The Last Blog Post

This my last blog post. Once I've said it everything seems so final. The year is almost over and I can still remember the first week of school as if it was yesterday. Surprisingly for me, I enjoyed blogging about books I read and what I thought of them and how they changed the way I thought about the world in general. In sixth and seventh grade I hated the way that we kept track of our reading. It wasn't creative, it was just tedious, and we weren't being asked what we thought of or learned from the book. It was simply proof that we had been reading. I am really glad that we were able to blog this year because it helped me to write about what I thought and what I was thinking. 

I have always been the kind of reader who, when given a book could read it through in one seating if it's really good. I'm a fast reader and I get absorbed in the stories, sometimes I won't even realize what’s going on around me until someone actually tries to get my attention. But it's different when I'm reflecting on a book that I read; I tend to go more into what the story reminds me of, how I connect it to other things, or what the kind of story in general makes me think of. I automatically veer away from talking too much about the book in particular.  I think sometimes it would be better if I kept on topic a little more, but that's something that I'm just going to have to work on.

Writing online is harder for me than writing in a notebook because I know that it can be seen and judged by other people. It would definitely be easier for me to write on a blog if my identity was a secret. But for this blog, having my name and class and being open to my teacher and other students, I think twice about almost everything that I write because I care what people's reactions are going to be. I'm not sure if it's a good or bad thing but it's there for now. For some people I think that writing online would definitely be freeing especially under a pen name. When you're writing online, you are in complete control of what people see. You are able to edit everything before it is seen by others. But the other side is that many more people can see your writing if it is online, that might be frightening depending on how open your writing is and whether it can be traced back to you. I think that some people take advantage of being anonymous and say harsh or cruel things and I wish that people wouldn't do that. But other people portray their best selves online, there's no strings attached and I think that helps some people. Other people put stuff online that they shouldn't and they don't seem to realize that it can affect them. Writing online can be different for every person who does it.

There are a bunch of sites that allow you to put your opinions and comments up for people to see. I think it is really good to share what you think and hear what other people have to say. As long as you are open to other ideas then I think it is really beneficial to be able to do this. But some people use these sites to vent and put other people down. It's wrong for people to do this and I don't think they should be able to do that. There are other sites, like Facebook, where you show who you are. I think these sites have their benefits but they are definitely abused. Some people say things online that they would never say in real life. I think, that if there is something you wouldn't feel comfortable saying to someone's face you should not say it online. 

I probably won't continue this blog, but I might start another one. It would just have some of my stories or loved websites and songs and links to other blogs that I like. It would be most definitely be filled with fan art. It would be about the things that I love and I want to share with other people. 

Goodbye blog.

The Schwa Was Here

I just started reading "The Schwa Was Here" by Neal Shusterman. It’s the first book to break my Jodi Picoult cycle and it is a very different type of book. It's about a boy that the other children call the "Schwa". The "Schwa" is a boy who people don't notice. His friend, Antsy, calls it being functionally invisible. When the "schwa" is in a classroom with nine other people the teacher would only count nine students, if a group of people are standing in a circle they will not notice the "schwa unless he does something to draw direct attention to himself. He can overhear people talking about him because they won't see him even if he's standing a foot away in plain sight. When he meets Antsy, they conduct a bunch of experiments on whether or not people notice him and soon enough they are making a lot of money from people daring him to do things without getting noticed, like stealing donuts from the teacher's lounge or walking into the girl’s bathroom. 

The book is partly about the science fiction aspect of a partly invisible boy, but it is also about kids feeling invisible. The narrator, Antsy, lives in a big family where he can go unnoticed most of the time and at times he likes it but sometimes he doesn't. There's a contrast between the fiction of the invisible boy and the reality of a boy who feels invisible. I know that a lot of people my age feel unnoticed and some of them are. People just want to be noticed, to be acknowledged, to be seen. The book sends the message that you can make yourself noticed no matter who you are without being harmful to yourself and others. It manages to send the message while telling a comical science fiction story about a boy who actually is invisible. It in a funny way puts the other problem in perspective.

It's a book about invisibility whether it's wanted or unwanted, whether it’s real or metaphorical, whether it's helpful or not. It's a book about the two ids that have to learn how to deal with it or find a way to get rid of it. It’s a science fiction story that incorporates a story about a boy realizing that he wants to change and that he has to work hard to do that. Neal Shusterman is an amazing author and I would completely recommend his books.

