Welcome to the Cozy Mystery

For the longest time, I only read mystery books. 

Nancy Drew books were some of the first - their eye catching art motivating me to learn how to read. The logic was easy to follow and occasionally, I could solve the mystery before the big reveal. After Nancy Drew and Encyclopedia Brown, I jumped right into Agatha Christi. 

Agatha Christi is the Queen of mystery series. She wrote Hercule Poirot, "And Then There Were None", and of course, the little granny knitting away and catching murderers, Miss. Marple. My grandparents had a ton of Agatha Christi books for me to pick from. And when I went through all of those books, I started going through the other mystery series they had stacked up in the many different bookshelves scattered throughout their house. 

Eventually I found my way to "The Cat Who..." series by Lillian Jackson Braun. I loved how easy to read the books were and enjoyed the narration of the main character Jim Qwilleran and hearing about the antics of his two Siamese cats Koko and Yum Yum. 

It was this series that formerly introduced me to the Cozy Mystery genre and its many wonderful tropes. Since my family seems to be drawn to these types of stories, they are the books I most commonly read outside of school (even to this day). 

My latest venture into this genre was "A Margin for Murder" the 8th book in the Beyond the Page Bookstore Mystery by Lauren Elliott. I'd say the book was fairly standard as far as Cozy Mystery Tropes are concerned, though not all of the big tropes were present. 

An alliteration for the title keeps it in the reader's memory better.

I most associate Cozy Mysteries with the following: 

• Amateur sleuth. Bonus points if this sleuth is a woman in her mid-30s (it seems to be the most popular main character right now in this genre)
• Romantic ties to law enforcement (either a new boyfriend/girlfriend or an ex). Could be a police officer, a government agent, or a lawyer. 
• A hobby that links the sleuth to the mystery. Bonus points for ties to writing, books, knitting, cooking, fashion, or home remodeling (can also be an occupation).
• The sleuth owns their own business or is a writer. I'm lumping these two together because this occupation allows for the main character to go off on adventures without risking their livelihood (at least too much). Typically these jobs are seen as quaint like tea room operators, fashion reporters, columnists, bookstore owners, or wedding planners. Home remodeling can be a hobby or an occupation. Bonus points for coffeeshop owners.
• An animal side kick. Typically this is a dog or a cat, but there was one book I read that included a bird as the cute animal companion. 
• Something to do with the paranormal or psychics. I've read series with witches, tarot readers, and psychics. Even "The Cat Who..." series had a cat that might have had some psychic abilities. Extra bonus points for ghosts and poltergeist activity.
• Small towns or cities - it wouldn't be a Cozy Mystery if everyone didn't know everyone else. That way there are plenty of local suspects as well as shifty out-of-towners to be vary of. Think Cabot Cove in "Murder She Wrote". The majority of "The Cat Who..." books take place in Mouse County which is "300 miles North of everywhere".

There are other tropes that I've noticed over the years. Cozy Mystery titles usually have some kind of pun that centers on the main character's occupation or hobby and the mystery at large. At some point the sleuth becomes a suspect. Or (my current least favorite) the too many boyfriends problem - and it's always boyfriends for a mid-30s super-sleuth. 

However many predictable tropes these series have or how complicated it can be solve the mystery (sometimes its really obvious and other times the author pulls one of Christi's famous last minute clues), I enjoy returning to the genre every so often. When I go into a Cozy Mystery, I expect all of those things (yes, even the too many boyfriend).

What keeps me coming back to the many series in this genre are the characters and how they interact with each other. 

Sometimes its a fun aunt/niece duo, other times its a pet causing all kinds of trouble, or it could be a bored retiree looking for a little excitement. The characters typically have a ton of friends with big personalities. The suspects are all distinct and memorable. And the murder victims sometimes deserve what's coming to them. 

With the Cozy Mystery market so saturated, it takes a lot to stand out in the crowd. I've noticed that more Cozy Mysteries are branching out into other subgenres. I've already mentioned the witches and paranormal angles, but historical fiction is equally becoming a popular subgenre to host a Cozy. 

