A Call to Democrats: Stay Angry

(Image taken from: Daily News Bin) Registered Democrats are usually supposed to be the “adults.” While Republicans can go about calling us “libtards” on social media and saying that we “just want everything for free,” Democrats are supposed to be the ones who take the higher ground. In many ways, we’re often called out as being elitists since we tend to believe we’re somehow better and smarter than our myth chasing, science disbelieving counterparts. But on November 8th, we lost everything. Republicans will retain the House and Senate and we’ll also have a Republican president. So, in every way, we’re screwed.

But we don’t have to take it lying down. Donald Trump didn’t just dismantle and refigure the Republican Party overnight. The Tea Party was doing it for years before he started his campaign, and we as Liberals need to do the same. I’m not saying that we should mount Bernie Sanders as our patriot and form a leftist version of the Tea Party. The “We are the 99%” movement ran its course and doesn’t need to be revived. But I am saying that we need to be just as divisive and rigid in our beliefs as Republicans have been for years. This might sound counter to our beliefs, but we need to be petty like Republicans. One thing the GOP loved doing was snatching away any of Obama’s achievements. If the economy was doing well, it had nothing to do with Obama. If Obama was taking out members of ISIS in drone strikes, the moment something terrible happened like the Boston bombing or San Bernardino, he wasn’t doing enough to keep us safe from terrorists. Well, you know what? We need to do the same for Trump and his administration, and we need to start right now.

One narrative I am afraid to see unfold is the destruction of the Obama legacy for the birth of the Trump Presidency. There are those who honestly believe that a black man ruined this country and that a white man will make America great again, and we need to make sure that Republicans account for their own failures. There will be many who still blame Obama even though Republicans control all the major seats, but we can’t let them get away with that. We need to hammer them on social media and out in the streets that this country was heading in the right direction during Obama’s two terms, and that all future failures will be on their shoulders and their shoulders alone. Republicans are already saying that we should just accept the course of action now that our democracy has picked Donald Trump as President, but there are those who never accepted Barack Obama as President, and we should do the same with their candidate.

One might say I’m preaching hate and not love, and it’s a fair argument. But we can’t just submit like Republicans think we already do. We have to be strong, we have to be tough, and we can’t give in. In other words, we have to be Republicans at heart. Just not in mind.

Review: The Death of Ivan Ilych

The Death of Ivan Ilych by Leo Tolstoy
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

The Death of Ivan Ilyich is a book of both economy and horror. It doesn't contain zombies or people getting their brains bashed in with spiked bats (too soon?), but its subject matter and frankness toward death are so raw and so bald that it's probably the most horrifying book I've ever read. I mean, seriously, what's scarier than questioning your own mortality? What's scarier than death? Tolstoy, a Christian, presents a rather happy ending amidst all the talk of black holes and falling into nothingness, but the rest of the book is stark and direct. It's a masterpiece, surely, but not the kind of book you want to have on your nightstand when you're lying in your own death bed. Talk about a downer. Yeesh.

View all my reviews

Review: On Writing

On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft by Stephen King
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Pretty much the greatest book on writing you could ever possibly read. If you do read this book-and I highly encourage you to do so-then you never have to go to a single writing seminar in your entire life. I should know since I've been to several, and none of them match the direct simplicity of what makes for good writing as this book does. It doesn't hurt that Uncle Stevie is super humble and is like a friend throughout the entire lesson. This book has reinvigorated my love for writing. It helped me get at least a good 8000 words in my latest novel, which has stalled a bit ever since my wife and I had our first child. In every single way, if you write, then this is a must-read. Like you haven't read it already...I know I'm very late to the party.

View all my reviews

Review: The Outsiders

The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Well, here's another book I probably should have read in school. The Outsiders is really well-written for an author who was only about 17 or so when they wrote it. I think I've been spoiled by all the tropes that this book helped to lay out as far as teen gangs and such. The plot was a little soft, but the characters were interesting and well-conceived. It's a tad bit dated (Even though I thought it was written in the 80s rather than the 60s), but it's an interesting and fast enough read to recommend. Not like you haven't already read it. I'm really catching up with some of these books.

View all my reviews

Review: The Handmaid's Tale

The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Wow. Just a staggering work of fiction. Margaret Atwood provides probably the second most harrowing and compelling picture of a dystopian future of all time. The first, of course, is Cormac McCarthy. But nobody is beating The Road. Nobody. What makes this story so unique is the feminist outlook, which shows just how terrible men are to womankind. The best science fiction talks about current issues, and this book, written in the 80s, seems more relevant than ever, what with the fight with Planned Parenthood and a woman's right to choose. The Handmaid's Tale is a futurists outlook on how things were back then, and it resonates loudly since so little has really changed. It's just a phenomenal story. I recommend reading Tess of the D'Urbervilles as a companion piece for a whole other look of female oppression. I'm sure you've already read it since I'm apparently the very last person on Earth who has, but if you haven't, do. Prepare to be amazed and sickened.