The Tragedy of Romeo & Juliet

“The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet” written by Shakespeare, is known as the most famous love story of all time.  It’s a beautifully romantic drama with a tragic ending. It usually is thought of as the ultimate love story, but it’s also about so much more. A main theme in the story is loyalty. There is Romeo and Juliet's loyalty to each other, there is Tybalt's loyalty to Lord Capulet, and there is the loyalty between Mercutio and Romeo. Throughout the story, Shakespeare is able to portray the many loyalties that characters have to each other. The reasons behind these loyalties are mainly: love, family, and friendship.

            One of the most important loyalties in the story is the loyalty that Romeo and Juliet have to each other. It starts before they even know each other’s names. Once Juliet has met Romeo she claims that if she could not have him she would never be married. She pledges herself to him before she knows his name; it goes to show how loyal she is from the very start. The loyalty that they have for each other occasionally conflicts their other loyalties. When Juliet is talking about Romeo she says “Deny thy father and refuse thy name, / Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love, / And I’ll no longer be a Capulet.”(2.2.37-39). Juliet is willing to give up her family for Romeo, whereas Romeo tries to take on Juliet’s family as his own. He acts as though her cousin Tybalt was his own family. When Tybalt challenges Romeo Romeo’s response is “I do protest I never injured thee / But love thee better than thou canst devise / Till thou shalt know the reason of my love. / And so, good Capulet, which name I tender / As dearly as mine own, be satisfied.”(3.1.69-73). Tybalt has a vendetta against Romeo, but because of Juliet, Romeo refuses to fight with Tybalt and claims to love him as family. The loyalty between Romeo and Juliet isn't one of those things that is started early on and doesn't last very long; it was so strong that they wanted to be together in death. Their loyalty to each other lasts throughout the entire story, and in the end the actually do die for each other.

            The biggest feud throughout the entire play is the one between the Montagues and the Capulets. Almost all of the characters side with one family even though no one seems to know why the two families hate each other. In the beginning it is stated rather simply by a Capulet that “The quarrel is between our masters and us / their men.”(1.1.20-21). the true feud seems to be between Lord Montague and Lord Capulet, but everyone is pulled in by their blood relation. One of the clearest examples of family born loyalty is Tybalt’s loyalty to the Capulets. At his Uncle’s party, Tybalt is the one who caught Romeo and his friends crashing the party. His immediate response is “This, by his voice, should be a Montague. - / Fetch me my rapier, boy.”(1.5.61-62) and “Now, by the stock and honor of my kin, / To strike him dead I hold it not a sin.”(1.5.66-67). He feels that Romeo is disrespecting his family so it would not be wrong to kill him. Although Tybalt is impulsive as a character and the choice to start a fight was his own, his real motive is to protect his family and its honor. Tybalt’s overall hatred towards the Montagues is brought on only by his Uncle’s feud. Tybalt feels the need to protect his family from the disrespect that he believes the Montagues are showing. This is despite the fact that he doesn't even know what his uncle's feud with Lord Montague really was.

            Another strong loyalty in the play is Romeo’s loyalty to his best friend Mercutio. It is so strong that at one point it overshadows his loyalty to Juliet. Mercutio has taken on the Montague’s side when it comes to the huge feud between the families. When Romeo is challenged by Tybalt and refuses to fight, Mercutio takes on the fight as his own. Romeo and Mercutio were incredibly close, so when Mercutio is killed, by Tybalt, it sets Romeo on the war path immediately. Romeo finds Tybalt and says “Mercutio’s soul / Is but a little way above our heads, / Staying for thine to keep him company. / Either thou or I, or both, must go with him.”(3.1.131-134). He says this referring to Mercutio's spirit and saying that he needs someone to die now to keep him company, It will be you, or me, or the both of us. Romeo is in a rage, because his friend had an untimely death, and at the least he shouldn't die alone. Romeo doesn't fear for his own life, he goes as far as to welcome death if it means that he will be able to keep Mercutio company. He was willing to kill or even die for his best friend, nothing else mattered.

