I’ve read A Little Princess before but after this — after this! — why couldn’t this title have been published more widely? This was, truly, a wonderful book! I felt compelled to read this after Jenny’s post on her blog and I just had to read it. The Head of the House of Coombe and Robin have got to be one of the better pre- and post-war novels out there. And it’s not overly-dramatic. The characters have their own problems they had to defeat but it just made them all the better. While most of Robin’s development happens in the first novel, Lord Coombe actually has his small realizations regarding his own development (which is slightly ironic, given their titles). The two of them are my favorite characters in the two-novel series, though Lord Coombe probably being the most interesting!

I didn’t realize that my scanned notes for The Woman Who Had Two Navels were not uploaded before so now I’ve already uploaded them. They can be downloaded here (8.9MB).

We’re reading this for class and our finals will be on this novel so I decided to blog this anyway and get my insights slash opinions sorted out before I answer essays tomorrow (LOL).

Alright, so this novel’s got deep aspects to the point that it drives readers (i.e. me) to confusion. But thankfully, there are some teachers to clue me in at a point or two (or friends who’re willing to share notes from their teacher). Though, for the most part, I’m left to think about what the hell everyone (and everything) means (the meaning of their existence basically exists outside my sphere of comprehension).

While I was reviewing for tomorrow’s exam, I thought about how I found the book. If I liked it. At a point yes - it is to be appreciated. I just don’t usually read these kinds of classics (talks about my taste, yeah?) but the novel did make me reconsider the effect of the Spanish and American colonizations again, and my opinions on both of them. I already do not like the American influences deeply rooted in the country. The Spanish may have brought unpleasant habits and practices, but at this point, the novel illustrates how the influences Americans brought might have actually been worse - at that time.

I can’t really decide so I moved on to what I wanted to believe about the book and its characters.

TOPIC 1: The Macho-Concha relationship. Even though it’s romantic to say, “Love knows no bounds,” and, “Age doesn’t matter,” for society it does and there are bounds. A twenty-year-old having an affair with a woman in her middle-forties disgusts me. Ten-year difference? Fine. Fifteen? O-okay. But more than twice your age? I don’t even want to imagine. And to add to this, Macho marries Concha’s daughter.

I feel aghast at the situation Connie’s in and I want to believe that Macho really got over Concha and learned to love Connie because that would make everything less ugly. However, I still have doubts about this. When Macho proposes to run away with Connie - he wanted to run away because he wasn’t over Concha yet. “Out of sight, out of mind,” the saying goes. Connie knows this. Macho also admitted that he affair he thought was over was only over when he found out the letters were gone. Connie becomes more tragic as she had loved Macho - learned to love him - before discovering his betrayal.

(more…)

This book actually has wonderful reviews if you read through Amazon. Those people write better reviews than I do, so all I’m here to talk about are merely comments.

One of the things that I liked about the book is the way it touches the topic of illegitimate children during the Victorian times. And not just illegitimate children, but more importantly, female illegitimate children. The book manages to highlight the main concerns regarding the powerlessness of illegitimate females during during the past, and how very dependent they are in blood and money. Although the two sisters both have a happy ending at the end, there were definitely trials they had to undergo (either they brought it upon themselves or they have no power to control such fate).

There was a review in the past (as was discussed in the introduction in the book) - a review against Magdalen having a “happily ever after” of her own when she was so undeserving of it. Although I agree that Magdalen did things too far, she was, at least, someone who was courageous enough to fight a reality she knew was unfair. A stark contrast of her sister, Norah, who accepted things as they were and settled herself into a pattern of expected living. Even though Wilkie Collins also show how the patient are rewarded (in the character of Norah), Magdalen still deserved something good for fighting for what she thought was right and going against the unfairness of society. It cannot be denied, either, that she also wanted to get back their inheritance to save Norah from the hardships of a governess’ life and the happiness of her own.

Going off-topic: It’s nearly October! : D I can’t wait to read An Ice Cold Grave!

I haven’t posted in a while. Hehe. Anyway, I’ve finished The Scarlet Pimpernel a few days ago. It was a bit fast (it had swiftly narrated the history of the characters and how they came to that point - i.e. the courting of Margarete (sp?) and Sir Percy) and the beginning was quite uninteresting. However, as the story progressed, it became more suspenseful and gripping. The only downside is that the suspense did not last very long. By the latter part of the novel, the story became quite predictable (at least to me). Maybe if the author expounded on other details or histories (of the characters, not of the French Revolution), it would have turned out to be a greater novel. Nevertheless, it was good. =)