A Sardonic Sense of Humour

The Painted Veil by Somerset Maugham, is an early twentieth-century novel about lust, unrequited love and courage, taking place principally in the Chinese countryside.

When Kitty Garstin marries Walter Fane it is not for love. As she says herself, she never loves him, not at any point in the novel, despising his “sardonic” sense of humour and his crooked ways. No, Kitty does not marry for love. Instead, she marries Walter in a panic: her younger sister is already engaged; Kitty herself is nearing the ripe old age of 24 or 25; and this marriage would require her to live in Hong Kong, so she wouldn't have to deal with her sister's wedding or go on any loathsome family holidays ever again. Sorted. Walter on the other hand, adores Kitty. She is beautiful and chatty and funny, and Walter, though regretting that his love is unrequited, is happy enough with the situation to carry on with his life in peace.

In the bustling city of Hong Kong, Kitty meets many new people, old and young, men and women, all from the British Colonial base. One such person is Charlie Townsend, a charming, well-built man with a handsome face and apparently wonderful eyes. He is Kitty's undoing. Married himself, he never really loves Kitty so much as takes the opportunity she throws at him, and when Walter finds out a year later on finding them himself, Charlie has no intention of leaving his wife and saving Kitty from the clutches of Walter's ultimatum.

In short, the ultimatum is either stay with Walter or be divorced by Walter. The latter involves staying in Hong Kong. The former involves moving to the city of Mei tan fu, a bacteriologist, but this is less appealing as the site is ridden with a terrible cholera epidemic of which the citizens are dropping like flies. It is this option she is forced to choose.

This is where we see a journey of self-discovery take place. Kitty barely ever takes in someone's personality when we have a person described to us. It is always how attractive they are; how nice their eyes are or how revolting their nose is. Tired of hanging around the house all day and all night, Kitty decides to work with the French nuns who manage the orphanage, and here we see what was a dislike of “ugly” Chinese children change to a love of children and the development of a maternal instinct, just one example of how this new life changes her.

Simultaneously, Kitty learns to live with Walter, though he never really forgives her for her sinful behaviour and though she never fails to remind the reader that she does not love him and could never love him. She befriends the Customs man, Waddington, a squat man with a good sense of humour and a chatty tongue. It is Waddington who tells her about the Way, which is essentially a path of self-discovery the Chinese have figured out long before us.

Over the course of her stay in Mei tan fu, Kitty realises everything she never had figured out, sees everything she was blind to, and understands everything she felt clueless about previously. Her relationship with Charlie, for example, and Charlie's true self. Her superficiality shines through here again; she satisfies herself by telling herself that he was too fat, his eyebrows were apelike and revolting and his face was ugly, as opposed to thinking that his charm and his flattery were all false.

The Painted Veil really is a good read. The whole self-discovery makes it a great holiday read and it isn't too long at 200 odd pages so do give it a go. The film, starring Naomi Watts as Kitty and the thin one from Fight Club is great too, I must admit, following the story the whole way, though it is dramatised a bit, making us believe that Kitty does love Walter towards the end, but that's Hollywood for you.

By Jess

Old Sport

In keeping with the theme of my American literature reading habits I took a successful stab at F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby.

The Great Gatsby is the tale of society in Long Island from the point of view of newcomer Nick Carraway. His house, with lawn unpreened and lacking a multitude of servants, is situated next door to the abode of a somewhat local celebrity, named Jay Gatsby.

I assume you all have the heard the phrase 'a friend of everybody is a friend of no one'. That phrase applies perfectly to Jay Gatsby. For all of his inconsistent life stories and all of his booming 1920s house parties, nobody really knows or cares about him as a friend. And anyway, Mr G isn't the goody-two-shoes in many ways. His shady schemes with a Mr Wolfshiem, portrayed rather anti-semitically by Fitzgerald as a conman with bad grammar, never really dominate the plot, but it still means that we readers know Mr G is a bit dodgy.

Gatsby has a habit of calling people “old sport”. Is this a way of trying to have people think the two of them are great pals? Because it doesn't work, as we so tragically find out. The only exception to this sentiment of 'I'll come to your party but I wouldn't bother with your funeral' is Nick; this is how we find out the story that makes the novel.

Nick, always the friendly one, is the old chum of another man who lives on the other end of Long Island. This man is named Tom Buchanan, and he has a twisted sort of lifestyle. For he is having a long and drawn-out love affair with a Mrs Wilson. Yes, you read correctly: she is also married, to Tom's friend, Mr Wilson. In the meantime, however, Tom learns of his wife's (yes he has a wife) relation with Mr Gatsby, which is one of harboured love. For Daisy and Mr G were once terribly in love but were separated, and now that they have been reunited, they have started to have an affair. Which is a bit awkward when Tom finds out, especially since it was Nick who was persuaded into inviting them both to his house for tea by a mutual friend named Jordan Baker who Nick sort of fancies anyway. Confused?

And though Tom is in the wrong, he has a point. Daisy isn't very subtle with her affections and Mr G thinks she will leave Tom for him, therefore holds back no smart remarks that may hurt Tom. Which is just really awkward for Nick, who turns out to be pretty fickle with who he supports and whether he loves or hates his new clique.

Fitzgerald's writing is compelling and though the novel is not entirely filled with a turbulent plot, I was left thinking about who was in the wrong and who was in the right, leaving me with the conclusion that everyone was in the wrong. Which was a depressing but satisfying conclusion. Give it a read and let us know what you think / thought (if you have read it already). The movie is coming out in the not too distant future with a star-studded cast: Leonardo DiCaprio as Gatsby; Carey Mulligan as Daisy; Tobey Maguire as Nick; and Isla Fisher as Mrs Wilson, to name but a few, but you know the book will be better, so do read it before then. Pretty please.

By Jess

It All Ends Here

Last night I had the great privilege of attending the 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2' premiere. It was a huge event and the red carpet stretched all the way from Trafalgar Square down to Leicester Square, they had also turned half the carpet into Diagon Alley. I had been so excited about seeing the film I hadn't really thought about the fact that this was the end, despite the words 'It All Ends Here' being superimposed over every poster in the world.

I have been reading Harry Potter since I was six, therefore as Harry has grown over the past seven books and eight films so have I. I couldn't tell you precisely what it is about the books that makes them the all time best books in my opinion, yes there's the fantastic names (Neville Longbottom, Severus Snape etc.) and the magical world being set in England, in places that we all recognise (Kings Cross Station, Surrey, Tottenham Court Rd) but it's more than that. It has to be, there's a reason these books are the second most widely read novels in the world, second only to the Bible. There's a reason why we all (myself included) queued up at midnight to get a copy of the books, why next week everyone will be at the Odeon at midnight to see the first screenings of the final film installment. It's because we all love Harry, not in the same sort of way we love an action hero, but we love him as a best friend and care about what happens to him and Ron and Hermione.

The new film is in 3D, a move which I wasn't thrilled about, I think 3D is quite gimmicky and Harry Potter doesn't need it. However, soon I was so engrossed in the movie I'd forgotten all about the clunky glasses on my face. The movie begins exactly where the last one finished, with our three protagonists at Shell Cottage trying to decide whether to go after the Hallows or Horcruxes.  I promise this review won't have any major spoilers (although let's be honest it's not like you haven't all read the book a dozen times,) so I will focus on my personal highlights and I've narrowed it down to three scenes.
Scene one: The 3D came into its own during the break in scene at Gringotts Bank. It felt like we were on a roller coaster as the cart twisted and turned through the underground vaults.
Scene two: All the teachers and the remaining members of the Order come together to defend Hogwarts against the imminent attack from Voldemort and his followers. As well as some very witty lines from McGonagall (Maggie Smith) there is a fantastic shot of the protective enchantments coming together and forming a bubble around Hogwarts.
Scene three: The most obvious one, the Battle of Hogwarts. I don't want to spoil it so I will just summarise it in one word- epic. It was quite simply very, very epic.

For those of you worrying about too many changes to the book in this film don't be, obviously there are changes, there always have to be. But J.K Rowling was one of the producers on this film, and if she was happy with the changes then so am I. The splitting of the final novel allowed for far fewer details to be skipped over, unlike in the sixth movie. The only thing missing from this film was the promise of another one to come. During the premiere J.K Rowling cried, Emma Watson cried, Daniel Radcliffe cried, Rupert Grint cried and I bawled. These movies and books mean so much to so many and as Daniel said last night; "I don't think the end of the story happens tonight because each and every person who will see this film will carry the story with them through the rest of their lives." And he's right because in the words of Seamus Finnigan; "there's only one Harry Potter," and I for one miss him already.