View all my reviews

Review: Harry Potter and the Cursed Child

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child - Parts One and Two by J.K. Rowling
My rating: 1 of 5 stars

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child should be called, Harry Potter and the Search for More Money. This is such a crummy cash-grab that I'm really surprised that J.K. Rowling would read the script and then say, "Yeah. That's cool. Let's make this canon." It's just so poorly written that I can't stand it. It's certainly the worst play I've ever read before in my entire life.

The characters are an annoyance rather than full of life like in the novels, and there is virtually no magic in this play whatsoever, whereas the books were nothing but magic. I don't even think seeing this performed would make it any better what with all of these corny lines, and its stupid plot. Harry Potter's son, Albus, and Draco Malfoy's son, Scorpius, go on an adventure together. But what really annoys me is that it centers on my favorite book in the series, and just makes a mockery of it with this story being so crummy. I cringed throughout most of the script and couldn't believe that it was so bad.

Also, and this is SUPER annoying, but one thing that I loved about all the Harry Potter books is that even though they had these really strange subheaders (i.e. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince), you always found out later in the story why it was given that strange title. But even after finishing this book, I couldn't tell you who the "Cursed child" is in question. Why is that? I understand the idea of, "Hey, let's let the reader decide for themselves." But if a function of all the titles for The Harry Potter books was to reveal what this has to do with the wizarding world of Harry Potter, then why stray from that tradition? Honestly, this play makes me question why I fell in love with Harry Potter in the first place. A waste of time, paper, and the actors who fill out these roles. Don't read it.

View all my reviews

What Makes a Book "A Classic"? And Are Critics Wrong?

Just recently, I finished reading Under the Volcano, which the Modern Library calls the 11th best novel out of 100. But here's the thing. When I say "reading," I'm taking huge liberties with the word since I really just finished skimming the book. That's not to say that I didn't give it an earnest effort. I sat and really tried to pick apart the book and take my time for the first 100 pages. But after that, when I realized that not much was going on at all (on the surface) and that the plot could really be summed up in a single sentence--A drunkard drinks a lot, finds a dead body, and then, bad stuff happens--I kind of found myself skimming whole chapters and then looking up on wikipedia to make sure that I got all the key details from each chapter, which I had.

So, why is this a classic? Well, most would say that it's the prose itself that makes the book so noteworthy, or that it has all these crazy references to other classic books that makes it such an enjoyable read (It's like the Paul's Boutique of novels).



But whatever the reason, I just couldn't get into it. There are whole chapters that are just inner monologues that really felt like they were going nowhere, and it just wasn't an enjoyable book in any way. The same goes for Lolita, which is number 4 on their list.

While I made a real effort to finish Under the Volcano, I honestly couldn't get even remotely close to finishing Lolita, which was just too boring for words. (I'm not too big on the Kubrick movie, either, so maybe I just don't dig the story). But that's what makes the list so weird. You have books like those, which are undoubtedly the stick your nose in the air kind of titles, and then you have genuinely interesting, plot-driven books like Slaughterhouse-Five, The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter, and Brave New World (Which is actually quite high at number five). So what's going on here?

One might say, well, duh, books are beloved for different reasons, and I get that. But how do you have such artsy-fartsy books like Under the Volcano and A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, and then have a book like Slaughterhouse-Five, which has a subplot involving a man's beliefs in a planet called Tralfamadore? More importantly, do the critics really know or have a say in what can even be considered one of the "best books" in modern literature?

And what's really interesting to note is that if you look at what everyday readers consider the best modern novels, they have a whole bunch of wacky L. Ron Hubbard books, as well as that nut, Ayn Rand, and her objectivism. Atlas Shrugged, it should be noted, isn't even ON the top 100 list of the modern library. Neither is anything by sci-fi writers, even though many would consider Foundation by Asimov a classic. Or does genre writing not count at all when considering the "best" modern books?

That's why I believe that it isn't really much to put stock in either the critics or what general readers would consider great literature. Personally, my favorite book is A Confederacy of Dunces. I don't think it's great because of the writing, which I actually thought was kind of so-so. It's because I honestly couldn't stop laughing at certain moments, and I just really loved the characters. Especially Ignatius, who is my favorite character that I've ever read (Oscar Wao is a close second). I like it because I think really fat, obnoxious people are funny, and I can understand if others don't enjoy a story that could follow such a ridiculous human being, but then again, I'm not calling it the "best" book, which I think is too grandiose a word when considering what a book sets out to be in the first place. But then again, people like to point out how intelligent they are, so books like Ulysses, or movies like Citizen Kane, act as the sort of cornerstone for pedantic people. I don't know. Either way, don't read Under the Volcano if you're looking for an enjoyable book. It may be considered one of the best modern novels, but man is it boring. But that's just one ardent reader's opinion.