Pirate King by Laurie R. King [2011]

In this latest adventure featuring the intrepid Mary Russell and her husband, Sherlock Holmes, New York Times bestselling author Laurie R. King takes readers into the frenetic world of silent films—where the pirates are real and the shooting isn’t all done with cameras.

In England’s young silent-film industry, the megalomaniacal Randolph Fflytte is king. Nevertheless, at the request of Scotland Yard, Mary Russell is dispatched to investigate rumors of criminal activities that swirl around Fflytte’s popular movie studio. So Russell is traveling undercover to Portugal, along with the film crew that is gearing up to shoot a cinematic extravaganza, Pirate King. Based on Gilbert and Sullivan’s The Pirates of Penzance, the project will either set the standard for moviemaking for a generation . . . or sink a boatload of careers.

Nothing seems amiss until the enormous company starts rehearsals in Lisbon, where the thirteen blond-haired, blue-eyed actresses whom Mary is bemusedly chaperoning meet the swarm of real buccaneers Fflytte has recruited to provide authenticity. But when the crew embarks for Morocco and the actual filming, Russell feels a building storm of trouble: a derelict boat, a film crew with secrets, ominous currents between the pirates, decks awash with budding romance—and now the pirates are ignoring Fflytte and answering only to their dangerous outlaw leader. Plus, there’s a spy on board. Where can Sherlock Holmes be? As movie make-believe becomes true terror, Russell and Holmes themselves may experience a final fadeout.

Pirate King is a Laurie King treasure chest—thrilling, intelligent, romantic, a swiftly unreeling masterpiece of suspense.

Author: Stuart Woods
Series: Mary Russell & Sherlock Holmes (Book 11)
Genre: Detective Fiction
Publisher: Bantam (September 6, 2011)
Media type: Kindle, Hardcover, Audio Book
Pages: 320 pages
ISBN-13: 978-0553807981
Preceded by: The God of the Hive
Publication date: September 6, 2011

Reader Review

An Adventure for Mary Russell (with Holmes)

Laurie King's Pirate King follows The God of the Hive: A novel of suspense featuring Mary Russell and Sherlock Holmes as the 11th story in the series begun by The Beekeeper's Apprentice: Or On the Segregation of the Queen/A Novel of Suspense Featuring Mary Russell and Sherlock Holmes (Mary Russell Novels).

The Pirate King of the title is a reference to the Pirates of Penzance by Gilbert and Sullivan, a reference appropriate both in plot and motif. William S. Gilbert himself might have appreciated the ending, which mixes Gilbert's fairytale style with a mercantile Machiavellianism. It is much to her credit that Laurie King actually pulls it off. (Though some might disagree, the only part that seems implausible to me is the pace of those particular events.)

King's narrative is generally good and her descriptive skills a bit better. I found them actually moving in spots; others may disagree.

The story's weaknesses are the tangle of story layers necessary (a story about an adventure whilst filming a movie about the making of a play) and a certain formulaic feel to some of the Russell-Holmes scenes. One in particular has me wondering whether King lost touch with her characters or whether she is planning some future development. In my opinion, the best books in the series are the early ones that develop that relationship. At this point, it may be hard to sustain continued development, especially as King has castled Holmes queen-side, moving him well out of the reader's eye for most of the story.

Since the whole point of the series may have been to use Holmes as a launching-point for Russell, the stories may drift further and further from the Holmesian root. I think that a shame. I also think it a shame that Russell shadows Holmes so completely. The partnership of Russell and Holmes was a daring, outrageous stroke. It made the series in the beginning, and the forgetting of it may be the series's unmaking.

- by Reader in Matawan

 


Of parrots, pirates, and politics; of personae, poets, and plots

I love this series, I do, despite its fantastic premise and unlikely chronology. But the plots I imagine get in the way of the plots King provides for her readers.

And I confess: I see Mary Russell as a real person.

From the first book, The Beekeeper's Apprentice, the character of Russell transcends the hokey Holmes resurrection and the cosmic coincidences necessitated by the incorporation of those narratives into these tales. For me, the professional Russell isn't Holmes' partner, but the Oxford scholar who combines mathematics and theology, who works dawn til dusk in Bodley, who reads books while walking down the street. This Russell could stride from the real Somerville to its fictive shadow, Shrewsbury College, to engage Harriet Vane and her former tutors in exquisitely parsed SCR debates. The scholarly Russell could generate such fascinating narratives that I have come to resent the intrusion of Holmes into her life.