Personally, I'd like to see more mixing genres for Cozies. Science Fiction Cozies could take place on a space station with plenty of locked room scenarios (there are actually a few Star Trek books that might count as Cozies in this example). Western Cozies could offer a new perspective on law enforcement in the wild west. Fantasy Cozies apparently already exist, but could you imagine the potential for Urban Fantasy Cozies like the "Dresden Files" meets Miss Marple? 

I'm not sure how horror might work as a Cozy subgenre, as a Cozy Mystery is supposed to be relaxing and not high-stakes, but I'm sure some ambitious author (not me) could make it work.

Have you guys read Cozy Mysteries and if so, what were some of your favorite series? Did your Cozies mix genres at all? What are some of your favorite tropes in the genre. Leave a comment and let me know.

Until next week. 

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y'all like hearing from me.

Welcome to Arizona

I recently went on a trip to Arizona. It was my first time in "The Grand Canyon State" as well as visiting the Grand Canyon. 

This lovely trip was a birthday present from my aunts. We flew into Phoenix from the different places along the East Coast and Midwest where we actually live and made it our base city. It helped that two of my cousins live in the downtown center of the city and one of my aunts went to school in the state (sorry - no dates will be revealed) and still has friends in the area. 

We then traveled all over the state, seeing the sites, and seeing as much as we could - along with a few more family members. 

My first impression of Phoenix was that it's huge - much bigger than I expected. My aunt and I drove half an hour from the downtown center and we were still in the city. I also enjoyed the fact that the airport is called Sky Harbor. Don't know why I find the name amusing - probably because I half expected to see the ocean (despite being in a landlocked state) around every mountain. 

My second impression of Arizona was...man is this state green!

Do y’all see the deer?

Now, I don't mean that in a clean energy or sustainability way (though I did see a windmill farm and lots of houses with solar panels on top). I mean this in the actual color. 

My (admittedly) stereotypical impression of Arizona prior to actually setting foot in the state was that it was going to be varying shades of brown, reddish-brown, and tan. There would be cacti randomly spaced about, but not much. Oh, and tumbleweeds. 

Granted Arizona has all of those things (though I didn't see any tumbleweeds), however, it is also very green with tons of flowering plants and even an area that gets enough snow for winter sports. Now, all this green might have been because I had been in the state at the height of spring, but it was not at all what I was expecting. 

I have long maintained that each State within the United States has a unique culture that can't be interchanged for one another. Oregon and Washington might both be in the Northwest and have tons of coffee shakes. But one has a culture of letting you camp anywhere and shooting a gun into the sand dunes (Oregon), while the other is a rainforest that closes their campgrounds at the end of October (Washington). This observation can also be true within states (never mistake the cultures of eastern/central Pennsylvania with the heavily influenced by Pittsburg western part of the state). 

Arizona has it's own unique culture and flavor that can't be found anywhere else in the United States. Prior to coming to the state, my only exposure to the desert was Las Vegas. I didn't like Las Vegas. I found it hot, bright (even at night), and gaudy. I recognize that Las Vegas is also only one small corner of Nevada, but it's still a representative of that State's culture. No where in Arizona felt like Las Vegas. 

The only city that I could compare to another in Arizona was New Orleans and Tucson - and that's a surface level comparison as I didn't spend enough time in Tucson proper (I was out hiking). However, the colorful houses, street art, and attitude of the residences (not the tourists) reminded me of the Crescent City, except instead of French influence it was Spanish/Mexican and the location was a desert instead of a swamp. As I wrote, its a surface level comparison, but that doesn't detract from the similarities in beauty that both cities have.

I also need to address the canyon in the state. 

The Grand Canyon is fantastic. I have never seen anything like it before. Pictures, documentaries, and descriptions have nothing on actually standing on the edge of the rim and seeing how unbelievably big and colorful it is.

There's a reason The Grand Canyon is one of the seven natural wonders of the world and it does not disappoint. 