            The loyalties in this story are amazingly strong and are shown for a variety of reasons. I thought that the best character relationships to represent these loyalties were Romeo & Juliet, Tybalt & Lord Capulet, and Romeo & Mercutio. They were the strongest loyalties in the story for love, family, and friendship. The scenarios in this story are very extreme compared to current family feuds. Nowadays you don’t try to kill someone simply because he came uninvited to your Uncle’s party. You might take on some of your friend’s battles metaphorically but there is not so much sword fighting now.  And when you get married you will have new in laws but hopefully they won’t be out to kill you for disrespecting your new father in law. The Loyalties in the play were more pronounced due to the lifestyle back then but these types of loyalty still do exist. It’s a part of everyday life, just without all the swordplay.

Perfect Match 2 (Spoiler Alert)

It wasn't until the second to last page of the book that I understood what the title was for. I had been trying really hard to figure it out and I was making all these wild connections to things that could have possibly fit. But nothing really made sense, until I read the last chapter. Usually the books I read, (mainly Jodi Picoult), have titles that interconnect with the story in a variety of ways and all of the characters have moments where you, as the reader, make the connection and are able to figure it out. It is usually mentioned in dialogue   at least once in the book. Or it's just blatantly obvious and you don't even have to think hard to figure it out. But this book was different; there were no subtle hints in the conversations, it didn't really weave through the book and relate to all of the characters, and it wasn't really clear why it was the title. 

When I first started to try to make connections I focused on the characters relationships  I tried to see if any of the characters were each others perfect match. But I couldn't really find anything; Nina and Patrick were definitely not perfect for each other because they both had really time consuming jobs and while Patrick was in love with Nina, Nina was already married and was not really in love with Patrick - she cared about him, but she wasn't in love with him. They did grow up together and they had the boy loves the girl-next-door thing going on for a while. In the beginning I thought it was going to be them but as the story went on you could tell that Patrick had lost his chance. As much as you pity Patrick and wish there was a way for them, it's pretty clear that it just wasn't going to work out.

The next character I focused on was Nathaniel. I was looking at his relationships with all the other characters. For a while I supposed that it had to be Nathaniel and his mother, Nina. Nina loves her son enough to commit murder (later ruled out to be manslaughter) and the only person that Nathaniel lives for is his mother, yes he loves his father too but he is more emotionally attached to Nina. When Nina is taken to a prison for a short time Nathaniel regresses so much that he needs therapy to teach him how to talk again. But while they do love each other and Nina definitely goes above and a bit too far beyond to prove her love for Nathaniel their relationship would be incorrectly labeled if you called them a perfect match. They were a family, they loved each other, but they weren't perfect for each other.

I skimmed over a couple of the other character relationships but none of them seemed to really make any sense with the title. Nina and Caleb are married but they don't agree on many things and they aren't very similar at all. Caleb and Nathaniel were just a typical father son and just lacked the intense connection that Nathaniel had with his mom. Patrick and Caleb both loved Nina but one of them got her and the other one didn't, and they weren't friends, they simply tolerated each other, and Caleb sort of pitied Patrick for being in love with his wife. Patrick and Nathaniel were really close because Patrick had a love for Nathaniel because he was Nina's son. I thought about the other more minor characters but none of them fit at all.

Then in the very last two pages of the book I finally got it. It was a relationship that I had sort of skipped because it didn't seem to stick out much. But on the second to last page you find out how Father Gwynne really died. Caleb poisoned him ! I was really surprised because Caleb seems like the sweet law abiding person in this story but he kills someone. Nina and Caleb both killed to protect their son; Nina killed Father Glen and Caleb killed Father Gwynne. The two that murdered out of love end up together, what a completely perfect match.

Perfect Match (Spoiler Alert)

The book "Perfect Match" by Jodi Picoult is about a mother who kills the person who is suspected of  molesting her son. The mother, Nina Frost, was a prosecutor who prosecuted against child molesters and abusers and rapists. She has a five year old son, Nathaniel, who she loves with all her heart. When she and her husband, Caleb Frost, find out that Nathaniel was molested it starts a legal battle against the person that Nathaniel named as his molester Father Glen. During the court case Nina buys a gun and shoots and kills the defendant in court. This starts another case with Nina as the defendant. They are pleading insanity at the time of the crime and during this court case it was found that Father Glen, their local priest, was not guilty of molesting Nathaniel. It was actually a visiting priest named Father Gwynne. When Nathaniel named his molester he said "Father Gwynne" but it was interpreted as "Father Glen" because Nathaniel was known to not be able to pronounce his "N"s and Father Glen was the only local priest alone with a name like that. They weren't aware that a Father Gwynne even existed.