Not only am I guilty of regarding Mary Russell as a real person, but I further transgress by wishing her into the company of Dorothy Sayers -- think of the translation debates! -- of the Pankhursts, of the Reverend Maude Royden. Of Radclyffe Hall.

And this in novel, really for the first time, King gives Russell a good woman to respect, albeit a fictional woman.

King aids and abets my fantasy by making Russell the author of the series. And here the MRH of the novel's preface claims that she has vowed "that the accounts [of her adventures with Holmes] would be complete." Outraged, I broke the habit of a lifetime and flipped to the last page. OK, the dread words "to be continued" did not appear.

(This doesn't mean I've forgiven King for the last installments -- one, really, not two books, making this only the 10th in the series. King made Russell look bad.)

But this is a 5-star review.

Like Gaudy Night and King's stand-alone, Touchstone, this story's formulation of whodunnit is more philosophical and socio-historical than immediately red in tooth and claw. King steps back from the political concerns of the 1920s and takes into account the cultural tensions generated by post-industrial Europe's staggered advance into the 20th century. And the controlling metaphor she employs is pirates.

Pirates.

The absence of an article -- definite or in. -- in the title gives us a key to the plot: the transmutation of kingship from a cultural absolute to a social contract. We see this on a number of levels with the incorporation of Gilbert and Sullivan, the introduction of the new reality of film, the addition of a woman to Mycroft's nascent MI-6. We see it in the reverse piracy of the former colonies learning to fleece the former colonizers: The Empire Strikes Back.

And face it. All writers love pirates. King gives us quotes and allusions covering most of the 18th and 19th century English pirate narratives, and she makes genius use of the Gilbert and Sullivan mockeries. I did regret that she ignored the pirates who kidnap Hamlet and rescue Viola's twin, the pirate whose head saves Isabella's brother in Measure. To say nothing of the pirates who snatch Angelica in Ariosto's mad epic. (Not for nothing did Tom Stoppard claim Shakespeare's early title to be "Ethel, the Pirate's Daughter."

But had King pulled in another century or two of pirate allusions, the complaints of the blood-thirsty readers might have been even more strident.

This is an elegant mystery in the tradition of Sayers and Mary Stewart -- lots of lovely detail about foreign lands and exacting professions. Enjoy it for what it gloriously is: the unlikely adventures of a Sherlock who was born a woman.

- by Julia M. Walker



Is Sherlock Holmes on his way out of this series?

I loved the first book in Laurie R. King's Mary Russell/Sherlock Holmes series, The Beekeeper's Apprentice, and have read every book in the series as soon as it was published. I was delighted from the start of the series when the young bluestocking, Mary Russell, met up with Sherlock Holmes. Their partnership was filled with erudite and witty repartee, and they traveled the world together sleuthing in ingenious disguises and using elaborate ruses to escape peril.

But then something strange happened. King began separating Holmes and Russell. When this trend began, the books would describe each of the partners' doings, which were bookended with scenes of them together. Later on, though, their time together became strictly limited and Mary's separate role was emphasized.

Pirate King takes this trend even further. In this book, Holmes is entirely absent for a good two-thirds of the book and the pair are together for very few pages. I would estimate that scenes of the two of them together total only about 20 pages or so out of more than 300 pages.

Mary is persuaded by Holmes and Inspector Lestrade to go undercover as a director's assistant with Fflytte Films as they head to Lisbon and Morocco to make a silent film about Gilbert & Sullivan's The Pirates of Penzance. "How can there be a silent film about an operetta?," I hear you ask. It turns out the project is about a film crew trying to make a film about The Pirates of Penzance. The play-within-a-play conceit becomes ever more elaborate, as Mary works with actors playing the parts of pirates, constables, British officers and coquettish daughters, and many of the actors turn out to be something other than what they seem.

Mary's task is to see what she can find out about Fflytte Films that might explain why crime seems to follow its films in ways related to the subject-matter of each film, and why the previous director's assistant disappeared before the crew left England for Portugal. A series of minor disasters besets the cast and crew in Lisbon, but real danger begins as their sailing ship approaches north Africa. In this third part of the book, Holmes has joined the cast incognito, as an actor playing the Major General, and he and Mary must rescue the party from grave danger. This third part of the book, which takes up a little over 70 pages, has all the derring-do, action and spirit that are lacking in the rest of the book. It is cleverly written in a way that I could imagine as a script for a silent film adventure story.