By Talia

What happened to my sweet girl? She's gone!

So I just watched Black Swan for the third time, and still it is mesmerising. And I decided how better to share my opinion than with all you lovely people.

Black Swan, starring Natalie Portman (V for Vendetta; Closer), Mila Kunis (The Book of Eli; Friends with Benefits) and Vincent Cassel (Read My Lips; The Crimson Rivers) is a recent film that deals first and foremost with severe psychological issues and extreme striving for an ultimate perfection. Nina Sayers (Portman), is a ballerina in a New York City ballet company who has been wishing for the lead in a production for a long time, especially with her obsessively protective mother telling she deserves it non-stop. When the previous lead female is fired for being too old and past-it, Nina lands herself the role of the Swan Queen in the company's production of Swan Lake, though she does this in a not entirely P.C. way. I shan't elaborate. I will only hint that the director is male.

Anyway, a new addition to the company, Lily (Kunis), arrives and immediately Nina feels threatened. We all know that feeling. I can relate especially to Nina when the director, Thomas Leroy (Cassel), makes it known to poor Nina that he clearly admires Lily and her "passion" for ballet. She is so afraid of being replaced, and perhaps this is what stems a lot of the rest of the storyline.

If you do not know the ballet, let me help you. The White Swan falls for the Prince, but when her evil twin, the Black Swan, seduces him, leading him to reject and hence forget about the White Swan, she kills herself in despair. As 'Swan Queen', Nina has to play both parts immaculately. Precision is not a problem for Nina: she is always accurate and flawless; but it is also her main problem. Leroy insists that the Black Swan has to be passionate and carefree, i.e. a bit like Lily. So when Lily is made the understudy or alternate of the Swan Queen, Nina goes crazy. Not that she was particularly sane before that.

What we see in Black Swan is the production season through Nina's eyes, leading up to the grand performance. As previously mentioned, though, Nina is slightly insane, in that she is extremely paranoid and has magnificently vivid hallucinations. The point is, we are seeing the film through Nina's eyes, so half the time something will occur, the audience is shocked / upset / in a terrible awe; then it will turn out to have been a hallucination. This is what makes the film so thrilling. The goosebumps factor comes in when they play the Swan Lake theme tune in all its delicate glory, whilst her music box plays and the ballerina spinning has eerily had its top half broken off.

The contrast between Nina and Lily is pointed out all the time in Black Swan. Lily always wears black and has tattoos and swears a lot; whereas Nina wears white and is quiet and reserved. However, both have the girly, high voice typical of ballerinas and this sometimes confuses the two of them, especially when it is too dark to see who it is. The cleverness of this staggers me. We do see, however, a change in Nina as the film progresses. When she dons her Black Swan costume after committing a particularly heinous act, she dances as she never has before, with passion and insanity. I shan't tell you the ending, but it is as spectacular as the rest of the film.

Black Swan seems to me to be a bit like marmite. If you love it, you love it. And if not, then you hate it. So many people have reviewed it so badly yet so many have reviewed it so well and by that you know it's going to be hard-hitting. A friend said to me that she found it slightly far-fetched, which is true in a way, but so incorrect in another. Do you see what I mean? The questions are endless. Please do see it if you were unfortunate enough to miss it on the big screen.

Here is the trailer just to persuade you even further:





By Jess

Hungry for more?

I have just finished reading The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins. Before you point out that it is not exactly an adult book I would like to point out that reading should be for pleasure, and when my mind has been invaded by the UK constitution and about one thousand Cabinet members, I feel like reading a book that is not too challenging. So for two days I cast aside Anna Karenina (yes I am still reading it, I swear) and picked up The Hunger Games, and I do not regret it.

