Post #8 Book 3 Review

                For my book 3 review I read two different books. The first was The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams and the second was Inheritance by Christopher Paolini, which was the fourth and final book of the Eragon series. Hitchhiker is a science fiction novel about a man named Arthur who escapes the destruction of Earth and travels with his alien friend Ford in a series of ridiculous and hilarious adventures. Inheritance is a fantasy novel following the continuing journey of the dragon rider Eragon and his dragon Saphira as they attempt to finally bring down the terrible and oppressive rein of King Galbatorix. Even though they may seem different, both books follow themes of the place of humanity in the world and how loyalty is one of the greatest traits a person can possess.
               On Earth, and more specifically in England, Arthur is a simpleton who goes to the pub on a regular basis and roots for his hometown football club. His best friend is a bizarre man named Ford Prefect, who unbeknownst to him is an alien whose objective is to write about Earth so he can put an entry into the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, which helps people navigate the universe safely. When Ford learns that the Earth will be blown up in order to build an intergalactic highway, he whisks Arthur and him onto a passing spaceship. Thus begins their crazy and completely outlandish adventures across time and space, and Trisha, a human, and Zaphod, Ford’s alien cousin, soon join them. The book’s purpose is to use sarcasm and humor to entertain the reader and amuse us with the utter absurdity of the situations. An example of this is when Arthur says, “Would it save you a lot of time if I just gave up and went mad now?” It is rarely serious or deep. However, one of the main themes throughout was loyalty. There were many times when Arthur wanted to just run away because he was frightened by space and the prospect of the universe, but by staying with Ford he went on amazing adventures and discovered many things about himself and humanity. Another is the place of humans in the universe. Arthur learns that dolphins were actually smarter than humans in this quote, “For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.” But he learns that humans have done good because they served as research subjects for fourth dimensional beings as they tried to discover the meaning of the universe. This novel is one of the funniest I have ever read, and I think it was fantastic. Its only weakness is that it doesn’t describe settings as vividly as it should. Overall I rate it a 4.75 out of five.

                 In the world of Alagaesia, the young dragon rider Eragon continues his conquest to rid the world of evil and help the rebellion defeat the empire and start a new regime across the land. He is the last dragon rider and his dragon Saphira is the last of her kind. On the opposing side is King Galbatorix, who has led an evil reign for over a century, and Eragon’s brother Murtaugh, who is also a dragon rider. The dwarves and elves join the rebellion’s side as they slowly move towards the empire’s capital, readying themselves for the ultimate battle. The leader of the rebellion is a young woman named Nasuada, the leader of the dwarves is King Orik, and Arya, an elf, is the leader of Eragon’s personal bodyguards. The novel uses very descriptive and flowery language. An example is, “It's impossible to go through life unscathed. Nor should you want to. By the hurts we accumulate, we measure both our follies and our accomplishments.” Although it is very descriptive and it has great action scenes, the book often gets to slow parts that seem to drag on for pages upon pages without ending. It does have a touch of sarcasm, like when the character Angela says, “Safe travels to you and Saphira, Eragon. And remember to watch out for earwigs and wild hamsters. Ferocious things, wild hamsters." Like Hitchhiker, Inheritance preaches loyalty above all else. Eragon could’ve at numerous times abandoned the rebellion and flown off to anywhere he wanted to and lived his own life, but he stayed the course and followed them as far as possible, never giving up and keeping his promise to be loyal to them. Another is the value of humanity within the world of Alagaesia. Humans are generally looked down upon by the other races because the king, Galbatorix, is a human who killed off all of the dragons and the riders and rules the land with an iron fist, and humans are in part blamed for this. Then Eragon, a human, becomes the next dragon rider (in the first book) and now as the rebellion gains steam all of the races must look up to him to be their savior and must trust him like he is one of their own. Overall, the book is thrilling and very imaginative and gives a respectable end to the series (which I started reading a decade ago), but does slow down at parts and wouldn’t make a lot of sense if you haven’t read the three previous books and is also very long. I give it a 4.2 out of five.

 

Post #7 Book Talk Prezi

Post #6 Book trailer

Perks of Being a Wallflower Book Trailer

Post #5

•          How true does a book have to be in your mind to be considered non-fiction?   Why?

•          Are half-truths okay if it’s still a good story? Does it matter if Frey or Mortenson bent the truth to tell their stories?

•          Is David Shields right?  Do we need lines between genres—do we need to label something fiction or non-fiction?  Why does it matter?

 

1. I believe that in order for a book to be considered non-fiction it needs to be at least 97% true. There should be at least a little bit of leeway for gaps in a person's memory or for inaccurate facts that the author didn't realize weren't completely true, but it should be almost entirely true. Of course 100% would be the desirable percentage of truth in the book, but I'm willing to give the author just a little benefit of the doubt.
2. I believe that if you're reading the book for a good story it wouldn't matter because regardless of if the content is completely true or partially true it would still be a good story. However, if you're reading the book for inspiration or to help you get through something similar to the characters and then found out the book was a lie, I would be irate because I would feel betrayed by the author. In the end they shouldn't have lied so much because it breaks the trust you have with the reader.
3. I believe that David Shields is right because if Frey's book had been published as a novel or fiction there would've been no outcry about it and the story would still be just as good as it currently is. But in his eyes selling it as a memoir would lead to better comercial value and more books sold because all of the publishers rejected it as a ficiton novel. Even though giving a book a defined genre helps the reader decide to read it I don't think we should put so much weight into whether a book is a memoir or ficiton and just look at it for its story and meaning. The meaning still doesn't change but can be hurt based on what genre we define it as. Books are books, and giving them a specific genre won't change that.