If you end up going to The Grand Canyon, I recommend going to the National Park. The paths are mostly paved, there's plenty of places to grab a bite to eat (though wait times will vary), there's a free bus service, and there's still a small danger that you could fall off the rim (sorry no guard rails). It is well worth a visit and you can either stay in the park at one of the hotels or campsites, stay right outside the park and take the shuttle in, or (do what my family did and) stay in Flagstaff and drive up same day. 

Finally, I want to mention one of my favorite spots in Arizona. I didn't even know I was going to it until my aunts decided it would be a fun side trip. Jerome Arizona was an old copper mining town built into a mountain. The roads reminded me a little of mountain towns in West Virginia. A lot of the town claims to be haunted, but (for once) I wasn't interested in the ghost stories. I was more interested in the local art, mining history, and food. The town is incredibly quirky with tones of ruins (including the remains of an old saloon with toilets placed in the open basement - don't know what that was about), silly signs, and lots of skeletons (the kind you find at Party City). I loved it and probably could have spent an entire weekend exploring everything. Unfortunately, I only had an afternoon. 

Is this an art project??? I need answers!

Arizona isn't just a desert state dripping in sandy browns. It's alive with flowering cacti, cooing doves, wild horses, mischievous pigs called javelinas, and tiny deer. There's a lot more greenery than I imagined as well as color buildings. Native American culture is more prevalent/naturally integrated than in other parts of the country (*cough* east coast *cough*).  

If you plan on going to Arizona, I recommend some of the following: 

• Wear lots of sunscreen, no matter your skin type
• Have a sweatshirt or jacket handy for the cooler nights and higher altitude parts of the state (like Flagstaff)
• Have a hat, but mind the wind - especially at The Grand Canyon
• Have plenty of water
• Do not approach the wildlife
• Do not appropriate Native American spiritual beliefs and practices (unless you are originally from that culture)
• Go hiking
• Do not put your hands anywhere you can't see because a lot of the plant life has spikes/needles, there are a ton of venomous creatures (snakes, spiders, and scorpions)
• Wildfires can and do happen
• Check out a historic mining town
• Enjoy the local art

Have you guys been to Arizona? If so, what was your favorite part of the State? 

I love having the opportunity to travel, though the past few years have made that difficult. I hope to see more of my home country over the years as well as explore the world outside of the United States. Though there's no place like home, going to far off places is a wonderful adventure. 

Until next week.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y'all like hearing from me.

Welcome to the Many Adaptations of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

 Did y'all know that there's a musical version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde starring David Hasselhoff and can be found on YouTube (link here)? Well there is and it's as ridiculous as you think it is. Go check it out if you want to spend two and a half hours of your time watching a man angst about his life and commit murder while drinking a special potion that makes him look like something out of the uncanny valley (at least that's the impression the book gives). 

If you'd rather watch the twenty-two minute summary from Musical Hell on YouTube, you're welcome to do that instead.

What I find interesting about this version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde isn't it's misstep in stunt casting, but how far it deviates from the original source material.

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a compact novella by Robert Louis Stevenson. The same guy who famously wrote Treasure Island. Mr. Stevenson is probably one of my favorite late Victorian writers (along with Stoker, Carroll and Doyle). His prose are, for the most part, are easy to read for modern audiences. The one exception I'm familiar with is the short story "Thrawn Janet", which is written entirely in Scots. (I internally screamed the entire time I tried to read this one.) 

Most people know of Stevenson's work. Treasure Island has had many adaptations and The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde has become well intertwined with horror pop culture. My first introduction to both stories was through children's media. The Muppets did fantastic adaptation of Treasure Island, while Scooby and the Gang met Jekyll and Hyde in the episode "Nowhere to Hyde". Interestingly enough, The Scooby Doo episode is actually somewhat closer to the original mechanics and motivations of the story than that musical adaptation I mentioned at the start of this post.

Don't believe me? 

