RSS

Author Archives: aureliaosborne

Book Wednesday: The Commitments, by Roddy Doyle

This was Roddy Doyle’s debut novel, published in 1987. It was adapted into a movie, in 1991, and in a West End musical theater show, last summer. It tells the story of a group of young Irishmen-and-women who form a soul band, reach some level of local success, and suddenly crash and burn due to interpersonal conflicts.

I picked up the book for one very, very specific reason: there is a small chance that I might see the musical this summer, and I didn’t want to take the risk of breaking my personal vow to read the book first, whenever I can.

I was pleasantly surprised by the book. In many ways, the writing is similar to my own: on the short side (the copy I had was 176 pages long, with a pretty good sized print) and dialog heavy. The writing is also different to my own, in many ways. There are a lot of quoted song lyrics and onomatopoeic representation of musical instruments, which I don’t do because the idea of breaking copyright laws and getting sued really scare me. There are no chapters, which I’ve never tried, but I might, at some point, because I find it interesting. The dialog is written with a very heavy accent, which I don’t do because reading accents annoys me, and I don’t like inflicting things that annoy me unto other people.

But still, picking up this book, knowing it was a success, adapted to the stage and the screen alike, and noticing similarities with my own writing style, it’s nice. It gives me hope for the future.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 9, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , ,

Theater Monday: Waiting for Godot

I don’t think it’s possible to study French literature, and therefore by extension French theater, without studying Waiting for Godot. It is the ultimate play of the Absurd school. It is a play that happens nowhere, at no time, and is mostly deep and illogical dialog about, among many things, a guy no one ever sees, written in French by an Irish playwright. A Modern French Theater Study teacher’s wet dream.

Two homeless men, Vladimir and Estragon, are sitting beneath a tree, by the side of a road, waiting for a man named Godot, who is going to change their life, though they’re not sure how. The days pass, we’re not sure how many, and Godot never comes, always sending someone with the message that he will come the next day. It’s very deep and meaningful and everything, though I could probably use a re-read.

My strongest memory of the play is the time I’ve missed seeing it. When I was studying literature in college, the theater class required that every student see, and critic, a live play. The teacher organised a field trip to Montreal, for the whole class to see that play. (I can understand the purpose of the trip; it’s easier to correct the homework if everyone sees and writes about the same play. As for the choice of the play, well, see the first paragraph.) I couldn’t go, and I can’t remember why. I want to say that it’s because I had surgery on my jaw, but I know that’s not it, because it was the fall semester, and I had that surgery in February. Maybe I had a doctor’s appointment, to prep for the surgery?

The point is, I had to go see a different play, and I missed a lot of in-jokes over the next two years.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 7, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: ,

Anything goes Friday: I love etymology

As promised last Friday, here is my post on etymology.

Have you ever thought about how weird language is? It becomes especially obvious when you speak more then one language, and the languages in question are wildly different. In my case, those would be French and English.
Take the word “green”. Simple enough, right? I say that word, and you think of the color, and unless you are among the 2.5% of the population who are color-blind, you’re going to think of a color that’s at least similar to the one I’m thinking of. Did you ever wonder why we call this color “green”?
Tracing back through Middle English and Old English and Proto-German and even Proto-Indo-European, it is linked to the root of the word “grow”. Which makes sense; a lot of things that grow are green (plants, flowers, tree leaves, moss, etc.) and vice-versa. In French, however, the color is called “vert”, which can be traced back to the Latin word for “fresh”, and/or “vigorous”. What I find really interesting is that the reason French (and Spanish and Italian) draw so heavily from the Latin is the fact that the Romans invaded, and remained there for centuries. Yet the Romans were also in England for centuries, six of them to be exact, and almost no Latin roots can be found in the modern English language.
And think about the Celts. They occupied a pretty large portion of Europe, including both France and England, for at least as much time as the Romans did, and yet what trace is there of the Celtic influence in either language? Nothing, unless you count the math.
If you count up to 20, you see that each number is described by a different word. 21, on the other hand, is written in two words: twenty (20), and one (1). Only to more you think about it, the less it makes sense. We use Arabic numerals, we count on a base of ten, why is eleven even a word? Logically, 11 should be ten-one, the same way 21 is twenty-one. Who counts on a base of twenty?
The Celts, of course. In the Celtic language, 30 is twenty-ten, 40 is two-twenty, 50 is two-twenty-ten, 60 is three-twenty, 70 is three-twenty-ten, 80 is four-twenty, 90 is four-twenty-ten. And while that bit of counting was lost to the practicalities of modern mathematics, the individual names of numbers from one to twenty remain.
And in French, the link is even more obvious. Number from one to sixteen have their own name (it’s possible that 17, 18 and 19 also all had their names, but their are now ten-seven, ten-eight and ten-nine) AND the numbers between 60 and 100 are counted on a base of 20. 71 is sixty-ten-one, 83 is four-twenty-three, 95 is four-twenty-fifteen.
Isn’t this all amazing?! And what’s even more amazing is that France and England are really close to each other, they shared so much cultural background, and yet they developed languages so completely different from each other.
(It might have something to do with the fact that they spent over 500 years actively at war with each other, but that’s a story for another day.)