Post 4: Adapting Perks of Being a Wallflower

So, there are definitely three scenes the director could not cut from Perks. The first would be where Sam, Patrick and Charlie drive through the tunnel and Sam stands up in the back of the pickup truck while they blast music because it shows the relationship all of them develop and it is the first time Charlie describes himself as feeling infinite. The other scene would be where Charlie kisses Sam during truth or dare because it shows Charlie's true love for Sam and how he really doesn't like Mary Elizabeth as much as he says he does. It also frays the friendship between Sam and Charlie. The last scene would be where Charlie comes to the rescue in the lunchroom while Patrick is being beaten up by Brad and his friends because it shows Charlie's loyalty to his friends and how Brad is more concerned with his image in front of his friends than his feelings for Patrick.
In order to fit length requirements, some scenes need to be cut out. One scene would be where Charlie and his family go to visit their relatives in Ohio because it just details the extended family's inner workings and doesn't progress the plot that much, and it could all be easily explained in a movie with a conversation between Charlie and his parents instead of a long trip that eats up valuable time. Another scene would be Charlie's sister's graduation because it just shows his sister moving on and again only details his extended family and how they react. It could be cut without backlash from readers.

Slaughterhouse 5 Book Project

                                                            Slaughterhouse 5 Daniel Marco

Part 1

            Have you ever wanted to visit the moon? Sure you have! But making the trip up into space is unimaginably expensive. Now, there’s no need to worry, because with our new Dreamscape Machine all you have to do is sit in a booth with our specially designed helmets and we can take you back to 1945 in Dresden after the famous firebombing. The landscape is just like it would be on the moon, and we’ve fitted it with gravity suppressors so you can feel like your floating. It’s just like the moon, except without all the hassle of going to space or dying from taking off your helmet or floating off into space if you jump too high. So what are you waiting for? Take the tour now!

Part 2

            I used this idea because it is how Billy describes Dresden after the firebombing. Billy and the rest of the American soldiers take shelter in the slaughterhouse as a rain of bombs hit the city above. After they come out he describes the city as looking like the moon due to the massive craters that consume the landscape and the ash and dust that cover everything in sight. On pg. 213 he says, “Germans were stopped there. They were not permitted to explore the moon,” showing his belief that it was a place that was no longer part of this world. I also wanted to show Billy’s experiences with getting unstuck in time as he often times will randomly drift off into his future or past and relive moments in that time, so I made the tours in the past so that I could demonstrate what it would be like to get unstuck in time. One of the many examples of Billy ‘time traveling’ happen on pg. 126, which says, “And Billy traveled in time back to the train he had taken in 1944.” The moon tours also show Billy’s fascination with other worlds besides Earth, especially a place he allegedly visited called Tralfamador. He says he learned many things from them, including the end of the universe, which happens when, “A Tralfamadorian test pilot presses a starter button, and the whole Universe disappears,” and I believe the moon tours in Dresden demonstrate another world that Billy might be fascinated with.

            I think this idea will work because it shows Billy’s peculiar personality that is obsessed with things others might leave untouched and is a unique take on the book as its ironic due to the fact that the promoters are trying to make money off the thing Kurt Vonnegut was trying to preach about and get people to realize and prevent. It can also promote the ideas of the book and influence readers to read it. It can also allow fans of the book to continue their experience by being in the same place andexperiencing the same things as Billy.

Post #2: What is a book?

A book is an experience.
Q: Why do so many people see books as being so sentimental?
A: I honestly do believe that books hold a significant value over a Kindle or iPad. I've never had to plug my book in at night to make sure it doesn't die, and I've never had it run low on battery when I was  in the middle of reading it. I can read it for hours on end without getting a headache because I've been staring at a screen. Unfortunately, screen staring has become somewhat of a national pasttime. If you don't get in your eight hours of screen staring every day, you're mocked as having an old way of thinking and not being in touch with the modern world. Mr. LaValle says we treat books like stone tablets, but we're really just trying to get in touch with a world where you aren't constantly being stimulated by electronic media. The sentimental thing about books is that they only exist to be read and enjoyed by people, and they have been doing that for thousands of years. I think there's something tragic about that, because if people stop reading them then they have no purpose anymore and were created for nothing. But long after your iPhone has broken or died, books will still be there, waiting for you to read them or pass them on to the next generation. Sitting down to read a book is like an event, an experience. You have to plan out the time to read it, turn to the page you read last, turn on the lamp beside you, get comfortable in just the right place. I can flip out my smartphone at any moment and read something. It's almost too convenient, and takes away the value of reading something impactful or memorable. So in this respect I agree with Mr. Piazza. You don't get to see the ambition of the author or the magnitude of the work if you're reading everything on a two inch screen. That's why an electronic book isn't the same as the actual thing. You know how they say the sequel is never as good as the original? This still holds true today. I hope that books last forever, and I think they will, so long as we take the time to understand their meaning and true value.