Here's to the New Year!

And to reply to eyeball's question- The answer to life the universe and everything is.... (drumroll) 42! Or so says Google (and Douglas Adams ) - and if Google says so, it must be true!

And in asnwer to his other question - yes the Christmas shopping is done- it took until after New Year because its not just pre-Christmas shopping, but the Post-Christmas sales, returns and exchanges as well... and now 'm all shopped out(or my bank account is anyway).

Speaking of shopping, I was very appropriately reading Sophie Kisella's 'Shopaholic' . I first read this about 4 years ago, when I didn't have a credit card, and was unlikely to be tempted by any sale but a book-sale; and I found it hugely funny then. This time though, I could relate. It was almost alarming, as I giggled my way through Becky's adventures from the Shopper's Hell to Heaven (shopaholic gets multimillionaire boyfriend), I was thinking, "This happened to me!' (not including the multimillionaire boyfriend).

I also got done with 'Ink Exchange' by Melissa Marr. Its the sequel to 'Wicked Lovely , which was a bit edgy and dark, without totally tipping over, and that I had enjoyed a lot.

'Ink Exchange' isn't as good though. For one thing it's written from the point of view of a set of different characters, with a decidedly different set of agendas, and the old heroes come off looking 1)incompetent 2)manipulative, neither of which are very heroic qualities. None of this would be a problem, if I was able to feel very sympathetic to the protagonists of this book, but well, I didn't really. The plot's just getting further complicated, and its all set up for yet another sequel, so obviously, that it's annoying. Why can't a book just be complete in itself?

The Romance novel and me

Admittedly I'm no conoisseur of the romance novel, in fact it is a genre I usually desperately avoid. But simply by virtue of being female, and the target audience for these books, I think I'm perfectly qualified to comment on them.

I'm not referring here, to classics like Jane Austen and Gone With the Wind, or even fairly middle-brow chick-lit like Georgette Heyer. I'm talking about Mills and Boon (that staple distraction of college classes) and Silhouette and Barbara Cartland and Danieele Steel(though these may actually have plot) and so on.

There's a fairly typical progression of so called storyline on these novels, most of which can be deduced from the first chapter or so. Woman( beautiful, virtuous, lonely) meets man (tall handsome, rich). They're thrown together, fall in love, have a couple of misunderstandings, make up, live happily ever after. End of story.

That's every love story really, and the utter obviousness aside, it doesn't really bother me. Its always good for a bedtime read when you just want to empty your head.

What does bother me is this : See, I've read the Mills and Boons of my mother's time, I 'rescued' them when they were gathering dust in the store room, and read them secretly when I was supposed to be doing more productive things.

And I've read the romance novels of today. Nothing has changed. In twenty years, nothing has changed (except for the somewhat more explicit scenes- but we'll come to that in a bit).

I mean, it really bothers me that twenty years on, and inspite of women's lib, feminism etc. these books still feature the knight in armour on a white horse racing to rescue the damsel in distress. It maybe a snowstorm, a runaway horse, an unwanted admirer, a cruel family... it never seems to happen the other way round. Oh wait... she rescues him from his loneliness, from himself, from the job that's taken too much out of him... sigh, how romantic.

So much for our much vanted independence. Apparently the vast majority of women only want a man to fulfill the fairytale we have imagined our lives to be (with ourselves as Cinderella as likely as not).

Its really odd, when you compare it with Young Adult fantasy novels, stuff which is supposed to be real escapist literature. Somehow in books actually based on fairytales, Shannon Hales' 'The Goose Girl'and 'The Princess Academy', Robin McKinley's ' Spindle's End' are all based off fairy tales, and they have a good component of romance(though admittedly its not all of it, and they have more plot to work with), but their women have character and they manage to rescue themselves usually. And its not like you need a major in English Literature to read these books either; they're also written for the casual reader. I don't understand why, when providing teens with good role models, it's alright to tell adult women that they can remain perfectly helpless, because there's a handsome prince for every beautiful woman (if she's got model looks and he's a millionaire- don't poor men and fat women have a right to romance?)

Its not that all romance novels are particularly bad. I'm decidedly partial to humour and think that it excuses a great many flaws, for example Sophie Kisella's 'Shopaholic' series. (Also Goergette Heyer- although her heroes tend not be be handsome and brooding- and her heroines not always beautifu, which are always pluses in my book- speaking of which, what've people got against happy men?).

The other thing that bother's me a lot is -ah, how do I put this delicately- umm, the bodice ripper part of it I guess... the fact that this woman has been saying "no, no, no" and he goes on ,(At that's ok? Excuse me?), and then its all ok because she's actually in love woth him, blah,blah, blah( hallo? some respect for the woman's opinions here?) what sort of an example is being set over here, anyway?

And lets not even get into the ummm... blush-inducing R-rated scenes ok? I mean, I infinitely prefer Barbara Cartalnd (though they may all be Princesses and Earls and Dukes and Knights ) but to (sort of) quote the Lady herself "The ladies are Ladies and the men are gentlemen"

In my crystal Ball

From the books that I have finished, coming to those I want to read (or re-read) over the next few months- the first would be ‘Siddhartha’. I already have it, its been sitting on my bookshelf for a while now, just waiting to be picked up.

Then, I want to read all those books that are shortly going to become movies, starting with Phillippa Gregory’s ‘The Other Boelyn Girl’ and the others in her series about King Henry VIII wives etc. I’ve seen those books in Barnes and Noble many, many times, but been too lethargic to pick them up. Now, however, there is some urgency in me to read the book before seeing the movie.

So many books are being made into movies this fall- I’ll have to read Beowulf (though that was one that I have long wanted to), and re-read The Golden Compass (by Phillip Pullman) and The Dark is Rising (Susan Cooper).

I’m actually amazed that the Golden Compass is being made at all – with all its negative references to an evil church (in a parallel universe to be fair) – though apparently it did run into some controversy over that here http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/his_dark_materials_the_golden_compass/news/1664784/

But given the popularity of turning books into movies, I’m surprised that one author who hasn’t been made it on the silver screen is Georgette Heyer (except for a version of Arabella and a spoof of The Reluctant Widow)- ‘The Masqueraders’ would be perfect on screen, so would ‘These Old Shades’ (they could even do a trilogy with ‘The Devil’s Cub’ and ‘The Infamous Army’– that seems like the norm these days) , or ‘Friday’s Child’ or ‘The Grand Sophy or…. And I could keep going. Just a matter of time I guess!