Monday, 3 December 2012

A description of my December miniature and why I chose February?



Les Très Riches Heures du duc de Berry -  février or February by brothers Limbourgh.

Illumination on vellum


It is a very charming, peaceful scene, suffused  with a great atmosphere of a winter afternoon. What's more it is one of these miniatures which show the life of lower classes from 15th century - a rarity indeed! It is also a very athmospheric picture, appropriate for this time of the year. I decided to do a bit of an analysis this time and bear with me, I haven't done it for ages :).

In the foreground you see a fenced-in small farm with the main house on the left, a barn with sheep in the center and, on the right, four beehives and a dovecote - everything you need to make your living. Behind the main house there is a granary with a smal cupola- so many sheep have to be fed a lot of hay in the winter and they had to store it somewhere, grain for bread too. A flock of dark birds (crows or dark pigeons?) are feeding greedily nest to the barn.Noticeably there are no cows or horses around, maybe indicating that it is one of poorer farms because these were more expensive animals, harder to feed throughout winter than sheep.

The painter cleverly removed one of the walls so we can peek inside the house.
In the foreground a woman, presumably the mistress of the house, and two other people, probably a boy and a girl, are warming themselves in front of a fire. The woman lifts her deep blue dress and a white shift, showing bare legs clad in sturdy shoes, so do her companions; they want to get as much warmth as possible. The woman is looking at an animal, lying near her feet, presumably a house pet kept to catch mice (a marten? a stoat? a dog? It looks like a white marten, it is certainly not a cat but I need help here) .

Now when I come to think about it I am pretty sure the woman is the wife. Her head is covered by a dark headscarf, meaning she is married, and she occupies the best place before the fire. She's done her washing and now she has to rest a bit. The fact that she didn't hesitate to bare her legs might mean just one thing: the pair in the background belong to her family, most propably being her children. Exposing yourself like that before your male servants would be unthinkable.

 Outside, a man with bundles of sticks at his feet cuts down a tree with an ax, while another walks in the snow, blowing on his hands to warm up despite the fact that his upper body and the head are enveloped in a kind of grey-white cloak or a blanket. Just looking at him you can tell how cold it is. A third man in the background drives a donkey, loaded with wood, towards the neighboring village, which is  visible just because of snow-covered roofs and the high, pointed spire of a church.The sky is leaden grey - probably more snow is coming soon.

So where is the master of the house, the husband? My bet is on the man with the donkey. He left his wife comfortable before the fire with younger kids ('sit here, honey dear, I'll be back in no time but no, I can't take you with me, you wouldn't want to catch ague, would you?'), sent two older sons to do outside work ('animals need feeding, you lazy monsters, and logging can't wait as well, move!) but he himself didn't want to bore to death at home any longer. He had a business to attend to, right? He  is going to sell wood on the local market, earn some extra income and maybe visit a tavern or two to drink warm beer, chat with people and listen to the news.

Now compare that quiet but compelling scene with the December painting: hunting the boar.Yuck!



Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, 1 December 2012

Review: Sleight of Hand (Bite Back series 01) by Mark Henwick

A copy of this novel for reviewing purposes was sent to me free of charge by the author via Blodeuedd - thank you very much !  That fact, of course,  didn't influence my review in any way. 

Book info:
Form: pdf
Genre: urban fantasy, paranormal fiction, crime mystery
Target audience: adults

Synopsis:

Amber Farrell is not your ordinary PI. She has been very well trained in one of the US Army super secret units. Unfortunately now the Army don’t want to have anything to do with her although they watch her carefully. She was a cop. Now most cops distrust her. All because of a bloody incident in the South American jungle. She was bitten by something strange and she survived against all odds; now she doesn’t know what to do with her life which is simply slipping out of her hands.

It is not a big secret what she is becoming: a vampire. However even as your average vampire aspirant she is still unusual. The whole process is taking her longer for one thing and she doesn’t seem to need a mentor. She can also identify other vampires by their coppery smell.

As a self-employed PI Amber is doing not very well, but soon she is given a very profitable job. Her new client is Jenniffer Kingslund, a rich local businesswoman with a bunch of problems of her own: normal and paranormal. All of them seem to revolve around one undeveloped location of Jennifer: Silver Hills. Will Amber be able to help her? What will it take?