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 4, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: ,

Book Wednesday: A new review for the Admirer

It came out Monday, on Steampunk Canada. Check it out!

http://www.steampunkcanada.ca/apps/blog/show/42017981-review-the-admirer

(Yes, it’s a short one today. And yes, maybe it is a little bit cheating to use my own book for Book Wednesday. I don’t care. I’m busy this week. And I’m excited about the review. Review! Woo Hoo!)

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 2, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: ,

Theater Monday: Les Miserables

Quick refresher: Les Miserables is Victor Hugo’s mastodon of a novel, painting the fresco of all humanity. It mostly follows the life of Jean Valjean, recent ex-convict who’s feeling a little savage when he finally gets out of jail after nineteen years (he broke a window and stole the bread inside, got sentenced for five years, tried to escape three times and saw his sentence increase with each attempt) but is restored to humanity by meeting a generous priest, and later by adopting the daughter of a girl he accidentally forced into prostitution and who dies of TB. There are a lot of other people he meets along the way, but except for the adoptive daughter, her future husband and his grandfather, everyone either dies or immigrates to America, and only two people take door number 2.

The only version of Les Miserable I knew, before 2012, was the movie with Liam Neeson, Geoffrey Rush, and Uma Thurman. In hindsight, that movie is terrible and has only the most vague resemblance to the actual novel, and even at the first watch, I don’t think it impressed me that much. (I think I remember a French version, starring Gérard Depardieu, but I think that’s because Gérard Depardieu was starring in every French movie back then.)

The musical adaptation by Alain Boublil and Claude-Michel Schönberg is a completely different story. I felt a connection to the story that the Liam Neeson movie certainly hadn’t brought me. It makes me yearn for a Disney adaptation so bad. Just this once, everybody lives. (yes, I know that’s Doctor Who. Still appropriate.) And I’ve yet to see a really bad actor in that show. (There were one or two disappointing casting choices here and there, but no one was actually bad, imo.)

First, I saw the 25th anniversary concert, filmed at the O2. It played on PBS in either late November or early December, I can’t remember, but I had already made the decision that I was going to go watch the movie. So many amazing performers: Alfie Boe, Norm Lewis, Lea Salonga, Samatha Barks, Katie Hall, Ramin Karimloo, Matt Lucas, not to mention all the great actors in smaller parts!

Then I saw the movie version of the musical, starring Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, Amanda Seyfried, Samantha Barks, and Aaron Tveit, among others, but I’m only naming the ones that made an impression on me. I didn’t hate Amanda Seyfried and Russell Crowe as much as others seemed to, Anne Hathaway and Hugh Jackman were all right but didn’t blow me away, and I fell a little bit more in love with the voices and the talents of Aaron Tveit and Samantha Barks.

Then I heard that the musical was returning to Broadway. But first it was coming to Toronto. Ramin Karimloo, whom I remembered from the O2 concert, would be Jean Valjean! I was so psyched! I checked the site every day for weeks, jumped on a ticket the first chance I got.

The music was as great as ever, the actors were brilliant (Melissa O’Neil, Gevenieve Leclerc, Perry Sherman, Mark Urhe, Earl Carpenter; they were all beautiful and amazing!) and I only wish that my seat had been better. I was at the extreme left up in the balcony, so there was a 10% of the stage that I couldn’t see, among other issues.

