?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
19 January 2015 @ 12:27 am
From the Sofa of Earnest Snores...  
This is one loud little cat, and she sounds as if she's putting SO much effort into those snores. They're very sincere. I do find it creepy when she does it with her eyes open, though. :O

My Idol entry is up, and it could sure use some votes. I'm hoping it'll do better by tomorrow's deadline. *bites nails*

So, last week was the Oregon/Ohio State BCS Bowl, which everyone now knows Oregon lost. Boy, that was hard to watch. One of realities is that the Midwest teams' linesmen tend to be very big, and the West Coast teams' aren't quite so heavy. The bigger players plow through the defensive line, and make an effective wall on offense. Still, Oregon failed to make the most of several opportunities, so they were their own worst enemy. Great season overall, and a great team.

You've probably heard of "normalizing," where you mentally convert something to a more familiar approximation. I did it just this week with a tiny bottle in the gym shower that was standing on end: for a second, I first read it as "octopus" instead of "shampoo". Hey, those were tall, smooth letters—no useful tails or anything! So, what's the reverse of that? During the Rose Bowl, one of the announcers was talking about an Oregon player, and I thought, "There's no 'Freebo' on that team!" The next day, the paper had a quote from Torrodney Prevot. So, probably him, right? With a Frenchified last name? But during the BCS Bowl, even knowing what that name should have been... I swear to God, the announcer was saying 'Freebo' again! I also got confused all season long about another player, because most of the announcers are mush-mouthed and call him "Ferra." I autoconvert that to "Farrell" or "Pherell". His name is actually Pharoah. Honestly, I expect an actual 'o' at the end of that name!

Other entertainments: I'm reading Pronto, an Elmore Leonard book in which Raylan Givens appears and is again very unlike the television character. He's not as smart, whereas TV Raylan is only dumb about women. Still, snappy dialogue and entertaining so far. I'm also reading Stephen King's The Mist. I'd hoped for something less wacky on the "creepy things" front, though the prose is easy-going. I don't like the female characters, though—and yet, I can't say that the men seem terribly developed, either. IDK... maybe I picked a bad book for getting acquainted with King? But his son's stories grab me from the get-go. Hmmm...

For movies, HalfshellHusband and I watched The Numbers Station (a John Cusack movie, and it never occurred to me that numbers stations might be used for coded communications—true or not), and the The Woodlanders (mainly for Rufus Sewell, who was as handsome as ever). Tonight, we watched Rush Hour with our son. Chris Tucker's voice _really_ takes some getting used to. Ouch. That was the only thing I remembered from the first time I'd seen it!

All right, off to bed. Some impromptu major pruning this afternoon, followed by a 5-mile run, means my back is aching. Hope the fog clears off enough to warm up a little tomorrow, for a bike ride. Today was cold and gloomy!

 
 
 
bleodsweanbleodswean on January 19th, 2015 04:53 pm (UTC)
I can't believe you've never read King! Yeah, "The Mist" isn't where I would rec folks to start. But it is short....It is part of a horrible nihilistic phase he moved through. I'll be curious to hear your thoughts.

The Coalition For Disturbing Metaphorshalfshellvenus on January 19th, 2015 07:10 pm (UTC)
I don't really like Horror as a genre, so King has been right off my list from the get-go. But so many LJ fans admire him-- sometimes just for his advice on writing-- that I thought I should give him a try.

"The Mist" was highly readable, and yet it also irritated me in some ways-- mostly the characterization.

What King books would you recommend instead?
bleodsweanbleodswean on January 19th, 2015 07:25 pm (UTC)
What did you think the "two words" were?

I don't think King is a writer of Literature but he's certainly a gifted and prolific wordsmith! His advice on writing seems to be of the tried and true wisdom which says "just do it, you have to sit down and write".

If you don't care for horror...I would strongly NOT recommend anything. I'm of the Oprah Winfrey school that says you can't unsee what you saw. But if you don't mind darkness...then The Stand and the Gunslinger stuff. Misery is great. These are books without monsters. Christine is fun.
The Coalition For Disturbing Metaphorshalfshellvenus on January 20th, 2015 04:12 am (UTC)
He said at the end that the two words were "Hartford" and "hope," but the ending was still of the "who knows what happens next?" sort.

I've heard good things about Christine, and I've seen Misery, so that might be worth trying. Thanks!
bleodsweanbleodswean on January 20th, 2015 01:47 pm (UTC)
Most King aficionados believe those words are "No Hope".

There are SO MANY BOOKS in the world that it doesn't make sense to read things that might not appeal to you. I totally get wanting to avoid certain things.
Direst Ryl: Snow Dropsryl on January 19th, 2015 10:21 pm (UTC)
Different Seasons is wonderful. Three of the stories became movies; the fourth is pretty much unfilmable. But they're great stories and, with the exception of "Apt Pupil," not really horror at all.
The Coalition For Disturbing Metaphorshalfshellvenus on January 20th, 2015 04:11 am (UTC)
Thanks for the rec! I'll add that to my ebook list. :)
Port: all the gin jointsdesertport on January 20th, 2015 03:48 am (UTC)
Oooh, I saw the movie of The Mist and loved it. Though the characters were a little stock-ish. I think because it was meant to be a sort of allegory about faith, rather than something particularly character-driven. If you see the movie I'd be interested in how you think it compares to the book.
The Coalition For Disturbing Metaphorshalfshellvenus on January 20th, 2015 06:07 am (UTC)
I probably won't see it. The book was okay, but I didn't love it. But more to the point, I already know the plot of the movie now! It's like "Gone Girl"-- people seemed to really enjoy it, but I'd just read the book, and so there was no point in seeing it. Half the appeal is the plot twists, which are not surprises if you've read the book. :D

Do you like King in general?
Port: deans pantsdesertport on January 21st, 2015 05:00 am (UTC)
The plot twists kind of do make the movie. Although the crazy old woman was really fun to watch. A good performance.

I've never really read King, actually. The first chapter of a faerie tale-style fantasy book way back in HS, but I think it was too dark for me. But also funny, so, respect. His "On Writing" essay is in the anthology I'm using in one of my classes, but I decided against putting it in my syllabus because it didn't really say anything extraordinary about writing.

Do you think you'll be reading more by him?
The Coalition For Disturbing Metaphorshalfshellvenus on January 21st, 2015 07:29 am (UTC)
I will try at least one more King book, to see if I can build some appreciation for him.

Really, I've read three books and a short-story collection by his son, Joe Hill, and loved them all. I'd thought "Horns" was good, but "NOS4A2" was an order of magnitude better still.

Whereas, my overriding impression of The Mist was, "meh."

So, we'll have to see if a second book changes any of that!