What I liked:

You might say it is just another paranormal fiction series with a mixture of everyday life in a big American city (Denver) and different fantasy creatures like vamps and werewolves but it was highly readable.

The world building was interesting, especially concerning the Athanate or vampires. The author tried to outline their existence in a fresh way (if it is possible at all with vampires swamping popular literature) and I appreciated his efforts. The criminal mystery actually was overshadowed by that thread, at least for me.

Amber is a highly-trained woman but her proficiency in martial arts and using conventional weapons didn’t come from thin air. It is one of my pet peeves – a more or less ordinary chica is turned into a vampire and in the matter of seconds, practically as soon as she touches a sword, she becomes a warrior extraordinaire. Here at least the author gave his heroine a proper background, making her exploits far more believable.

Also I truly enjoyed the fact that this novel didn’t feature either insta-love between the main lead and, say, a devastatingly handsome vampire master (ugh!) or an ugly love triangle. Amber is a sensible girl who knows her priorities and keeps her desires in check, concerning both her male and female acquaintances. I hope the author will continue that course.

Finally some secondary characters like Bian, the Vietnamese vampiress who likes Goth girls, Tullah, Amber’s secretary and her mother were really nice to read about.

What I didn’t like:

The biggest problem I had concerned my relating or rather not relating to the main heroine, Amber Farrell. Don’t get me wrong – I like kick-ass women who never pull their punches and make a career on their own, without needing a strong man by their side, vampire or otherwise. Still…whenever I felt I finally knew what made her tick I was led astray by her actions again and again. Let me be more precise: Amber is not a badly-constructed character but she is neither here nor there, a work in progress.

Sometimes she acts like a straight adult woman, sometimes – like a young gung ho man from a Bond movie. She kisses both men and women. For some period of time she is a kind of live-in girlfriend of Jen but without fully realizing the implications of her status. She publicly dances with her for heavens’ sake and still she never bothers to ask herself what others might think of it. When her sister is angry at her she is simply surprised. Although she is half way into becoming a vampire she hates most of vampires and is afraid of her own future as one. Still she doesn’t look for the answers – not really, taking into account the fact that she is an investigator – and when it comes to werewolves she doesn’t have any trust issues or problems…

I understand that it is just the first part of a whole series. Perhaps with hindsight everything would have become perfectly reasonable but reading the first part I sometimes found myself wondering whether Amber is a she or a he or a person somewhere in between. I bet there might be several explanations of such a character construction. First: it was done deliberately by the author for reason or reasons unknown, to be revealed later. Second: male authors, even very good ones, sometimes have difficulties getting into a female mind and their heroines come across as tomboys at best, hermaphrodites in the middle, something misshapen a cat might drag in at worst. Creating a complex character is never easy. In my opinion the jury is out when it comes to Ms Farrell. Her background (a stint in special forces, another one as a cop) definitely would predestine her to be a bit less feminine than your ordinary vampire chick and it’s fine by me but I wish she found her inner core, spoke with herself and took a mature, informed decision about her preferences – rather sooner than later.

Cover art:

Nice but a bit misleading. I mean vampires are far more prominent than werewolves in this one so what is that doggy doing here?

Final verdict:

An interesting beginning of another urban fantasy series and a nice debut. I wish Amber and her author all the best!

Thursday, 29 November 2012

NaNoWriMo 2012 - my impressions

Yes, I did it! I managed to write 50,000 words in roughly 30 days! I am so happy!!!

It wasn't easy. It wasn't problem-free but it was and is doable!

What did I produce?
A 50k+ story. With a proper beginning and a proper ending and plenty of typos. It is about a young magician called Vakr who gets involved in an affair that exceeds his expecations but makes him stronger. 1st person limited narration.

Is it readable/publishable?
No. I weren't able to edit much. I am pretty sure it is a horrible story but I did try to eliminate any inconsistencies.

What did I learn?
How to plan your writing in order to be effective. How to be disciplined about the amount of words you have to write a given day. How to sketch some scenes beforehand and fill them in later. How to go with the flow of the story, let your characters decide from time to time although you had planned it differently.