And now Les Miserables has opened on Broadway. Am I going to see it when I make my Easter trip? Meh, probably not. I still love the show, but it feels like I just saw the show, and those I loved the best in Toronto didn’t make it to Broadway. The ones who did make it, Mr Karimloo, Samantha Hill and Cliff Saunders, they are good, don’t get me wrong, and everyone should see them at least once. Twice in six months, thought, that’s a bit much.

If Alfie Boe, whom I’ve never seen live but loved at the O2 concert, if he’d been Valjean on Broadway, that would be different.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 31, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: ,

Anything goes Friday: more short thoughts

Because it’s one of those days again.

– I started to write about how much I love etymology, but then I realized that it would take too long to qualify as a short thought, so I’ll probably cue up a post on that for next Friday. For now, I’ll only say that language is a wonderful, improbable, amazing thing.

– I was shopping today, and I bought a bunch of movies, including “Frozen” and “Saving Mr. Banks”, which I then proceeded to watch back to back. Disney studios, who gave you the right to do this to my heart? How dare you?!?

– Sometimes I think about the fact that the majority of the Tumblr users I follow are younger then I am, by something close to a decade, and it makes me feel a little uncomfortable. Sometimes, I overhear some conversations between co-workers, about how a girl who goes to a club and asks for a friend to help her get away from the creeps is apparently a hypocrite because “she goes on the floor with a big smile on her face” and “she should stop asking for it”, or about how a five foot nothing girl got her ass grabbed by a six foot plus guy and “it’s so funny” because “you know how he is”, and it makes me feels sick a lot. And then I imagine putting this conversation on Tumblr, how the social justice warriors would tear it to shreds if they caught it, and it restores my faith in humanity. Because those co-workers I’m talking about? They’re in their late 30’s early 40’s. In 20-25 years, they’re going to be retired in some trailer park in Florida, while the current teenagers of Tumblr will rule the world. It can only be an improvement.

(Yes, the etymology bit would have been ever longer then that. I have a lot of feelings about etymology, okay?)

I think that’s enough for today.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 28, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Book Wednesday: The Jane Austen Handbook, by Margaret Sullivan

Aka, my favorite read of the week. A friend of mind grabbed this book for me at the library, and I might just pick up a copy for myself, because I really, really liked it.

Margaret Sullivan evaluates the complete work of Jane Austen, and mines it for information about the daily of the Georgian country gentry, supplemented by other material. Some of the information sounded more like a satire of Austen then like genuine reconstruction of the world of Austen. (The “how to indicate interest in a gentleman without seeming forward” chapter, especially, was entirely pulled from Pride and Prejudice, outlining the techniques used by Caroline Bingley to attract Fitzwilliam Darcy.) And as I’m not a big fan of satire as a genre, that bugged me a little.

Still, overall, it was a very informative and enjoyable read.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 26, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , ,

Theater Monday: Casting couch

Something I’ve been thinking about doing for a while, but kept putting off, until today because the day feels right.

Welcome to the casting couch! Where I take some of my favorite musicals and dream up my perfect cast.

Today we are looking at Notre-Dame de Paris, lyrics by Luc Plamondon, music by Riccardo Cocciante, based on the novel by Victor Hugo. The show has 7 named signing parts: two females, Esmeralda and Fleur-de-Lys, and five males, Frollo, Gringoire, Quasimodo, Phoebus and Clopin.

This show was played in London for a couple of seasons, and a shorter version was mounted in Las Vegas for about the same amount of time, and if I remember correctly, there was talk of taking it to Broadway, but that never happened.

Say the show was returning to London, and I had a chance to choose the cast. Who would I pick?

For Esmeralda: Samantha Barks. She’s a great singer, she can hit both the high and the low notes (this part is actually really hard, and I can understand that they cut the first part of the Bohemienne song, to remove the really low notes and allow the directors to cast sopranos as Esmeralda, but I don’t have to like it) and she’s really beautiful; I would have no problem believing that three guys fall head over heels over her face.

