IRA: Recommendation & Analysis

This will be my final blog for the book, Of Truth and Beasts. Overall, I enjoyed this book, as well as the series in general. Its similar to a lot of books in its general plot, but it has its own twist to it as well. There are many books that have a plot of good vs. evil, so its certainly not a new theme. Something that I like about it is the moral ambiguity, which isn't present in most characters in the vast majority of books I've read. There are characters, even one's on the side of good, who committ very questionable acts (such as murder, lying, etc.). This actually makes the story more realistic.

Also, the fact that there are various undead, gives the story more depth. They aren't caricatures of vampires. The mythology of the undead in this story is very complex and well thought out. There are many different cultures and different types of creatures (such as dwarves, elves, and humans, etc.). The fact that there are dwarves, elves, fey, undead, fey hounds and various other kinds of mythical creatures, places this book firmly in the fantasy/sci-fi category (primarily fantasy). Because of this, I would recommend this book to people who enjoy this category.

One of the few issues I have with this book and other books I've read, is the main theme (good vs. evil). This theme is used in a lot of books. The fact is, it starts to get kind of tedious. Theres a bad guy, the good guy saves the day, blah blah. We get it already! Thats not to say that they aren't good books, but its hard to write a book with this kind of theme and make it stand out. There are just too many books like it. Personally, though, I think this book and the series in general is off to a good start in making itself distinct from many others.

Another problem I have with this series is repetitiousness in the wording. This is something you wouldn't notice unless you've read the first books in the series. If you just read one book, it wouldn't be noticeable. However, most people read the first book in a series and go on from there. This brings up another related issue I have with the series. Some stuff that occurs in previous books and is already explained there, is mentioned in this book. Even if its a small mention, they feel the need to explain it yet again. Now, if you happen to acidentally start the series in the middle, this is a good thing. Otherwise, its just irritating.

Now, to sum up my analysis and give you my recommendation. This books plot is the usual good vs. evil, so if your tired of this plot, its probably not for you. Still, it does provide several twists and variations on your average good vs. evil theme, so its not just standard issue. However, if you can't stand lengthy, repetitious explanations, as well as wording seemingly copied from a previous book in the series, you'll probably become annoyed by this series. Considering the books genre, I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys this particular genre. That being said, I think anyone would still enjoy it.

The Grapes of Wrath: Movie vs. Book

The movie is lacking several of the scenes that the book has. In the book, they learn of the hardships of California both at the river and at the camp. In the movie, they learn of it just at the camp. Theres no turtle scene, and the gas stop scene is with the Joad's, not some unknown family. But one of the elements that remains the same is Tom going to help organize the workers.

I like both the movie and the book. The movie is faster paced, but most books made into movies are. I can't really decide which I prefer. The fact is, they aren't exactly the same so its hard to say.

Anonymous

This story explores the possibility that Shakespeare didn't really write his plays and poems. There does seem to be the possibility that this is so. Shakespeare's parents were illiterate, so it seems more logical that he himself was. That being said, its not totally impossible that Shakespeare knew how to write.

Theres also the possibility that a noble hired him to put his name to the plays. During that time, it wouldn't have been possible for a noble to write (their reputation). The fact is, theres no proof one way or another. We can't say for certain that Shakespeare wrote his plays, but we can't say for certain that he didn't, either. It really is simply a matter of opinion.

IRA

This book delves heavily into myths and legends to create an interesting storyline.  The main folktale/myth that is explored in this story is the undead. Though vampires are one of the undead mentioned, they are not the only breed of undead mentioned in this story. This actually helps the story have more realism. In every culture, there are myths and legends about nonhuman creatures, but they tend to vary greatly, even if they are the same creature.

Now, I guess I'm going to go off into a rant here but I feel that I must. As I'm sure you've all noticed, and I've mentioned this in a previous blog as well, todays vampire differs drastically from the past. The vampire legend has been butchered and altered so drastically, its almost unrecognizable. In the past, you could count on vampires, in both movies and books, being the bad guys. They were always portrayed as monsters with no humanity. It's simply unbelievable what has happened to the vampire. I mean, come on! Sparkling vampires?! It is one of the most ridiculous changes made to the vampire legend. And this is just one of many ridiculous alterations of vampires. Personally, I find myself wishing for the movies and books where vampires were blood sucking monsters. Hard to believe vampires were once viewed as the soulless undead, huh?

IRA

Today I would like to discuss the myths and development of vampires in our societies.

In many societies, there are many different tales of inhuman creatures. Vampires are one of the most prominent and prevalent of these nonhuman creatures. It's interesting to note the evolution of the vampire in society. The old tales of vampires depict them as bloodthirsty, soulless monsters. But in modern times the vampire has been romanticized. The fact is, the only reason the vampire myths were created was to explain strange deaths, as well as the various symptoms of death. Many of these supposed "signs" that indicate that a person is a vampire, are perfectly explainable as side-effects of death. Longer nails and hair, the skin has shrunk, etc. Now you may be wondering is there any truth to the blood drinking? Well, as for that, there certainly are individuals who drink blood but they're simply mentally disturbed. However, that doesn't make them vampires by any means. All in all, the vampire myths were merely created to give an explanation to unexplainable events.

IRA

A topic that occurs in this book is power through knowledge. A prime example of this is the main character Wynn, who is a sage. While she is not a particularly powerful person in typical terms. Many characters strengths lie in more typically accepted areas, such as fighting or magic. Unlike them, her strengths are her intelligence and perseverance. She makes mistakes, but overall, her intentions are good.

I would also like to discuss the second main character, Chane. He is a Noble Dead, which is what they call vampires in his native land. This character seems to lack a moral compass. It appears as though he became this way after he became a vampire. I don't believe that becoming a vampire totally destroys your sense of right and wrong. It's far more likely that the fact that you have to kill when you become a vampire in order to survive simply hardens you emotionally. If you can't discard your morals somewhat, you won't survive. This is very reminiscent of humanity in general (definitely not vampire exclusive).

This isn't to say that Chane doesn't have any redeeming qualities. He wouldn't be on the good guys side otherwise, now would he? One redeeming quality of his is his love of scholarly pursuits. It's one of his few humanizing features. But overall, the one really humanizing and redeemable quality he possesses is his love for Wynn. This love for her caused him to follow her over half the world, and also stop feeding from people. He used to kill and feed from humans without remorse, but now only feeds from animals. He is totally and utterly committed to Wynn. This allows us to remember that he was once human, too. Without this, it's easy to think of him as nothing but a soulless killer, which he is not.