I'm puzzled why Laurie R. King has altered this series to de-emphasize the Russell/Holmes collaboration almost to the disappearing point. Having so much of the book devoted to Mary working alone forced it into an awkward first-person narrative that reads like a well-educated and earnest young businesswoman's travel diary. I wasn't particularly interested to read in detail about her dealings on behalf of and with the cast and crew, her seasickness, rehearsal travails and the like. (And I'll admit I was a little miffed by Mary's scornful attitude toward my beloved Gilbert & Sullivan.)

Though the book returned to the series' old form at the end, I couldn't help noticing that the subjects of Mary's investigation were mere afterthoughts in the resolution of the story. It made me wonder about the utility of so many of the previous pages detailing Mary's sleuthing.

Has Laurie R. King come to feel so restricted by the Russell/Holmes partnership that she separated them? Is the weight of Sherlock Holmes's legendary persona so burdensome that she wants to cut him loose? She's the creator and, of course, she's free to do that. But I'm one of those pesky fans who don't like to see a change in a series' winning formula.

- by Maine Colonial

Animal Farm by George Orwell [1945]

Since its publication in 1946, George Orwell's fable of a workers' revolution gone wrong has rivaled Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea as the Shortest Serious Novel It's OK to Write a Book Report About. (The latter is three pages longer and less fun to read.) Fueled by Orwell's intense disillusionment with Soviet Communism, Animal Farm is a nearly perfect piece of writing, both an engaging story and an allegory that actually works. When the downtrodden beasts of Manor Farm oust their drunken human master and take over management of the land, all are awash in collectivist zeal. Everyone willingly works overtime, productivity soars, and for one brief, glorious season, every belly is full. The animals' Seven Commandment credo is painted in big white letters on the barn. All animals are equal. No animal shall drink alcohol, wear clothes, sleep in a bed, or kill a fellow four-footed creature. Those that go upon four legs or wings are friends and the two-legged are, by definition, the enemy. Too soon, however, the pigs, who have styled themselves leaders by virtue of their intelligence, succumb to the temptations of privilege and power. "We pigs are brainworkers. The whole management and organisation of the farm depend on us. Day and night, we are watching over your welfare. It is for your sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples." While this swinish brotherhood sells out the revolution, cynically editing the Seven Commandments to excuse their violence and greed, the common animals are once again left hungry and exhausted, no better off than in the days when humans ran the farm. Satire Animal Farm may be, but it's a stony reader who remains unmoved when the stalwart workhorse, Boxer, having given his all to his comrades, is sold to the glue factory to buy booze for the pigs. Orwell's view of Communism is bleak indeed, but given the history of the Russian people since 1917, his pessimism has an air of prophecy. --Joyce Thompson --This text refers to the Paperback edition.

Author: George Orwell
Genre: Political Fiction
Publisher: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (November 20, 1990)
Media type: Hardcover, Paperback, Audio Book
Pages: 144 pages
ISBN-13: 978-0151072552
Publication date: 17 August 1945


Reader Review

 

"Four legs good, two legs bad!!!"

"Animal Farm" by George Orwell was never required reading for me when I was in school, so it took me some time to finally get around to reading it. I found it to be a complete and enjoyable read that had me hooked from the very first sentence. It is an excellent exercise in symbolism and creative imagination. While the book may be a very short read, it brings a whole lot to the table by giving you an interesting take on how history can be reenacted in the most imaginative ways.

The animals on Mr. Jones' farm have had enough of what they deem to be slavery. They're tired of being ordered around by humans while they see no benefits in their daily work. This is all sparked by a dream that the boar, Major, had about a unique place where animals called the shots and never had to be ordered around by humans ever again. He tells them a revolution is very much needed. When Major dies, the animals act quickly and are able to overthrow the alcoholic farmer and his thugs from his very own farm. The pigs are in charge now, as they claim that they are much smarter than the others and know how to lead. What seems to be paradise quickly transforms into another form of slavery altogether enforced by propaganda and threats from the pigs. And yet, the animals do not know any better, as they are deceived by the new system that gives them the illusion that they are better off than they were with Mr. Jones calling the shots.