Will I be willing to repeat that experience?
YES. It was fun and it was worth my effort. Still I am happy I finished it. Demanding like hell.

If you have participated this year (it is not over yet) or previous years let me know about your experiences.

Tuesday, 27 November 2012

The Most Fascinating Libraries of the World 09 - St. Paul's Cathedral Library, London

I visited a friend's blog one day and I was literary blown over by a picture of one of the most fascinating libraries around - Trinity College Library in Dublin, Ireland. It also gave me an idea of a series of posts about the best, the most beautiful, the strangest and the biggest libraries there are. The libraries that can make you drool, where you would be able to spend an indefinite period of time without noticing, where you would like to live and die till the end of the world (if they only served coffee and cake that is). Perhaps you can't visit them all but what is the Internet for? I'll try to illustrate my posts as well as it is only possible, providing, I hope, a nice tour for every visitor around. Enjoy!


By the way, if you want to admire other great libraries, presented by me in this series, search this blog using 'libraries of the world' tag and you'll find them all.

St.Paul's Cathedral Library, London
(thanks, Tasha/Heidenkind from Truth Beauty, Freedom and Books blog, for the tip!)



History (from the official website)

The library's collection was almost completely destroyed in the Great Fire of London. Lists surviving from 1313 onwards give a picture of the pre-fire library. Wren's library chamber was restocked by the Commissioners for rebuilding St Paul's: they bought collections, including valuable Bibles and liturgical texts, and were fortunate to receive a generous bequest in 1712 of nearly two thousand volumes from the library of Henry Compton, late Bishop of London. In 1783 the library of John Mangey, Vicar of Dunmow and Prebendary of St Paul's, was added. In the nineteenth century large collections of ecclesiastical tracts and pamphlets were brought in and improvements made to the library's holdings of sermons preached in the Cathedral and at Paul's Cross.



The subject strength of the historical collections lies in theology, church history and patristics. Current acquisitions are restricted to major works on the history of the Church in England, on Wren and the building of the Cathedral, the Church in the City, and 'alumni' material.

Access to the cathedral Library

The library of Dean and Chapter is normally open to researchers by prior appointment on Mondays and Tuesdays, and on Fridays in the afternoons only. It is sometimes possible to arrange for library material to be made available at other times.

For enquiries relating to the library please contact the Librarian Joseph Wisdom .



Cathedral archives

The Cathedral library retains little archival material. The archive of Dean and Chapter, and the smaller archives of the College of Minor Canons, and of the Cathedral (Choir) School are deposited at Guildhall Library.


Saturday, 24 November 2012

La Voisin or a 17th century self-made woman à la française


As the title suggests it will be a story of one intrepid woman who lived in the 17th century France. She didn’t have any wealth or titles to her name. Despite that fact she managed to educate herself and find a good, high-profile job or rather create one. In fact she was far more successful than her husband and she was able to cater for the needs of all her household. She became a very prominent figure in Paris, feared and visited
Catherine Deshayes, "La Voisin", 17th-century print of her portrait held by a winged devil (so you know at once she is bad). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
even by those rich and mighty. Still her job wasn’t exactly respectful – I would call it demanding and dangerous. No, she wasn’t a prostitute. She was a fortuneteller and a poisoner. Her name is Catherine Monvoisin, née Deshayes, but she was better known as "La Voisin".



Nobody knows when Catherine was born. At that times children from lower classes weren’t registered at all, especially girls. It was most probably around 1640. You also won’t be able to find anything about her childhood or youth. Her public life started with a marriage to one Antoine Monvoisin, a jeweler with a shop at Pont-Marie in Paris. Antoine wasn’t a great businessman – soon enough he was ruined. Catherine decided to take things into her own hands – she started practicing chiromancy, face-reading and midwifery to support her family. Some say she specialized mainly in performing abortions.

There are several conclusions to be drawn from that facts. First is that Catherine must have had a real gift of reading people’s characters. She said that she developed the talent God had given her and, allegedly, she had been taught the art of fortune telling from the age of nine. It is known that she actively studied methods of physiology but without being a natural psychologist she would have never achieved so much. She was clever enough to spend a lot of money to provide the right atmosphere which would make her clients more inclined to believe in her authority and the prophecies provided. For example she acquired a special robe of crimson red velvet embroidered with eagles in gold for an exorbitant price of 1500 livres to perform in because her sessions were a kind of performance, no doubt of it.