For Fleur-de-Lys: Katie Hall. This is a soprano part, who’s on stage for a very short amount of time and has to show a great deal of development, going from wide-eyed ingenue to dark and fierce scorned woman. From what I’ve seen of Katie Hall, she can handle it. And I love her voice so much, I want to see her in everything.

For Frollo: Earl Carpenter. This character is a combination of the blind righteousness of Javert and of the obsessive lust/love of a Phantom, and Earl Carpenter happens to be one of my favorite actors to have played both parts.

For Gringoire: Killian Donnelly. This character opens the show, and the actor playing him needs to grab the audience with pretty much nothing but his voice. That voice needs to be extraordinary. Killian Donnelly’s voice is extraordinary.

For Quasimodo: Fra Fee. The role was written for a new singer (at the time, of course, he’s become a superstar since) who was a very strong, powerful baritone, despite his young age. (He also had a very peculiar, gravelly voice, but you can’t ask for everything). Fra is another young singer who is a strong, powerful baritone, and I love his voice.

For Phoebus: Alistair Brammer. This part calls for a Disney Prince kind of voice, and he has it. Also, he’s good-looking, which is helpful when one plays a part who has multiple characters attracted to them.

For Clopin: Ramin Karimloo. The part was created by a rock singer, who brought a lot of raw energy on stage, which Ramin Karimloo can certainly bring. The part is also canonically stated to be a person of color, and this Iranian-born actor qualifies.

I also have a Broadway dream cast for this show, but it needs some work. So that’s enough for tonight.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 24, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Anything goes Friday: I love Ireland

So … I had a thing planned for today, but it didn’t work. So instead I’m just going to post something real quick.

I love Ireland. I’ve been wanting to go there for almost half my life. (That makes me sound terrifyingly old.) (“terrifyingly” is a word? English language, you are so weird. Anyway.) I blame Nora Roberts; about 15% of her entire body of work is either set in Ireland, or features a predominantly Irish character. To sooth the inner, and possibly outer, hipster, I’ll add that I’ve also read The Princes of Ireland, by Edward Rutherford. I don’t think I’ve read The Rebels of Ireland, though, and I probably should. I probably should re-read the Princes as well.

I also love listening to Irish folk music, and I started collecting albums right around the time I started reading Nora Roberts. Add that to all the photos in Google images, and, well … I’m going there someday. It might not be like the pictures or the books or the songs (in fact I strongly suspect it won’t be) but I’ll see for myself how different it is. Someday.

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 21, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , ,

Book Wednesday: A Week in Winter, by Maeve Binchy

I had a bit of a challenge finding a book for this Irish week I’ve created for myself. I wanted a book written by an Irish author, and set in Ireland, and one that I could read in a few weeks, keeping in mind that I’m working full time, which left out Ulysses, and that’s was the only Ireland-set, Irish author book I own. Thankfully, I remembered another author, one I used to have on my shelves (I loaned the book out and never saw it again): Maeve Binchy. I went to the library, and thankfully, they had one on the shelves: A Week in Winter.

A Week in Winter is ostensibly the story of a woman who opens an inn in her small Irish town, and of her first week in business. (I’ll let you guess the season.) It’s more a study of various character then a novel; when I think “novel”, I think “single narrative”, and this didn’t have it. Instead, each chapter told the story of one character, starting in their teenage years, if not in their childhood, and going up to a certain point in time, then the next chapter would go a little further in time, until the book ends, at the end of the week. This means that the strength of the story relied entirely on the characters, which are, for the most part, interesting and even likable in some cases. But even the unlikable characters make for a good read, and that takes talent.

The only downside, and I’ll admit it’s a serious point, was the end of the book. The last two chapters, to be precise. Up until that point, it had been made clear that the stories of the characters only loosely connected to each other, but with those last two chapters, it felt like the author was trying to bring everything back into one narrative, and tie it up in a neat little bow. The last chapter especially gave the impression that she was trying to give each character a magic happily ever after, and since the end point of each chapter already ended the character’s journey on a high note, that last chapter was overkill, in my opinion.

I still enjoyed the book, overall, and recommend it to everyone who wants several good examples of how you set up a character and tell its story in one chapter.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 19, 2014 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , ,