through life. Patty Jane married a hottie and got pregnant on their wedding night. Thor, her hottie husband disappears days before the baby is born. I must confess that I was thisclose to not reading further until Thor ran head-on into a tree one icy winter evening. I read to find out what happened to him.
After Thor's disappearance and her depressive episode, Patty Jane opens a neighborhood beauty parlor to financially support her family. She soon decides that classes would be a great addition for the ladies who come to the shop, so she offers a variety of classes, ranging from art to Hollywood gossip. Her mother-in-law, now living with Patty Jane, bakes delicious Norwegian treats for the women to enjoy with theior coffee and tea, and Harriet, an incredibly gifted and multi-talented artist, sometimes plays harp. Of course the women in the beauty parlor gossip as well.
I must confess that I did get misty-eyed near the end of the novel, which means that Lorna Landcik did a great job in developing a few characters. I'll give her props for that. However, of all of the book club picks, this is at the bottom of the list for me. Sorry Patty Jane. You're just not my cup of tea (pun intended).
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Book review: Silent Killer by Beverly Barton
I have to admit that I love suspense, psychological horror, and murder mystery novels. My first favorite "adult" author was John Saul, whom I discovered when I was 12 years old. I say "adult" author because my readings prior to his novels were youngadult or children's novels, including VC Andrews Flowers in the Attic series. I loved novels that would pull me in on the first page. As an adult, I still enjoy John Saul novels. My favorite authors are John Sandford (of Minnesota!), James Patterson (whose movies can't even touch his novels!), Patricia Cornwell, Sandra Brown, and a sampling of others.
Last year a friend turned me on to Beverly Barton. I was leary at first because my friend loves romance novels; I do not. I was pleasantly surprised. The romance wasn't over-done; it wasn't mushy and filled with hyperbole. It was realistic albeit predictable, but the romance wasn't the focus of the storyline, which is what got me hooked into a great suspense novel.
Beverly Barton's novel Silent Killer didn't disappoint. Someone, believe to be chosen by God to enact His will, is violently murdering men of God because they have committed sins. There are many churches of different faiths in this small Alabama town, and everyone knows everyone, typical of small towns. Also typical of small towns, people have secrets... and secrets have a way of getting out. Murder, rape, "bastard" children, and evil deeds are woven throughout the novel with deep friendships, kindred spirits, and great loves. There were a couple of unexpected twists, although to a seasoned suspense reader, I was correct in my guess of the murderer, but the reason behind it was a twist.
What I did not like were the unanswered questions and loose ends left at the end of the book. The author, aware of this, write a letter to the reader stating that the loose ends will be answered in her next novel, Dead by Midnight. Ummm, thanks...?
Last year a friend turned me on to Beverly Barton. I was leary at first because my friend loves romance novels; I do not. I was pleasantly surprised. The romance wasn't over-done; it wasn't mushy and filled with hyperbole. It was realistic albeit predictable, but the romance wasn't the focus of the storyline, which is what got me hooked into a great suspense novel.
Beverly Barton's novel Silent Killer didn't disappoint. Someone, believe to be chosen by God to enact His will, is violently murdering men of God because they have committed sins. There are many churches of different faiths in this small Alabama town, and everyone knows everyone, typical of small towns. Also typical of small towns, people have secrets... and secrets have a way of getting out. Murder, rape, "bastard" children, and evil deeds are woven throughout the novel with deep friendships, kindred spirits, and great loves. There were a couple of unexpected twists, although to a seasoned suspense reader, I was correct in my guess of the murderer, but the reason behind it was a twist.
What I did not like were the unanswered questions and loose ends left at the end of the book. The author, aware of this, write a letter to the reader stating that the loose ends will be answered in her next novel, Dead by Midnight. Ummm, thanks...?
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
book review: The Bonesetter's Daughter by Amy Tan
The book club selection for June was The Bonesetter's Daughter by Amy Tan. I wasn't familiar with Amy Tan's work (she authored The Joy Luck Club), so I didn't have preconceived thoughts about this book.