The book is greatly inspired by real events that went down during the era of communism in Russia, using animals as the actual people. While it helps to know about that time period, the book is written so well that it is easily understood even if you only know a little about what happened during that time. The use of animals was a very creative way to tell this story, as it gives you a big incentive to actually care for these characters. Had this just been about real people, then it would've just sounded like anything you could find in your history books. Orwell finds a much more interesting way of tackling the topic. He gives life to every one of his characters and they all elicit some kind of a feeling from you. There are times when the book is funny, and then there are times when it is just downright chilling (the last chapter will stay in your head for more than a few hours).

George Orwell's "Animal Farm" is a genuine masterpiece that quickly hooks the reader from the very beginning. It's an extremely easy read as well as an enjoyable one--not enjoyable in the sense that this is a "happy tale," but enjoyable in the sense that you really feel like you're reading something great. If you haven't had the chance to check it out, make sure you add this to your reading list. It is something that should be read by everyone at least once in their life, even if they don't end up enjoying it as much as others. I loved every single word that was written in the extremely creative read. This is an important classic in literature that shouldn't be missed for any reason.

- by Michael Crane

 

The power of words

"Animal farm" is to this day one of the best attempts to criticize a totalitarian regime through the means that literature provides: the power of words. George Orwell (1903- 1950) wanted to help others to realize things that for him were evident, and attempted to do so by writing a fable that can easily be read as a satire of the Russian Revolution. Orwell said in an article that "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it. It seems to me nonsense, in a period like our own, to think that one can avoid writing of such subjects. It is simply a question of which side one takes and what approach one follows".

Orwell also pointed out that "Animal Farm was the first book in which I tried, with full consciousness of what I was doing, to fuse political purpose and artistic purpose into one whole". He succeded beyond his wildest expectations, even though at first nobody wanted to publish this work because it was too controversial.

The plot of this book is relatively easy to grasp, and I think that is probably one of the reasons why it is so popular. Some animals decide to take over the conduction of a farm, because they believe there is too much injustice, and that they would improve the situation if they had the power to do so. They make a revolution, and end up evicting Mr. Jones, the owner of the farm. From that moment onwards, the farm is called "Animal farm"...

The animals establish seven "commandments", that they are supposed to obey at all moments in the new "Animal farm": 1- Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy, 2 - Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend, 3- No animal shall wear clothes, 4 - No animal shall sleep in a bed , 5 -No animal shall drink alcohol, 6 - No animal shall kill another animal , 7- All animals are created equal. At the same time, all commandments can be comprised in a maxim: "Four legs good, two legs bad".

Everything seems all right for sometime, and all the animals work together for the success of the revolution, obeying the commandments and striving for a new order of things. However, after a while the pigs begin to think that being part of the animal revolution is not enough: they want to dominate it. After that first realization things take a quick turn for the worse, and we cease to be in the presence of a "wannabe utopical society", having instead to be unwilling witnesses to the birth of a new totalitarian society.

At that moment, the pigs even change some of the commandments. For example, the fourth commandment turns into "No animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets", and the sixth commandment says "No animal shall kill another animal without cause". Now, the commandments can be reduced to "Four legs good, two legs better". Finally, all the commandments will be replaced with one: "All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

All in all, I consider "Animal farm" extremely interesting, even though it is somewhat sad and pessimistic. The language is clear, and you won't find yourself wondering what the author meant by a phrase, or needing to read a paragraph again. From my point of view, that makes the reading process even more enjoyable.

Despite that, I believe that this book will be considerably more appreciated by those with some basic knowledge regarding the Russian Revolution. Only then will the reader be able to take full advantage of what this short fable can offer him, due to the fact that he will realize without too much effort that some of the fictional characters in "Animal Farm" were inspired by historical characters. For example, Napoleon (one of the pigs) was quite possibly inspired by Stalin, and Snowball (another pig) by Trosky. When you read this book, try to find the characters that represent the proletariat, the Communist Party, the intellectuals, etc... :)

On the whole, I regard this book as one of those you just need to read, but that fortunately you can also enjoy. The messages implicit in "Animal farm" are many, and the questions it makes you pose yourself are even more. But then, what better than a book that makes you THINK ?

- by M. B. Alcat



"Pig"-headed Beasts

Animal Farm, a book full of "pig"-headed beasts! When reading this book my emotions ranged from being sympathetic with the animals in the beginning to pitying the animals for their stupidity. I felt bad when Mr. Jones would work the animals hard and only feed them enough to get by. But my sympathy turned to pity when the animals fell for Napoleons propaganda (squealer's speeches). After finishing the book I realized how bad totalitarianism is and despised Napoleon for becoming such a power hungry "pig".

My favorite character was probably Clover. She was my favorite because she was pretty smart and didn't always agree with Napoleon right away. She questioned his and the other pigs' behavior. She was the only animal that would realize every time Napoleon changed a commandment. She was also very nurturing and mother like towards the other animals.

I really liked how everything in the book paralleled something in Russian history. It was really interesting to try and figure out what everything meant. I also really liked the book because it was an easy read and I had no trouble trying to figure out what happened.

George Orwell did a wonderful job showing how totalitarianism is bad and eventually will not work in favor of the people or animals in this case. I really enjoyed how he used a story about animals to explain the effects of totalitarianism. It turned something that otherwise could be a boring subject into a story about a farm.

I learned a lot about totalitarianism in this book. I knew that it was bad prior to reading the book but I had no idea how it affected the people the so badly. I always used to wonder why the people never fought against a dictator but after reading this book I realize that sometimes the people don't even now how bad they have it.

I thought that the end of the book was sort of disappointing. I wanted the ending to include a big downfall of Napoleon since he was such a horrible leader to the animals. But instead the book ended with Napoleon being happy and still in control.

There are a few things I still don't understand. I don't know what the windmill in the book represents in Russian history. I also didn't understand the ending. Why couldn't you tell the difference between the pigs and the humans? and What does that represent in history?

I would definitely recommend this book. It is a very interesting book to read in either an English class or a history class. I wouldn't recommend this book to someone to read outside of school because the book is much more interesting when you can compare it to the Russian history.

I don't know if I would read another book by this author. This particular book was interesting because it was so accurately representing an actual country's government. I might read another book by this author if there was another book that included this quality.

Overall Animal Farm is an "oink"-ing good time to read!

- by  Alexa Sevin

1984 by George Orwell [1949]

Among the seminal texts of the 20th century, Nineteen Eighty-Four is a rare work that grows more haunting as its futuristic purgatory becomes more real. Published in 1949, the book offers political satirist George Orwell's nightmare vision of a totalitarian, bureaucratic world and one poor stiff's attempt to find individuality. The brilliance of the novel is Orwell's prescience of modern life--the ubiquity of television, the distortion of the language--and his ability to construct such a thorough version of hell. Required reading for students since it was published, it ranks among the most terrifying novels ever written.

Author: George Orwell
Genre: Dystopian
Publisher: Everyman's Library (November 3, 1992)
Media type: Hardcover, Paperback, Kindle, Audio Book
Pages: 376 pages
ISBN-13: 978-0679417392
Publication date: 8 June 1949

Reader Review

The kind of distressing book you NEED to read...

Eric Arthur Blair was an important English writer that you probably already know by the pseudonym of George Orwell. He wrote quite a few books, but many believe that his more influential ones were "Animal farm" (1944) and "1984" (1948).In those two books he conveyed, metaphorically and not always obviously, what Soviet Russia meant to him.

I would like to make some comments about the second book, "1984". That book was written near his death, when he was suffering from tuberculosis, what might have had a lot to do with the gloominess that is one of the essential characteristics of "1984". The story is set in London, in a nightmarish 1984 that for Orwell might well have been a possibility, writting as he was many years before that date. Or maybe, he was just trying to warn his contemporaries of the dangers of not opposing the Soviet threat, a threat that involved a new way of life that was in conflict with all that the English held dear.

Orwell tried to depict a totalitarian state, where the truth didn't exist as such, but was merely what the "Big Brother" said it was. Freedom was only total obedience to the Party, and love an alien concept, unless it was love for the Party. The story is told from the point of view of Winston Smith, a functionary of the Ministry of Truth whose work involved the "correction" of all records each time the "Big Brother" decided that the truth had changed. The Party slogan said that "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past", and they applied it constantly by "bringing up to date" the past so as to make it coincide with whatever the Party wanted.

From Winston Smith's point of view, many things that scare us are normal. For example, the omnipresence of the "Big Brother", always watching you, and the "Thought Police" that punishes treacherous thoughts against the Party. The reader feels the inevitability of doom that pervades the book many times, in phrases like "Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you".

Little by little, Winston begins to realize that things are not right, and that they should change. We accompany him in his attempt at subversion, and are unwilling witnesses of what that attempt brings about. This book is marked by hopelessness, but at the same time it is the kind of distressing book we all NEED to read...

Why do we need to read "1984"?. In my opinion, basically for two reasons. To start with, Orwell made in this book many observations that are no more merely fiction, but already things that manage to reduce our freedom. Secondly, and closelly linked to my first reason, this is a book that only gets better with the passing of time, as you can read in it more and more implications. One of Orwell's main reasons for writting this "negative utopia" might have been to warn his readers against communism, but many years after his death and the fall of communism, we can also interpret it as a caution against the excessive power of mass media, or the immoderate power of any government (even those who don't defend communism).

Technological innovation should be at the service of men, and allow them to live better lives, but it can be used against them. I guess that is one of Orwell's lessons, probably the most important one. All in all, I think you can benefit from reading this book. Because of that, I highly recommend it to you :)

- by M. B. Alcat


 

The History Lesson You Wish you Had
 
George Orwell's final novel, 1984, was written amidst the anti-communist hysteria of the cold war. But unlike Orwell's other famous political satire, Animal Farm, this novel is filled with bleak cynicism and grim pessimism about the human race. When it was written, 1984 stood as a warning against the dangerous probabilities of communism. And now today, after communism has crumbled with the Berlin Wall; 1984 has come back to tell us a tale of mass media, data mining, and their harrowing consequences.

It's 1984 in London, a city in the new überstate of Oceania, which contains what was once England, Western Europe and North America. Our hero, Winston Smith works in the Ministry of Truth altering documents that contradict current government statements and opinions. Winston begins to remember the past that he has worked so hard to destroy, and turns against The Party. Even Winston's quiet, practically undetectable form of anarchism is dangerous in a world filled with thought police and the omnipresent two-way telescreen. He fears his inevitable capture and punishment, but feels no compulsion to change his ways.

Winston's dismal observations about human nature are accompanied by the hope that good will triumph over evil; a hope that Orwell does not appear to share. The people of Oceania are in the process of stripping down the English language to its bones. Creating Newspeak, which Orwell uses only for examples and ideas which exist only in the novel. The integration of Newspeak into the conversation of the book. One of the new words created is doublethink, the act of believing that two conflicting realities exist. Such as when Winston sees a photograph of a non-person, but must reason that that person does not, nor ever has, existed.

The inspiration for Winston's work ,may have come from Russia. Where Stalin's right-hand man, Trotzky was erased from all tangible records after his dissention from the party. And the fear of telescreens harks back to the days when Stasi bugs were hooked to every bedpost, phone line and light bulb in Eastern Europe.

His reference to Hitler Youth, the Junior Spies, which trains children to keep an eye out for thought criminals- even if they are their parents; provides evidence for Orwell's continuing presence in pop culture. "Where men can't walk, or freely talk, And sons turn their fathers in." is a line from U2's 1993 song titled "The Wanderer".

Orwell assumes that we will pick up on these political allusions. But the average grade 11 student will probably only have a vague understanding of these due to lack of knowledge. It is even less likely that they will pick up on the universality of these happenings, like the fact that people still "disappear" without a trace every day in Latin America.

Overall, however, the book could not have been better written. Orwell has created characters and events that are scarily realistic. Winston's narration brings the reader inside his head, and sympathetic with the cause of the would-be-rebels. There are no clear answers in the book, and it's often the reader who has to decide what to believe. But despite a slightly unresolved plot, the book serves its purpose. Orwell wrote this book to raise questions; and the sort of questions he raised have no easy answer. This aspect can make the novel somewhat of a disappointment for someone in search of a light read. But anyone prepared to not just read, but think about a novel, will get a lot out of 1984.

1984, is not a novel for the faint of heart, it is a gruesome, saddening portrait of humanity, with it's pitfalls garishly highlighted. Its historic importance has never been underestimated; and it's reemergence as a political warning for the 21st century makes it deserving of a second look. Winston's world of paranoia and inconsistent realities is an eloquently worded account of a future we thought we buried in our past; but in truth may be waiting just around the corner.

- by Julie




Consummately Wrong

Orwell wrote 1984 at a miserable juncture in history. The Second World War had just ended, the Europe of his memory was in ruins, the full horror of the holocaust had been laid bare and the victorious powers seemed bent on completing the destruction the planet. The best of optimists would have quailed, and Orwell was no optimist. Surrounded by this stark despairing landscape, he wrote a stark despairing speculation. It was his damning indictment of the dark places of our souls.

It has been called a masterpiece; one of the twentieth century's greatest prophecies; a visionary dystopia that will speak for all time.

I beg to differ.

I do not question the brilliance of Orwell's writing. It exactly conveys the utter dejection and despair that he felt in the aftermath of the war. It is an incredibly taut development of character, theme, setting, and plot that strikes our psyche like a fist to the stomach. It attains exactly the right balance between storytelling and polemic.

It is also all wrong. It felt wrong thirty years ago when I first read it. It feels just as wrong today.

If we ever manage to create hell, it won't be Orwellian. Humans are far more amenable to seduction than oppression. Why spy into every household when one can be persuaded to spy on oneself? Why use techniques as inefficient as torture when far more can be accomplished by appealing to our basest pleasures? Why need doublethink be forced when we will freely embrace it where it is invested with enough allure? And why would the denizens of a misbegotten future bother to listen to voices of discord when their every waking hour can be filled to excess with titillation, shallow ecstasy, and unending bombardment of the senses? The dystopia of the future will not be one of oppression, but of gluttony.

An observant person, looking at the here and now, might conclude that hell has already arrived. But it has arrived via Huxley, not Orwell. We already have the Brave New World of test tube babies, mass pacification, casual sex, and broadcasted voyeurism. The key to keeping a society docile is to make docility so pleasant, so seductive, that we will freely and willingly embrace it over the rigours of a well-examined life. The road to hell is paved with syrup, not vinegar.

Orwell was a brilliant thinker and writer, not just of fiction, but of social and personal commentary. His essays are probably the finest since Montaigne's, and his powers of human observation and his sheer intellect are overwhelming in their stature. This is what makes 1984 so difficult to understand. Such a keen mind should have arrived at very different conclusions from those exposited in this book.

In a really hellish future, there will be no need to destroy malcontents; they will simply be irrelevant.

- by Barry C. Chow

Romance of the Three Kingdoms by Lo Kuan-chung

Romance of the Three Kingdoms, written by Luo Guanzhong in the 14th century, is a Chinese historical novel based on the events in the turbulent years near the end of the Han Dynasty and the Three Kingdoms era of Chinese history, starting in 169 and ending with the reunification of the land in 280.

The story (part historical, part legend, and part myth) chronicles the lives of feudal lords and their retainers, who tried to replace the dwindling Han Dynasty or restore it. While the novel actually follows literally hundreds of characters, the focus is mainly on the three power blocs that emerged from the remnants of the Han Dynasty, and would eventually form the three states of Cao Wei, Shu Han, and Eastern Wu. The novel deals with the plots, personal and army battles, intrigues, and struggles of these states to achieve dominance for almost 100 years. This novel also gives readers a sense of how the Chinese view their history in a cyclical lense. The famous opening lines of the novel summarize this view: The world under heaven, after a long period of division, will be united; after a long period of union, will be divided.

Romance of the Three Kingdoms is acclaimed as one of the Four Great Classical Novels of Chinese literature; it has a total of 800,000 words and nearly a thousand dramatic characters (mostly historical) in 120 chapters. It is arguably the most widely read historical novel in late imperial and modern China.


Author: Lo Kuan-Chung
Translator: C. H. Brewitt-Taylor
Genre: Historical
Publisher: Tuttle Publishing (April 15, 2002)
Media type: Paperback
Pages: 1388 pages (2 volumes)
ISBN-13: 978-0804834674 (Book 1), 978-0804834681 (Book 2)
Publication date: 14th century

Reader Review

 

A Fabulous Read

I think that all Westerners should be exposed to this classic of the East. Without a doubt, "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is one of the very best works of literary art that the human mind had ever produced.

A short synopsis is in order. The novel centers around a rather short, turbulent time in ancient China, following the collapse of the Han Dynasty and predating the rise of the Jin dynasty, the period known as the "Three Kingdoms". In order to rise up against the now-corrupt Han dynasty, the mystic Zhang Jiao began what is known as the "Yellow Turban rebellion". In response to this menace, heroes of China gathered in order to put down this threat. Among these heroes are the virtuous Liu Bei, the loyal and familial Sun Jian, and the cruel and wily (but talented) Cao Cao. After the Yellow Turban rebellion is put down, it is realized that the Han dynasty has grown horribly weak and corrupt, and the heroes leave for home with their own ambitions of ruling China. Liu Bei wishes for the old days (he is a distant relative of the Han line), Cao Cao wishes for personal glory and honor, and Sun Jian wishes to rule China in order to leave it to his sons. Many other players enter the drama (hundreds in fact!), but the story really revolves around these three and their spheres of influence.