In order to give you some notion how exorbitant a price it really was compare it to the expenses of one Aubert de la Chesnaye a merchant, fur-trader, seigneur, financier, member of the Conseil Souverain of New France who lived in the same period. Soon after his arrival in the colony La Chesnaye began to acquire land. In 1659 he purchased for 1,000 livres 70 acres on Coteau Sainte-Geneviève, one of the colony’s most favoured sites for agriculture by virtue of its proximity to Quebec, and a lot on Rue du Sault-au-Matelot in Lower Town where he built a spacious home in the 1660s. La Voisin seemed to aim really high, feeling the need to spend more on a robe.

During her work as a fortune teller, she noticed the similarities between her customers wishes about their future: almost all wanted to have someone fall in love with them, that someone would die so that they might inherit, or that their spouses would die, so that they might marry someone else. Her clients were her masters and she knew how to be flexible and meet their expectations. Initially, she told her clients that their will would be true if it was also the will of God. Then, she started to recommend to her clients some actions: to visit the church of some particular saint; eventually, she was selling them amulets and recommend magical practices of various kinds. She started to sell aphrodisiacs to those who wished for people to fall in love with them, and poison to those who wished for someone to die. The bones of toads, teeth of moles, Spanish flies, iron filings, human blood and mummy, or the dust of human remains, were among the alleged ingredients of the love powders concocted by La Voisin. Apparently not all her clients wanted to visit a church or believed in divine interventions so she was arranging black masses where they could pray to the Devil. It was only a matter of money.

Of course La Voisin hardly worked alone although her unlucky husband seemed to be content to keep to the background. Catherine found other, more skilled professionals, to cooperate with and soon enough she had a large network of colleagues and assistants, among them Adam Lesage, who was one of her lovers and performed allegedly magical tasks; the reneged priests Étienne Guibourg and abbé Mariotte, who officiated at the black masses; and poisoners like Catherine Trianon as La Voisin was not particularly skilled in that area and her clients, recruiting from those privileged, influential and rich, were more and more demanding. She had also an extensive network of associates and had been able to place young girls among the ladies-in-waiting at the royal court to spy for her.

That way Catherine had made a real fortune from her business. Among her noted clients were countess de Soissons, duchess de Bouillon; Comtesse de Gramont ("la belle Hamilton"), François-Henri de Montmorency, duc de Luxembourg, princesse Marie Louise Charlotte de Tingry, marchioness Benigne d'Alluye, countess Claude Marie du Roure, count de Clermont-Lodéve, countess Jacqueline de Polignac, duchess Antoinette de Vivonne, Marquis Louis de Cessac, Marquis Antoine de Feuquieres and Marechal de la Ferthe. La Voisin resided at Villeneuve-sur-Gravois, where she received her clients. Like a good businesswoman she tended to them all day and them she entertained them at parties with violin music in her gardens at night. The house also included a furnace, allegedly for the bodies of dead babies, who were then buried in the garden.

Officially La Voisin was a religious woman although it’s hard to say whether she truly believed in God or just pretended to do so in order to deflect any accusations and make a part of her clientele more comfortable with her services. Anyway she regularly attended the church of the Jansenist abbé de Sant-Amour, principal at the Paris University. On the other hand she was also interested in science and alchemy and financed several private projects and enterprises, some of them made by con artists who tried to fool money out of her. Privately it is said her glamorous life was also a stressful one - she suffered from alcoholism. It must have been a high-stress and high-risk career, full of unexpected pitfalls. For example in 1665/66, her fortune telling was questioned by the priests of Saint Vincent de Paul's order, the Congregation of the Mission, but La Voisin defended herself successfully before the professors at the Sorbonne. She proved to be one intelligent lady but it was hardly the end of her problems.

