Trainspotting 5/2/12

These are unrelated characters and events. Just trying out the style.

- Awright, Aiden?
- Aye... I just wis thinkin, ken?
- Aye... Ye look a wee bit sad is aw.
Aiden shrugged, glancing up at Matthew. They had known each other since they were young, and were like brothers.
- We kin go to the pub, likesay, fir a drink.
- Aye.
Aiden nodded his agreement, standing from where he'd been seated on the building's stoop.
- Ye cannae be sad wi a good drink, kin ye?
- Naw.
He finally smiled a bit, glancing over at his friend as they walked.


Something else I wanted to mention. Neil Gaiman is a British author. When writing his novel American Gods, which takes place in the United States, he said he consciously had to think about writing in "American" rather than "British," because it needed to be believable to American audiences. He said this was somewhat like trying to write a novel in French. Even though it's English still, it is like an entirely different language when it needs to be convincing to the people who speak it. Writing this was similar. It's still English, but I had to stop and look up how every word was spelled, even words like "you" or "for." Very interesting experience.

Trainspotting 4/30/12

In the article we read, this line stood out to me: "Whenever I discuss Scottishness with Scottish students the consensus is that the only good indicator of a Scot is a Scottish accent." I wish the article had gone more in depth on this topic. Does this mean the Scottish do not have distinctive characteristics other than their accents? Or are they simply not characteristics useful in determining upon a first meeting someone's nationality? It seems hard to believe that this is the only indicator, or differentiating factor, though the accent is distinct.

The sections at the end of Exile that are told from the third person are fascinating as well. Since the rest of the book is told in such distinct, first person voices, these chapters stood out from the rest. It was a completely different experience to watch these characters from the outside, rather than from the point of view of a character.

Trainspotting 4/25/12

The scene with the squirrel stuck out to me in this section of reading. Renton seems, from the beginning of the novel, to be one of the least violent characters. Yet here, he has no qualms about killing a squirrel, something that upsets Spud greatly. Spud speculates about this. He suggests that it's because the squirrel is "free. That's mibbe what Rents cannae stand. The squirrel's free, man." He then relates the squirrel to baby Dawn, and says how their lives were wasted for no reason, and how it makes him sad and angry. This scene paints an interesting picture of both Renton and Spud. The reader sees a slightly more violent side of Renton, and the very gentle, compassionate side of Spud.

Comparing the film to the book was fascinating. I had only read the first half of the book when I watched the film, so it was interesting to see how the events of the first half of the book ended up all over the film, not just the first half. Things were changed, and moved around, but the feel of the film was similar to the feel of the book. I also feel that the characters were portrayed well, and as expected, except Begbie. Not sure what I was expecting, but it wasn't him.

Trainspotting 4/23/12

The first part of Trainspotting firmly establishes the world of the novel, heavily influenced by drugs and the means of getting drugs. The audience is introduced to the characters and to their world. It is dark and dirty and unstable, and even in the first two sections, several people get hurt and/or die. However, their lives, while sad, are not as miserable and hopeless as one might expect. What was the most surprising wasn't the drugs or the sex, it was the absolutely revolting moments, such as when Mark/Rents digs in the clogged toilet for his drugs.

The different accents are interesting as well. It is a bit difficult to differentiate between the Scottish voices, and to establish who is speaking. However, the difference between these and the more familiar English is stark, and therefore, interesting, because it makes uniquely different characters. The Scottish parts are hard to read and at first, a bit tedious, but it is very critical to the story to differentiate between Scotland and England.

Cock and Bull 4/18/12

I have commented on Cock and Bull several times previously now, so I will refrain from reiterating what I've already said (I finished reading it a week ago, so I don't have any new light to shed on today's portion).

I will focus instead on how interesting reading the interview between Self and Amis was. This was not even because of the content. It was because of how the interview, as Self and Amis' exact words, demonstrates who they are, and can be used in examining their works. The interview was far more intriguing because it was two authors we've read, rather than one being interviewed by someone unrelated. It made for a much better comparison point. Seeing both authors as authors, rather than as narrators, sheds an entirely different light on the works. It was also fascinating to hear them talk about their own works, and each others. It is one thing to speculate about a work, and another to hear about it from the author himself.

Cock and Bull 4/16/12

I will start out by again mentioning that I greatly preferred "Bull" to "Cock." It was a combination of things - Bull was a far more likable character than Carol, and the sexuality of the piece was a bit less in your face than in "Cock." Clearly, the sexuality is still present, but it isn't quite as obsessive like Carol's. It's more sensitive, because, while Carol becomes more masculine and powerful with her new body part, Bull becomes more feminine and sensitive with his. This, for whatever reason, made him far easier to sympathize with, which made the piece more enjoyable.

In the article we read, a line on page 122 stood out to me. It says, "There is nothing like rubbing shoulders with the forbidden for it to lose its totemic power." This line is interesting because it's so true. Things are taboo in a culture because the people of that culture are not accustomed to them. But the more someone spends time with a taboo thing or idea, the less taboo it becomes. Americans object to the idea of eating horse and dog, but in many cultures, it is as normal (or more normal) than chicken, cow, or pig. These books are like this too. They're strange and uncomfortable at first, but the further one reads, and the more books like these one reads, the less weird it becomes. It's simply desensitizing. Funny, to think about how different the world would be if everyone understood than and accepted more.

Will Self imitation 4/11/12

Matthew woke one day to find that his skin had become scaly and that his back had a dome-shaped growth on it. The growth sounded hollow when knocked upon, like a shell. He struggled to get out of bed and, once in the bathroom, stared incredulously at his new appearance.

No amount of lotion would smooth out the rough, greenish-grey skin. He tried, with an entire bottle. When that failed, he stood, staring into the mirror, contemplating with the strange calmness that comes after a serious shock. He certainly couldn't go to school or to work like this. He doubted if he could go out in public at all. He couldn't even go to the doctor. He wondered whether his physician made house calls. He wondered whether he would give his physician a heart attack, when the doctor saw that the young man strongly resembled a tortoise.