I could tell you to read the book, but that takes a lot more time than you probably want to spend (though you should read the book because it is excellent). Instead, you can watch the wonderfully sarcastic summary by Overly Sarcastic Productions on YouTube (click here). 

Yes, the big twist at the end has been spoiled by pop culture. However, that's not what makes the book so interesting. It's the suspense. We know Hyde is bad news, but what evil will he do next? Will he ever be caught? And will Dr. Jekyll put an end to Hyde for good?

It's also a little more complicated than a split personality (or Dissociative Identity Disorder as is the mental illness's proper name). 

However, this fore knowledge of the main twist somewhat necessitates the changes to the plot. Most people know going in what the connection between Jekyll and Hyde is (I'm not going to outright type it out because you might be the 0.0001% of my readers who aren't familiar with the story). So, adaptions need to keep the audience interested in the story another way.

Insert the love interest(s).

The original novella has very few female characters. The two most important are a little girl and a maid - neither of these characters have a name. 

Thus adaptations love to add a lady or two - usually as a love interest (or two) - to add some drama to the plot. This has been done in a lot of movie adaptations, the previously mentioned hilarious musical, and some cartoon adaptations. The Scooby Doo episode included a maid character who is a suspect in the mystery. In Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet the Wolfman, their school is putting on a stage version of the story that includes a love interest.

These love dramas are not in the original story at all. The main drama starts out as a mystery that eventually leads to the questioning of human nature. The question drifts from who Mr. Hyde is and becomes what makes a person evil and can that part be carved out. Dr. Jekyll struggles with personal issues (that are left incredibly vague in the novella). 

I find that most adaptations drift from this theme to focus more on the added love drama. Which is a shame because the original theme is much more interesting.

Recently, I read a graphic novel adaptation of Stevenson's novella. Klimowski and Schejbal collaborated to create hauntingly beautiful drawings (which is the reason I brought the book in the first place). It's an extremely faithful adaptation, including characters who are typically left out such as Mr. Enfield and Dr. Lanyon. It even has one of my favorite lines ("if he be Mr. Hyde, then I shall be Mr. Seek"). However, the novella in its original state doesn't seem to take well to a visual adaptation and the narrative felt a little too streamlined.

They also made (in my opinion) the mistake of showing Dr. Jekyll's struggles...and they aren't all that shocking.

Okay, they're shocking by Victorian standards (maybe). But one of the most creepy aspects of Stevenson's original work is how vague he is about the evil being committed. The author leaves it up to the reader to fill in the gaps and that makes for a more interesting experience while reading the text. 

The graphic novel decided to just show their readers this "evil" and I didn't find it all that "evil". If they had left it vague, my imagination would have definitely come up with something a lot worse (especially with the creepy charcoal drawings to go off of). Instead they chose something pretty generic - even for the Victorian standards of the time. 

Which brings me back to why any adaptations of this novella need to have some narrative changes to keep the reader interested. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a very internally driven narrative. It's a fight between the good and evil within a person rather than an external one. Any visual medium has to add an external drama element to draw out the story.

The original novella on its own is really good and I do recommend y'all check it out if you haven't yet. If you have read the novella, let me know what you think of it. Also let me know if you enjoyed Mr. Hasselhoff on Broadway. I can assure you that I was entertained. 

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y'all like hearing from me.

Welcome to the Perceived Passage of Time

 I admit that I've been a little MIA the past month. I swear I have a good reason, but since I don't have to share the details of my life online, I'm not going to explain myself.

Okay - maybe I'll explain myself a smidge. 

I lost track of time. So complain in my comments section.

As I've gotten older, I've realized how precious a resource time is. Much like the money I earn (and then spend), I have to budget my time. I may want to go to bed after midnight, but if I have an 8:00AM meeting, I'm going to be regretting that time I didn't spend sleeping.

Yesterday, I felt like I had all the time I needed this weekend to get everything I wanted to done. I took my time cleaning parts of my apartment and took a very long walk around the neighborhood. Today, as I write this blog post, I notice that I do not in fact have as much time as I wanted. I'm behind on the amount of cleaning and writing I'd hoped to do.