The death of the king's sister-in-law, the Duchesse d'Orléans, had been falsely attributed to poison, and the crimes of Madame de Brinvilliers (executed in 1676) and her accomplices were still fresh in the public mind. In parallel, a riot took place where people accused witches of abducting children for the black masses, and priests reported that a growing number of people were confessing to poisoning in their confessions. In 1677, the fortune teller Magdelaine de La Grange was arrested for poisoning, and claimed that she had information about crimes of high importance. It led to the arrest of the successful fortune teller and poisoner Marie Bosse and Marie Vigoreux in January 1679. All these events made the police aware that there existed a network of fortune tellers in Paris who dealt with the distribution of poison. They started to look for other members of that network but I suppose nobody could predict that they would be dealing with an attempted regicide soon.

Madame de Montespan
The most important client of La Voisin was Madame de Montespan, the official royal mistress to King Louis XIV of France. She was also her downfall. In 1667, Montespan hired La Voisin to arrange a black mass, allegedly celebrated in a house in Rue de la Tannerie. Adam Lesage and abbé Mariotte officiated, while Montespan prayed to win the love of the king. The same year, Montespan became the official mistress of the king, and after this, she employed La Voisin whenever a problem occurred in her relationship with Louis. As you can guess, she could practically take it for granted that sooner or later there would be problems.

In 1673, when the king's interest in Montespan seemed to deteriorate, she again turned to La Voisin, who provided a series of black masses officiated by Etienne Guibourg. Allegedly on a least one occasion, Montespan herself acted as the human altar during the mass. I don’t doubt the royal mistress was a great client but she was also too ambitious for her own sake. In 1677 she made clear that if the king should abandon her, she would have him killed. When the King entered in to a relationship with Angélique de Fontanges in 1679, Montespan called for La Voisin and asked her to have both the king and Fontages poisoned. La Voisin hesitated, but was eventually convinced or blackmailed to agree. At the house of her colleague, Catherine Trianon, La Voisin came with a plan to kill the king together with other fellow poisoners, Bertrand and Romani, the last being also the fiancé of her daughter. Trianon was unwilling to participate and tried to make her change her mind by constructing an ill-fated fortune for her, but Voisin refused to listen to her. Perhaps she was in a very tight corner and I suppose she knew the best how worthless these fortunes were. The group decided to murder the king by poisoning a petition which was to be delivered to his own hands.

The 5 March 1679, La Voisin visited the royal court in Saint-Germain to deliver the petition. At that day, however, there were too many petitioners and the king did not take them in his hands, which made her return without having delivered it. Upon her return to her home in Paris, she handed the petition to her daughter and asked her to burn it, which she also did. The next day, she made plans to visit Catherine Trianon after mass, allegedly to plan the next murder attempt upon Louis XIV.

The 12 March 1679, La Voisin was arrested outside Notre-Dame de Bonne-Nouvelle after having heard mass, just before her appointed meeting at Catherine Trianon. In April 1679, a commission appointed to inquire into the subject and to prosecute the offenders met for the first time. Its proceedings, including some suppressed in the official records, are preserved in the notes of one of the official court reporters, Gabriel Nicolas de la Reynie.
Louis XIV

At the arrest of La Voisin, her maid Margot stated that the persecution would mean the end of a number of people of all positions of society. Still the commission didn’t hesitate to arrest Marguerite Monvoisin, the only daughter of La Voisin, Guibourg, Lesage, Bertrand, Romain and the rest of her network of her associates. La Voisin was kept at Vincennes, were she was subjected to questioning. On 27 December 1679, Louis XIV issued an order that the whole network should be exterminated by all methods regardless of the rank, gender or age of those involved.

La Voisin confessed to the crimes she was accused of and described the development of her career. She was never subjected to torture: a formal order was issued giving permission to the use of torture, but it was made clear that the order was not to be put in effect, and consequently it was never made use of. The reason it suggested to be the fear that she might give away the names of influential people if she was questioned under torture. La Voisin never mentioned the names of any of her clients during the interviews. She once mentioned to the guards, that the question she feared most was that they should ask her about her visits at the royal court. It is likely that she was referring to Montespan as her client and her attempt of murdering the king, and that she feared that such a confession should result in her execution for regicide. Other sources state that, after being held a year, she was subjected to three days of intense torture during which her legs were systematically crushed. Still she did not confess.