The book is about a mother/daughter relationship and takes place in the past (mother's childhood and young adulthood in China) and the present (in the US). I have to be honest. I had the hardest time getting through "part one" of this book. The relationship between the mother LuLing and daughter Ruth is not a warm one. Ruth also doesn't have a good realtionship with her live-in boyfriend and his two daughters. The first part of the book is quite depressing, which only means that Amy's talent lies in character development.
LuLing refuses to learn English, although she knows a little, which means that Ruth has been translating for her mother since Ruth was able to speak. This mirrors LuLing's relationship with her own mother, which we learn about in "part two." LuLing was afraid of forgetting the past so she wrote it down for her daughter... all in Chinese. The stack of pages were forgotten for years, lying in the bottom of Ruth's desk drawer.
"Part two" was a much quicker read for me because it was the translation of LuLing's writings. It was about LuLing's childhood in China, her youth and young adulthood in an orphanage, and her life in Peking before coming to the United States. During "part two" both the reader and Ruther gained insight into LuLing. And that's where the real beauty lies. Once you get through the rough stuff of part one, you are rewarded with the remainder of the book.
The book is about a mother/daughter relationship and takes place in the past (mother's childhood and young adulthood in China) and the present (in the US). I have to be honest. I had the hardest time getting through "part one" of this book. The relationship between the mother LuLing and daughter Ruth is not a warm one. Ruth also doesn't have a good realtionship with her live-in boyfriend and his two daughters. The first part of the book is quite depressing, which only means that Amy's talent lies in character development.
LuLing refuses to learn English, although she knows a little, which means that Ruth has been translating for her mother since Ruth was able to speak. This mirrors LuLing's relationship with her own mother, which we learn about in "part two." LuLing was afraid of forgetting the past so she wrote it down for her daughter... all in Chinese. The stack of pages were forgotten for years, lying in the bottom of Ruth's desk drawer.
"Part two" was a much quicker read for me because it was the translation of LuLing's writings. It was about LuLing's childhood in China, her youth and young adulthood in an orphanage, and her life in Peking before coming to the United States. During "part two" both the reader and Ruther gained insight into LuLing. And that's where the real beauty lies. Once you get through the rough stuff of part one, you are rewarded with the remainder of the book.
Finding Myself - The Journey, 2
July 6, 2010
All-or-Nothing Thinking
All-or-nothing thinking, also called black-or-white thinking is something ACA have in common. I have it BIG TIME. I never realized I was a black-or-white thinker until I discovered ACA. It was like the sky opened up and everything became clear--again. Perfectionism and control go hand-in-hand with all-or-nothing thinking. Our options melt away and we become fixated and all-or-nothing thinking takes over our thinking process. We are good or bad, right or wrong, all wonderful or all horrible.
With all-or-nothing thinking we don't stop to think about our actions; we push forward with a sense of fear. We react. All-or-nothing thinking happens internally (thoughts) AND externally (verbally). For me, the majority of my all-or-nothing thinking happens inside of my head. It's the nagging voice that constantly tells me, "you're not good enough." It doesn't matter what "it" is, I'm not good enough. When I receive constructive criticism at work, my thoughts go straight to "I suck; I should be fired." All-or-nothing thinking is absolute. Through ACA I learned that this type of thinking is common in unhealthy homes where opinions or thoughts were attacked by the family with sweeping statements. Knowing this helps, but it doesn't stop the all-or-nothing thinking. It doesn't stop the hypercritical thinking of oneself. It's hard to ask for help.
This all-or-nothing thinking has come up twice for me in the last couple of weeks, in significant ways. The first was when I received notice of a position opening in another organization of which I am familiar and very much respect. It was a position I knew I could do well in, and it paid much more than I'm currently making at my full time job. However, after having been working for the same organization for 15+ years, completing that application was purely terrifying. Why? Because in my head, once I submitted the application, that meant I got the job, had to leave all of my friends, learn new skills, be the new person, make new friends, and basically start my life over. That's an example of all-or-nothing thinking. Application = job. Coupled with this way of thinking, is that of the four jobs I've held in my life, I *did* receive the job after completing the application. Notwithstanding with black-or-white thinking, there is no middle. And if I do not consciously think about things, the all-or-nothing thinking takes over, paralyzing me with fear. Application does not equal job. It might not even equal an interview. And from there alone, the all-or-nothing thinking becomes more difficult to control becuase WHY haven't they called? Why aren't I getting an interview? Why...? I know why... because I am not good enough... it all boils down to that one sentence. The bane of my existence. I am not good enough.
Logically I realize this isn't true. But logic and my feelings do not go hand-in-hand in my world. I know that this way of thinking is dysfunctional. I know I should be a thoughtful actor in my life, as opposed to a reactor. However, the voice in my head, that Negative Nelly is always there, whispering, "you're not good enough, Keri"... "something is wrong with you." I've been told that I'm too critical of myself, but what does that mean? Many ACA live in our heads--a lot, and have since children. The all-or-nothing thoughts are so familiar to us that they seem like facts.
The second all-or-nothing moment came last week during a meeting with my supervisor when I was already at a heightened stress level. Since it's still an "ongoing issue" I will refrain from discussing at this time. But you know what? This time it will have a very different outcome than what he is expecting.
All-or-Nothing Thinking
All-or-nothing thinking, also called black-or-white thinking is something ACA have in common. I have it BIG TIME. I never realized I was a black-or-white thinker until I discovered ACA. It was like the sky opened up and everything became clear--again. Perfectionism and control go hand-in-hand with all-or-nothing thinking. Our options melt away and we become fixated and all-or-nothing thinking takes over our thinking process. We are good or bad, right or wrong, all wonderful or all horrible.
With all-or-nothing thinking we don't stop to think about our actions; we push forward with a sense of fear. We react. All-or-nothing thinking happens internally (thoughts) AND externally (verbally). For me, the majority of my all-or-nothing thinking happens inside of my head. It's the nagging voice that constantly tells me, "you're not good enough." It doesn't matter what "it" is, I'm not good enough. When I receive constructive criticism at work, my thoughts go straight to "I suck; I should be fired." All-or-nothing thinking is absolute. Through ACA I learned that this type of thinking is common in unhealthy homes where opinions or thoughts were attacked by the family with sweeping statements. Knowing this helps, but it doesn't stop the all-or-nothing thinking. It doesn't stop the hypercritical thinking of oneself. It's hard to ask for help.
This all-or-nothing thinking has come up twice for me in the last couple of weeks, in significant ways. The first was when I received notice of a position opening in another organization of which I am familiar and very much respect. It was a position I knew I could do well in, and it paid much more than I'm currently making at my full time job. However, after having been working for the same organization for 15+ years, completing that application was purely terrifying. Why? Because in my head, once I submitted the application, that meant I got the job, had to leave all of my friends, learn new skills, be the new person, make new friends, and basically start my life over. That's an example of all-or-nothing thinking. Application = job. Coupled with this way of thinking, is that of the four jobs I've held in my life, I *did* receive the job after completing the application. Notwithstanding with black-or-white thinking, there is no middle. And if I do not consciously think about things, the all-or-nothing thinking takes over, paralyzing me with fear. Application does not equal job. It might not even equal an interview. And from there alone, the all-or-nothing thinking becomes more difficult to control becuase WHY haven't they called? Why aren't I getting an interview? Why...? I know why... because I am not good enough... it all boils down to that one sentence. The bane of my existence. I am not good enough.
Logically I realize this isn't true. But logic and my feelings do not go hand-in-hand in my world. I know that this way of thinking is dysfunctional. I know I should be a thoughtful actor in my life, as opposed to a reactor. However, the voice in my head, that Negative Nelly is always there, whispering, "you're not good enough, Keri"... "something is wrong with you." I've been told that I'm too critical of myself, but what does that mean? Many ACA live in our heads--a lot, and have since children. The all-or-nothing thoughts are so familiar to us that they seem like facts.
The second all-or-nothing moment came last week during a meeting with my supervisor when I was already at a heightened stress level. Since it's still an "ongoing issue" I will refrain from discussing at this time. But you know what? This time it will have a very different outcome than what he is expecting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)