I still did a lot of stuff. My apartment is relatively clean, I was able to take some time to socialize, and I even managed a lovely 1-hour nap (nap time becomes cool again sometime in college - no lies). However, I didn't get all the chores I wanted to done and the only thing I've written is this blog post (which you are now reading).

Where did the time go? Why did it slip through my fingers like ocean waves?

Why is it that the moments I want to hold onto most, fly away the quickest?

I know there's a term for this phenomena, but I'm too lazy lacking the time to look it up. However, I've heard plenty of people complain about how quickly time flies. I've listened to people older (and occasionally wiser) than me inform me that time speeds up as you age.

But how? Physics has taught me that time is a fixed unit...unless relativity is involved. Did I gain so much mass that I'm able to perceive time differently from when I was a child. Or is this a psychological phenomenon connected to the Fibonacci sequence of age? When I'm two years old, half my live happened in one year. So I feel like a year is forever. As a six year old, a month seemed forever because one month was 1% of my life experience? Now a month is less than 0.3% of my life and seems to go by like a NASCAR loop.

I first began to note the passage of time, after my friend's 13th birthday party. I distinctly remember the party - only because I fell asleep first and was the first person to wake up in the morning (boy do I miss being able to do that - my college years really messed up my sleep schedule). I also distinctly remember thinking about the party a week later and wondering why it felt like time had passed so fast. 

Then another week passed...and another.

Suddenly, it was a whole month from my friend's birthday party and I felt like I was feeling time go by. It was a disorienting feeling - one I still get when I want to revisit a very specific memory (usually happy, usually very detailed). 

The best way I can describe the feeling of time passing is trying to stay very still while also being pulled by an invisible force hard enough that I can feel my body losing the battle to stay planted in one spot. The closest examples I could give are feeling a powerful tide going out to see or being on one of those UFO carnival rides - you feel the force moving you, but are stuck against the wall.

I don't know if anyone else has felt this. Most people I've spoken to talk about blinking and suddenly time has leapt forward - your little baby is a sassy preteen. I don't have kids. I blinked and went from living in Maryland to New Jersey. Another blink, and I'm back in my home state of Virginia. I'm curious where this next blink finds me, but I'm also weary. 

I don't want time to slip by too fast, yet it seems to be. In another ten years, a month will be roughly 0.2% of my lived life. More events will have happened, more milestones met. A lot can change in ten years, and just as much can stay the same. I rarely noticed my growth spurts as a little kid, but my relatives who rarely saw me certainly did. 

I've started having that realization too. The kids I babysat as a teen are graduating high-school and college. Some have even become parents themselves. My youngest first cousin is in university and my oldest second cousin once removed is in high-school (I missed out on his whole childhood). Places in my head exist as they did years ago, not as they do today because I haven't been there in so long. When I picture my grandparent's house, it's forever yellow, though the family that lives there now painted it brown.

Time is not a constant. Our perception of time changes with age. For some of us it's a blink. For others, it's a pull that we notice while trying to live in a moment - until that moment is a new one.

I am excited for the future. I enjoy reviewing the past, though I'm sad I can't return to those moments. I love being in the present, even if I sometimes start to mourn the moment because I know how quickly it's over.

Time is a currency. Time is a constant. Time changes with speed and mass. Humans can't control time anymore than we can control the weather.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y'all like hearing from me.

Until next week.

Welcome to False Spring

 Last week was the solar equinox. 

Spring has "officially" begun in the Northern Hemisphere.

I celebrated the changing of the seasons by spending time outside and planting my balcony garden. I'm hoping to have some tiny tomatoes, lots of herbs, green beans, lettuce, and strawberries. I also included flowers to attract pollinators like butterflies and bees. 

And this weekend I had to bring everything in because Mother Nature decided it needed to go below freezing most of this weekend.

Thanks climate change.

Yes, changing climate is part of this annoyingly inconsistent weather patterns we've been experiencing. It's more of a thorn in my side than a tried and true problem. 