Her list of clients, the arranging of the black masses, her connection to Montespan and the murder attempt on the king was not to be revealed until after her death, when it was stated by her daughter and confirmed by the uncontaminated testimonies of the other accused.

La Voisin was convicted of witchcraft and was burned in public on the Place de Grève in Paris the 22 February 1680. In July, her daughter Marguerite Monvoisin revealed her connection to Montespan, which was confirmed by the statements of the other accused. This caused the monarch to eventually close the investigation, despite his earlier threats, seal the testimonies and place the remaining accused outside of the public justice system by imprisoning them under a lettre de cachet (a letter under the sovereign's seal, often authorizing imprisonment without trial; literally: letter with a seal)

After many years of stories circulating throughout Europe of witches, Satanists, and black masses, largely believed to have been created by the imaginations of Inquisitors, the case of La Voisin appears to have been the first real registering of events that began to conform to the rumors. It would, of course, not be the last. Still La Voisin seems to me firstly and foremostly a successful businesswoman and a clever psychologist who was destroyed by her own ambition, not an evil witch.

 
La Voisin and her organisation is portrayed in a novel by Judith Merkle Riley: The Oracle Glass (1994), which was reviewed by Blodeuedd not so long ago.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, 20 November 2012

Movie review: Lost in Translation by Sofia Coppola

Directed by: Sofia Coppola

Cast:
 Bill Murray as Bob Harris
Scarlett Johansson as Charlotte
Giovanni Ribisi as John, Charlotte’s husband
Anna Faris as Kelly
Fumihiro Hayashi as Charlie Brown
Akiko Takeshita as Ms. Kawasaki





Synopsis:

If you are an European or an American and you wanted to visit a very exotic country with a great culture but as different as possible from your own, where would you go? A small hint – you should try Japan. You won’t be able to read the simplest newspaper headline or signboard (just read, I don’t speak about understanding it) and even all those old good Arabic numerals will be mostly non-existent. What cheer, isn’t it? Small wonder such an extreme environment can force two foreigners, even as they differ from each other in practically every way, to spend their free time together and befriend each other.

Bob Harris, an aging American movie star, arrives in Tokyo to film an advertisement for Suntory whisky, for which he will receive $2 million. Charlotte, a young college graduate (she studied philosophy, imagine that!) freshly married to a celebrity photographer, John, is left behind in her hotel room as her husband has to work long hours on an assignment in Tokyo. Charlotte is unsure of her future with him, as she believes he takes more interest in his celebrity models, most notably a young and popular American actress named Kelly, than he does in her. At the same time, Bob's own 25-year marriage is lacking in romance as he goes through a midlife crisis and a career crisis at the same time. After a chance meeting in a lift these two develop a rapport and then a friendship while experiencing the differences between Japanese and American culture, and between their own generations.

Charlotte invites Bob to meet up with some local friends of hers. Bob accepts and arrives later at her hotel room dressed in clothes that appear to be designed for somebody at least 20 years younger. They go out and have fun in a karaoke bar with a couple of friendly Japanese (some of them even speak English). On the penultimate night of his stay, Bob attracts the attention of the resident vocalist. The next morning, Bob awakens to find the woman in his room, having apparently slept with her. Charlotte arrives at his room to go out for breakfast only to find that woman singing peacefully in the background. It creates a conflict and tension over a subsequent lunch. Later that night, during a fire alarm at the hotel, Bob and Charlotte reconcile and express how they will miss each other as they make one more trip back to the hotel bar. Still will their bond, created almost by accident in a foreign country, last longer than their Japanese adventure? What have they learned, spending so much time together in different circumstances?

What I liked:

I expected a lot from that movie and it gave me even more. There's not a word or a wistful glance out of place in Sofia Coppola's offbeat comedy drama. The tale of two Americans in Tokyo who come together in culture shock is all at once laugh-out-loud funny and lovingly tender. Not only fans of Bill Murray will relish, in my humble opinion, the most subtle performance of his career.
His hangdog charisma serves him to perfection as jaded movie actor Bob Harris, alone in Tokyo to shoot a tacky whiskey commercial, thoroughly bewildered by the in-your-face enthusiasm and politeness of the Japanese. Bob faces a midlife crisis, he is shocked by a completely alien culture and he feels his career goes downwards even if he still earns a lot. A whimsical twentysomething, Charlotte is struggling to find her place in the world, wondering whether she took the right decision and married the right man. Like two negatives these two ‘lost souls’ are magnetically drawn to one another and inevitably wind up making beautiful music - in a karaoke booth, where else? I must admit it is easy to imagine why somebody like Charlotte fell for somebody like Bob. He might be much older, balding and not exactly handsome but he cares and he pays attention to her. Overall Coppola gives her primary characters a Gothic twist replacing the older, brooding, tired masculine figure and the young, naive heroine with a feminine adventurer who provides the masculine figure with the motivation and opportunity to journey into the unfamiliar landscape.
Totally zoned out but at least they are together...
I liked an ethereal, dreamlike quality of this movie, something only distantly connected to soft-focus close-ups and an atmospheric score. The twinkling neon lights of Tokyo become the fairytale setting, its peculiarities giving rise to brilliantly surreal comic twists. Marvel at Japanese television's answer to Graham Norton, or the overzealous hooker who tackles Bob in what looks like an ungodly game of Twister.

It’s true that the laughs sometimes come in broad strokes (‘lip my tights!’), but more often Coppola demonstrates a delicate touch, never losing sight of the heartbreak that looms over her characters from day one. Like all the most memorable love stories, the tale is bittersweet, beautiful, and immaculate. And it is far more than that. In my opinion Lost in Translation offers a new spin on the romantic comedy – its narrative is rather minimalistic, it focuses on the Gothic’s “negative register” plenty of secrets, unfamiliar spaces, estrangement and dislocation in every plane. It explores cultural dislocation, loneliness and emotional estrangement by highlighting the gap between seeing, hearing and understanding. Not that the characters don’t try to fit in, they do: Charlotte visits a Shinto shrine, Bob asks his interpreter to be more precise while rendering the words of the director, shooting the commercial. Still they don’t succeed and the presence of the Gothic casts a shadow over the promise of romance between them although they need it both.

I’ve read reviews in which people complained that this movie was actually boring. You know, I can see their point. In superficial terms, Lost in Translation seems to be indeed a film in which nothing much happens. Its plot is fluid and subordinated to the more ephemeral story elements. Silence is more expressive than dialogue and poetic lyricism dominates spectacle. I found it very sublime but I think it is not everybody’s piece of cake.


Lost in Translation begins explicitly and ends implicitly. The opening title credits are pasted over a close up of Scarlett Johannson’s bottom covered in pink lacy underpants – a very controversial opening shot but also one which belongs to a classic repertoire of the cinema. In 1963 Godard produced a prologue for Contempt (Le Mépris) which comprised an extended single shot of Brigitte Bardot’s naked body, focusing particularly on her bottom. Coppola’s intention with this opening shot appears to be to defy taboos and to undermine expectations surrounding what might be considered the “money shot” in more traditionally exploitative cinema – just another way to emphasize the fact that more often than not things are more complicated than they appear at first glance and yes, it also concerns lacy underwear.The movie ends with a beautiful scene (spoiler, highlight to read) Bob's final words to Charlotte are audible only to her, and her reaction is really fantastic, creating a devastatingly beautiful moment of realizaition that while her future is uncertain, she will always have Tokyo.

What I didn’t like:

One minor carping. The fact that Tokyo is never much more than a metaphor there I find to be a downside of this movie. It felt as if great foreign cities exist only so that  Americans like Bob the fading megastar and Charlotte, a bit less privileged Yale grad can have a special environment for their struggles and epiphanies. While Bob and Charlotte worry that they will never carve fully-fledged identities for themselves, away from the demands of other people that is, the movie is making Tokyo, a vibrant, interesting city per se, fully dependent on them, miniaturizing it into just a pocket mirror of their souls. Also the Japanese supporting cast seemed just slapsticky, without a voice of their own.

Final verdict:

Definitely one of the best movies I have ever seen – a love letter to the totally unique and haphazard connections that human beings make with each other when they feel disconnected from the things that normally frame their lives. It was made with great technical prowess, it sparkles with a great sense of humour and asks you difficult questions without providing any easy solutions. Just like real life.