The novel follows the story of Katniss Everdeen who lives in the post-apocalyptic country of Panem, which is where North America used to stand, in the poorest of areas; District 12. The Hunger Games are an annual televised event shown in every district in Panem, organised by the omnipotent and cruel government in the Capitol, where one male and one female "tribute" from each  of the twelve Districts are put in an arena and forced to fight until only one victor remains alive. Think Big Brother but with killing rather than challenges and more intelligent contestants. Katniss volunteers to enter the Games in place of her younger sister and is forced to take part in the contest she had tried her whole life to avoid.

I think that part of the brilliance of the novel lies not only in the creativity of the idea but also in the way Collins creates a very real and understandable environment for the reader. Despite the entirely different world that the book is set in, it is not a place completely divorced from our lives in the 21st Century. Before the "tributes" take part in The Hunger Games they are put through rapid media training and have an image recreation, they are manipulated by those around them to project an image that is meant to gain them favour with the public. The same thing happens with celebrities today, especially the 'flash-in-the-pan' or '30 seconds of fame' type celebrities that are produced by reality TV shows, where your image is everything. Whilst reading it I felt appalled at all the people of Panem who just let this happen every year and sit back and watch children kill each other and themselves for enjoyment, but is that not just a few steps down the line from watching I'm a Celebrity...Get me out of here! ? Obviously I am aware there is a difference between eating bugs and eating a human because you are starving (an example from the book not my head!) but the passivity displayed by the spectators is definitely not alien to our modern times.

The Hunger Games is currently being made into a movie. It is being directed by Gary Ross (Seabiscuit, Pleasantville) and will star Jennifer Lawrence (yes the one who got an Oscar nomination for her first movie last year,) Josh Hutcherson (Little Manhattan, Bridge to Terabithia) and Liam Hemsworth (The Last Song, Miley Cyrus' ex.) If you have read this book then you will understand why I am incredibly excited about the movie, it has everything that could make a fantastic film, provided they don't deviate too much from the story itself.


Just an afterword:
I realise this post may have come across as a rant against reality TV, but let me assure you, I love many reality TV shows, especially X-Factor, The Bachelor and Shipwrecked. All three are balls of vacuous wonderfulness!

By Talia

Being Complete

As most of you will know, Never Let Me Go is a film that not too long ago hit U.K. cinemas, and it seems to me that everyone who sees it loves it. Adapted from the book of the same title, this phenomenon is so thought-provoking and so tear-jerking that it is hard not to love it.

Let me give you a blurb: it is split into three parts. These are when the children are Hailsham; when they are adults; and when they are donors, a decade later than the previous part. The central characters are Kathy (Carey Mulligan), Tommy (Andrew Garfield) and Ruth (Keira Knightley), who are all pupils at Hailsham. Hailsham is a boarding school of a sort, but it is not just that. It is where children, clones, are brought up to be healthy, fit, and ready to donate organs when they reach the right age. These children are modelled on other people: their 'originals', though they are never told who these 'originals' are. Kathy, Tommy and Ruth are all in the same boat in this respect.

Relationships develop and are carried on through the second part, altering when the story reaches the third part. What is so hard to watch about this film, and I mean this in a good way, is watching these helpless children being filtered through this fictional (don’t worry – none of this is real) system of guiltless stealing of something so vital to a human being as their insides. You sit there and you watch as the characters clock in and out of their homes, monitored every second of every day of every year of their lives. And the only person who has the decency to tell them about their cruel fate is immediately ostracized from Hailsham.

But we have to think – what is it that is so awful about their lives? Kathy becomes a carer in the third part of the film, meaning that she lives for a while without having to donate. But really – as she points out so truthfully, everyone is going to die in the end. As depressing and solemn a thought as it may be, we must admit it to ourselves. The characters in the film – Kathy, Tommy and Ruth – all go through similar experiences to us. They fall in love, they make and break friendships, they become, debatably, more independent and autonomic. They grow up. The fact that their lives are more concise, that they "complete" earlier, only means that they leave on a high. They don’t have to worry about wrinkles and about how their marriage is falling apart because it was a shot-gun wedding when they were 18. They are spared the figurative, certainly not literal, gore of it all. Their lives can still be viewed as 'complete'. But doesn’t that sound superficial, when I say that? What does everyone else think of the philosophical, and more importantly, ethical issues raised by this film? Go and see it. It’s only a tenner or so. Carpe diem.





By Jess