To save my garden from a late frost, all I had to do was move all of the pots inside my apartment. Sure they get less light, but they'll stay warm and eventually go back outside without any problems. It's an inconvenience to move everything, but it's not that difficult of a thing for me to do.

I have a solution for this last hold out of winter. 

But what if I couldn't move my garden? What if I had already planted it right into the ground instead of pots?

Well, a quick Google search would help me find tips to protect my garden from the late frost. There are loads of tips and tricks to protect plants from a sudden frost as it's become an issue to have a short warm spell followed by a cold snap. At worst, I have to replant my garden.

But what if it wasn't a garden? What if I had planted a whole field of crops that I depended on to harvest at the end of the season and I couldn't replant the crops? What if it wasn't just cold snaps I needed to worry about, but extreme heat or droughts? What if there was a biblical event that wiped out everything my livelihood depends on?

Why am I even thinking about these things if all I have going for me is a tiny balcony garden?

My garden is a hobby. I don't depend on it for financial needs or food. It's something nice to have that occupies my time and occasionally lets me add some extra flares to my meals. 

However, the food that I don't personally grow, I get at the store or farmer's market. If I buy my food from the store, that food might come from anywhere in the world. The food's journey from it's origin point to my dinner plate is long and has a lot of points of interest that can add to the costs I spend at checkout. These added points might be customs fees, fuel for transportation, storage costs, and enough money to pay every person who's labor went into growing, packaging, and transporting the food. Each point adds an extra layer to the price you pay at checkout...and then tax is added.

Of course, I might be able to cut out some of the costs and points of interest by getting my food directly from the farmers. Especially since each step in the process to get the food from the grocery store from other countries contributes to higher inflation. There's also less risk of food spoiling on a long journey than to buy it locally.

Except, I'm not hear to argue the virtues of where to buy your apples. 

And boy don't these apples look good!

I'm more pointing out how a cold snap might affect my ability to buy apples from my local farmer. Depending on the circumstances, the price of apples may go up, there might be shortages, or both scenarios might occur. The worst case is that there are no apples and the farm has to close down because they can't pay their bills. That adds to the overall decrease supply of apples that can be bought overall which further drives up price if demand doesn't change.

But importing food should help with supply right? Surely if we can't grow our food locally, we can still find sources to help with supply?

Yes, but there are risks. 

We've seen during the pandemic the problems associated with supply chain issues. Ports were overflowing with cargo that wasn't being unloaded because people weren't able to work. This lead to shortages at the grocery store and eventual higher prices. We're also dealing with higher fuel costs which is also going to drive up prices.

Oh, and now there's a war going on in one of the highest grain producing countries in the world.

All of these things are going to cause food shortages. Add in our good friend climate change and suddenly crops that were once easy to grow in a specific location, can't anymore. In my home state of Virginia, we've been having issues growing tomatoes since the early 2010s because of the changing climate. Will states famous for their tomatoes like New Jersey start having these same issues in the 2020s? 2030s?

The simple solution might be to have farmers change to crops that better suit the new climate.

Except that's not really that simple. We're seeing weather events that are unprecedented, heat waves and droughts that can take out the hardiest of plants - even the ones we're genetically modifying to account for these climate changes (humans have been messing with plant and animal genetics since we started farming - why do you think corn has a husk). 

If crops fail, people starve because demand for food doesn't go away. People need to eat to survive. 

This leads into many other topics (such as human migration, new diseases, and other catastrophes) that I don't have the time (or mental capacity) to get into. 

Needless to say, climate change is here. We have to adapt. I might be annoyed that I had to move all my plants inside because of a sudden cold snap (that are coming later and later into what should be considered Spring), but this annoyance is also tied to a deep fear that one day we might not be able to keep up the food supply with demand.

What will we eat then?

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y'all like hearing from me.

Until next week. 

Welcome to Banned Books

The past two weeks have been... a lot. Work has kept me busy and prevented me from doom scrolling as much as I normally would. I am keeping informed of the many, many situations going on around the world right now. However, there's very little I can do to directly impact things as they stand. Spending all my time online reading every new news bulletin that pops up is detrimental to my mental health. 

So, instead, I spend my time reading books.

Some of these books are digital, most are paperbacks won in GoodReads competitions. 

I've spent so much time reading early this year, that I'm (currently) four books ahead of my reading goal for the year. (Let's see if this momentum continues through the rest of 2022). I'm not super picky about genre - I'll even read romance under the right circumstances (sadly I just don't like most romance tropes). Cozy mysteries have long been my go to genre and my family likes to pass them around like candy on Halloween. I'm also fond of poetry, episodic fantasy, and horror. 

I've even made a point to read more non-fiction (usually business or science related) books.

Occasionally, I mix in a "classic" book. Last year I had a lot of fun reading "The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" and "The Hound of the Baskervilles" along with my annual reread of "Alice in Wonderland". Sometimes I agree with the book's status as a classic (like "Treasure Island" or "A Christmas Carol"), other times I wonder why they are considered classics (sorry "Great Gatsby"). 

This year, I think I'll try to include some "banned" books as well.

Why would I want to include "banned" or "challenged" books? Mostly to see for myself what the fuss is about. 

I've actually read quite a few books that have been "banned" - usually at school. In fact one of those books I read in twelfth grade English class has been cycling in the news again because my newly elected state's governor ran on a campaign to ban it.

 "Beloved" was one of those books that I was either not mature enough to understand or the literary prowess went completely over my head. That doesn't mean that I disliked the book or felt uncomfortable by it (no, this book was very uncomfortable for MANY reasons). I mean that I didn't fully get or appreciate it. I maintain that if I had been introduced to "Beloved" as a horror novel, I would have enjoyed the book a lot more (it's still uncomfortable and at times disturbing, but a seventeen/eighteen year old can handle the material just fine).

This call to ban "Beloved" and a few other titles I was familiar with, got me curious as to how many banned books I'd actually read. 

Unfortunately, I haven't found a reliable list of banned books. The lists usually include books that have been banned throughout different years or decades for one reason or another. Sometimes the books are only banned in one state or county, but easily obtained in book stores. 

So I picked the list Business Insider shared from The American Library Association (ALA) which list the top 21 books challenged in 2021. On this list of 21 books, I'd read 4.5 (as long as we count the one series of books listed as "one" book, otherwise its 10.5). 

That half book I read was "A Handmaid's Tale" which I tried reading the summer between Freshmen and Sophomore year for summer homework because it was an iconic feminist work, but was so disturbed by it that I just couldn't finish it. That doesn't mean it should be banned, just that I couldn't finish it. Instead, I ended up reading "The Bluest Eye" which is also on the list for 2021. It's also disturbing in some places.

However, the fact that a book is disturbing shouldn't mean that it ends up on a banned list. Sometimes we need to read disturbing material to learn empathy, understand history, and change the future. I didn't like "A Handmaid's Tale", but I did like "The Bluest Eye". I (for the life of me) didn't understand "Beloved" at age seventeen. Maybe if I read it over a decade later, I finally will. 

In recent years, a lot of banned or challenged books have focused on issues of race, gender, and sexual orientation. This seems to reflect what's going on politically in certain states whom I'm most disappointed in. The books I'm not seeing on these lists are the ones that actually advocate for harming others (none of those books will be listed in this blog post).

If you're wondering whether or not I believe in banning books, you've come to the wrong blog post. Yes, there are some books that I find hateful and would not recommend reading. There are also books that are just poorly written and probably shouldn't have gotten passed the editor.

It's not my place to say whether or not these books should be banned.

Because I sometimes find that once you "ban" something or restrict access to it, people (particularly kids who love defying authority figures) will find some way to get their hands on it any way. I'm definitely more interested in "Captain Underpants" now that I know it's been challenged so many times than when it first saw copies of it.

How many "banned" books have you guys read? Any on the 2021 list? Are you interested in reading any of these "banned" books? I know there are other lists out there that have different books on them (and some of those books I've also read), so don't feel limited by the list I've used for this post. 

I think I'm most interested in reading "George" by Alex Gino, "The Hate U Give" by Angie Thomas (it's been on my to read list for a while), and "A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo" by Jill Twiss, illustrated by EG Keller which was commissioned by Jon Oliver.

If you enjoyed this blog post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me.

Until next week. 

Welcome to Machiavelli

A few years ago, I picked up a copy of Machiavelli's The Prince. In popular culture, Machiavelli is seen as one of history's most controversial political figures who wrote things like "it is better to be feared rather than love". Most of this perception comes from analysis done on his most famous work: The Prince. 

However, if you read any of his other work or understand the circumstances that lead him to write The Prince in the first place, you'll find that Machiavelli wasn't the tyrannical power mad ruler people usually associate with his name. He was actually a realist. A realist who loved his home city-state of Florence.  

Machiavelli's most famous work, The Prince, was actually written after he'd been tortured and exiled by a new government that steamrolled in to conquer his beloved republic. It was essentially a very long cover letter telling the new ruler "hey, I actually know what I'm doing and can help you out." 

Unfortunately, (like so many written cover letters by job seekers) the guy Machiavelli wrote The Prince for likely never read it. Though the Vatican did and they promptly banned it - which naturally meant that everyone wanted to read it. 

This is perfect example of how banning a book can backfire.

If you want a brief summary on Machiavelli, I recommend checking out The Overly Sarcastic Productions video on YouTube (click here). Their video was what actually got me interested in reading The Prince in the first place. Prior to their synopsis, my only knowledge of him was through pop culture and his (evil) portrayal in the Immortal Diaries of Nicolas Flamel series. 

My take on The Prince was that I needed to know more Italian pre-renaissance history to understand what was going on and that Machiavelli could be a sarcastic realist to the extreme.

Now, this was my take on the job application that would end of up in the garbage bin. Other people have read The Prince and taken it quite literally or as a way to navigate the worst of humanity.

Stacy Vanek Smith, a reporter from NPR, had her own take on The Prince. One that heavily leaned on the idea that Machiavelli was a realist who genuinely understood how good and bad people can be. She recently released her book: Machiavelli for Women: Defend your Worth, Grow your Ambition, and Win the Workplace. It's a modern take on Machiavelli, adapted for the work place. Princes are now bosses and co-workers fighting for a spot beyond middle management. 

Overall, I thought the book was good for workplace advice, but lacked enough Machiavelli to satisfy me. However, I will concede that she found a lot of great parallels between Machiavelli's observations on princes and the work place. When she incorporated Machiavelli in her analysis and advice, I thought it was spot on.

It also helped me revaluate some of my reading of The Prince. 

I admit that 15th and 16th century Italian history is not something I am an expert in. I know the great artistic masters like Da Vinci, Michelangelo, and Rafael (the guys the Teenage Ninja Turtles are named for). I am also aware that Italy was a mishmash of city states that wouldn't be united for at least another few centuries. Oh, and Pope Alexander VI had kids - one of which, Cesare Borgia, is heavily referenced in The Prince because he conquered the Republic of San Marino in 1503. Popes aren't supposed to have kids and their family dynamic was super messed up.

Smith's book added even more historical context around the Italian political climate of 15th and 16th centuries that Machiavelli lived through. Machiavelli had to be a realist when your entire life could be flipped in an instant. Italian republics rose and fell at the same rate Italian Princes did - often and with little stability. He wanted what was best for his home, Florence.

Machiavelli wasn't evil. He was a smart man hoping to do right by his home. In some ways he succeeded. People still read The Prince - though it is often taken out of context.

Smith's book shows that not all conquerors are found on the battlefield. I think she succeeded in writing a modern workplace take on The Prince and has a great understanding of Machiavelli. There are many things we want in this work, but we can't have any of them without taking a hard look at reality.

Until next week.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y'all like hearing from me.