Saturday, 17 November 2012

Review: The Daughter of Time (Inspector Alan Grant 05) by Josephine Tey

Book info:
Genre: historical crime story
Target audience: pretty much everybody interested in history
Form: paperback, 220 pages


Synopsis (from Goodreads): 

 In one of Tey's bestselling mystery novels ever, Scotland Yard Inspector Alan Grant, immobile in his hospital bed, is intrigued by a portrait of Richard III. Could such a sensitive face actually belong to one of history's most heinous villains—a king who killed his brother's children to secure his crown? Grant determines to find out once and for all what kind of man Richard was and who in fact killed the princes in the tower.

 What I liked: 

Yorkist king Richard III grew up at Middleham....
Yorkist king Richard III grew up at Middleham. "Middleham Castle". RichardIII.com . . Retrieved 2007-10-24 . (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
 This novel deals with Richard III and all the various permutations of the Yorkist, Lancastrian and Tudor factions in late medieval England. I wanted to read it for a really long time but I couldn’t find a decent copy. What can be said… this book could have been as boring as your average history lesson but it isn’t, mainly because it is written in a very compelling way. Ms Tey (a pseudonym of Elizabeth Mackintosh) certainly knew how to keep the attention of her readers while presenting convoluted schemes of the royal palace and a police inspector trying to kill the time while recovering in hospital because of a leg injury.

 While dying of boredom Alan Grant is presented with a portrait of England's King Richard III (reigned 1483-1485) and comes to the conclusion that a man so genteel-looking couldn't possibly be the ruthless murderer Shakespeare made him out to be because 'villains don't suffer, and that face is full of the most dreadful pain' (judge for yourself here). Certainly Shakespeare made Richard III into a character who we love to loathe. An ugly hunchback, sneaky, rotten to the core, Shakespeare's Richard is the seducer of widows, the betrayer of loyal friends and the killer of the young princes in the Tower of London. Was the bard right or maybe it was just convenient for him to paint Richard the blackest of black?

 Intrigued, Grant starts reading books concerning the appropriate period – from middle grade textbooks, full of pictures, simplifications and doodles drawn by bored pupils, to serious positions appropriate for university scholars. He is also helped by a young, rich history enthusiast from America, Brent Carradine, on a scholarship to study at the British Museum, who does more complicated source research. They findings are impressive and inspiring – I admit that after finishing The Daughter of Time, I spent several hours on line googling the authors and historians Tey mentions in her book, looking at different portraits of Richard III and his family. I gather it was the best thing about the book itself: it made me curious and inspired, it taught me a lot while entertaining. I love such books to no end.

 What I didn’t like: 

 It was a lovely book but hardly flawless. Though there are arguments, with which I agree wholeheartedly (and no, never believe a word of a historian, Ms Tey is here absolutely right), the main hook of her novel--that the most famous surviving portrait of Richard III shows the face of a man who could not possibly kill defenceless children of his brother--is flawed to say the least of it. Every portrait ever made has been the portrait of not one person, but at least two--of the sitter and of the artist--and the practice of reading a person's character through their portrait is an interesting one, though it must always be seen as very dubious if not completely futile from the psychological point of view.

There have been mass murderers whose faces were kind, innocent and fresh. There have been (and will always be) innocent people, such types who wouldn’t hurt a fly, who look as if they were born in a prison and released only because the guards were afraid for their lives. No serious policeman can trust their own judgment when it comes to assessing faces. I presented one such example in my essay Beautiful Beast.

 Apart from that I think the book could have done with slightly more individualized and characteristic dialogue, but really, that's a minor complaint.

 Final verdict:

 Despite its shortcomings it is a story I would recommend to every history nerd, especially if you like the War of Roses period and criminal riddles solved with great sense of humour. I am not surprised this book was voted number 4 out of 100 best mysteries of all time by Mystery Writers of America (www.mysterywriters.org) . If you want to read the history of Richard III presented from a less fictional perspective I recommend “Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of King Richard the Third by Horace Walpole.

ETA: The latest news on Richard III: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9681019/Scientists-to-reconstruct-Richard-IIIs-face.html
Enhanced by Zemanta