The author, Luo Guan Zhong, wrote a book that is at once of strategy, history, psychology, warfare. Although battles are always present, even those readers not interested in warfare can find a great deal in this book. Inevitably, the reader will find himself siding with one of the great Kingdoms of Wei, Wu or Shu, and yet will still feel compelled to feel compassion, elation and sorrow for the others, as their fortunes rise and fall with the changing fates. Each time I read the book (six and counting!), I pull for Liu Bei, who brings himself from commoner status to the highest positions in the land despite his tragic flaw of being TOO virtuous! And yet, I cannot deny enjoying reading about Cao Cao, as he gains support and popularity until the battle of Chi Bi, at which point he falls and must rise again. Also, the ending is fabulous, and unexpected.

However, I must warn the first time reader of the complete deluge of names with which he will be accosted. To further complicate matters, different publishers of the book spell the names in different ways (e.g. Cao Cao=T'sao T'sao, Chuko Lee-ong=Zhuge Liang). I was aided in this struggle by the fact that I had played a game with these characters, so that I was familiar with some of them. The author revels in his knowledge of history, and expects the same of his readers, but the reader may feel completely overwhelmed. Just keep in mind the three main characters, and try to remember who follows whom, and you should do fine (however, it is frustrating when the character Xun Yu introduces the character Xun You, etc.).

"Empires wax and wane, states cleave asunder and coalesce". The first statement in the book is as true today as it was 2000 years ago. If you are a reader who prides himself on his knowledge of the classics, I can honestly say that your mental library is incomplete until you read this book. So, what are you waiting for?

-- by M. A Jenkins "southerndudeman"


 


Confusing For Spelling and Comprehensive For Pronunciation Ideas


Romance of Three Kingdoms is not just the novelized version of the history record "Three Kingdoms". It overtook the heart of both Chinese and Japanese. In Japan even younger generation who rarely read literature enjoy the story in the form of either comic books or in popular PC games. In China many of the Chinese Opera comes from the part of this story.
The story is based on the history of ancient China around late 2nd century to late 3rd century when the Chinese continent was divided by three strong kingdoms,Shu(Gui in Japanese),Wu(GO in Japanese) and Wei(SHOKU in Japanese).

I am familiar with the version of Eiji Yoshikawa, the author of Musashi, focusing more on the story of Liu Bei(Wei emperor),Guan Yu, Zhang Fei, and Zhuge Liang. Liu Bei, an heir of Han Dynasty ruling clan, is a humane leader supported by Guan Yu, deft both in brain and might maybe eastern version of Knight, Zhang Fei,short tempered but really strong warrior, and Zhuge Liang the master of strategy.

Rivaling Lie Bei is another giant Cao Cao outstanding ruler who nearly took hold of the whole Chinese continent but blocked by the allied forces of Wu and Wei in 208. Cao Cao is a bit demonized in this story but he is in fact one of the greatest rulers China ever had comparable to Napoleon. While Lie Bei who has little power gradually gains by charming a lot of talented people by his couteousness yet with propaganda tactics to demonize Cao Cao, Cao Cao took advantage of courting the Emperor and with the finest staff collected from the whole continent. Cao Cao's Wei will be overthrown by Sima clan who eventually subdue both Shu and Wu but Lie Bei, Guan Yu and Zhuge Liang are still loved and idealized by Chinese public.

On first reading you will be enjoying the way the characters outsmart the other camps. On second reading you will be struck by the humanity upon which the story is based. It is much more than a legend. It will surely get you closer to the mind of either Chinese and Japanese. But be careful. The way character name is pronounced differ between Chinese and Japanese. Such as Cao Cao is pronounced in Japanese as SOSO.

----------------

Now I must add a few things for newer 3k fans who encountered this epic through koei games. Koei adopts Pinyin system for three kingdom character names and pinyin method has almost subdued English speaking community. Brewitt Taylor uses Wade system differeing so much from the way the character names were currently spelled. For example. Cao Cao is spelled T'sao T'sao. As you can see older system is useful in pronunciation ideas.

Verdict: Excellent translation getting you much closer to this Chinese epic. Must-read for chivalry novel fans.

Rating: 94 out of 100. A bit cut by spelling confusion as I mentioned.
Recommended: For wide variety of readers.  

-- by susumu-