The main character in the story s Nina, she is the one who you hear from the most and a lot of the story is from her perspective. It was hard for me to read the book without getting mad that Nina had these two great guys in love with her and she was, in my opinion completely insane. What makes her insane is that she was completely lucid when she held her gun up to the priest's head and shot him four times. I know that at the time that everyone was 99.999999% sure that it was Father Glen that molested Nathaniel, but even then I think it was wrong that she shot him. I think that someone who molests children definitely deserves to die, but in this case I think it was idiotic that Nina was willing to risk Nathaniel growing up without a mother. Especially because Nathaniel was extremely attached to Nina and didn't function well without her.

Patrick Ducharme, the boy next door from Nina's childhood has been in love with her since they were children. But when Patrick shipped off to Afghanistan he was never able to tell Nina how he felt and she met Caleb Frost and fell in love. Patrick would even imagine a future with Nina, he would think that she would finally notice him and realize that she had feelings for him. But then Nathaniel was born and it was clear that Patrick could never ruin the kid's life by stealing his mother away. And Patrick grew to love Nathaniel almost as much as he loved Nina, he thought of Nathaniel as the son that he never had with the girl of his dreams. It's bothersome to me to hear him fawning over Nina even after she murders someone to regain her revenge or justice or whatever her excuse for it is. 

Another guy completely head over heels in love with Nina is her husband. Caleb was aware that Patrick is in love with his wife but he never questioned Nina's fidelity and pitied Patrick because he would never had what Caleb had. Caleb is completely thrown off when Nina kills Father Glen and is shocked and takes Nathaniel out of the house because he can't trust her anymore. But then he forgives her and comes back home. Caleb is put in an odd position because Nathaniel is also his son and he knows that he would have been willing to kill to keep Nathaniel safe as well. The difference is that Caleb saw how being convicted as a murderer would also harm Nathaniel. I think that Caleb is much more reasonable when it comes to his reaction to Nina's crime. But in the end he still goes back to her.

I understand that Nina thought she was getting justice but she was wrong and for a while I almost hoped that she would be convicted for the murder because murder is wrong. But there is more to the problem, and its name is Nathaniel. Nathaniel didn't deserve to lose a mother and if she was taken away he would blame himself  even though it wasn't his fault at all. Nina definitely deserves to go to prison but Nathaniel doesn't deserve to have his mother taken away. It can be hard to read a book when you can't even decide on your own opinion.

House Rules 2

I started "House Rules" by Jodi Picoult a while ago and over time I have been most interested in how the main character's little brother "Theo" has developed throughout the story. Theo is the little brother of Jacob. Jacob has Aspergers disease and it makes Theo's life really difficult. But until the middle of the story Theo was really able to hold himself together, more or less. Then when his brother is arrested for murder Theo kind of loses it and runs away. You hear parts of the story from Theo's perspective so you see how he feels while things are happening to his family. I pitied Theo more and more throughout the story. There was a scene I just read where Theo goes to meet his birth father and breaks down and starts crying and explains how he wanted to show his dad that he was the man of the house who was holding everything together but he was just so stressed out and tired and upset that he cracked.

I think that when things go wrong in this family the one who can't get rid of the guilt or the pain is Theo because Jacob doesn't mind what other people think because he doesn't interpret their social ques as being harsh or mean. Theo on the other hand does notice these kinds of ques and is hurt by them. Before Jacob was wanted for murder Theo was just a mostly normal teenage boy on the outside. From what I heard it seemed like Theo tried pretty hard to keep Jacob out of his life and it sounded like he had been successful. When the trial started Theo had to leave his high school and be home schooled instead, he had to be the one to go shopping, he had to take money out from the bank account. He had to do everything that needed to be done outside of the house because Jacob was under strict house arrest and his mother needed to stay with him 24/7 in order to keep him out of jail. I think that this made Theo grow up very fast because it was putting a lot of responsibility on his shoulders and I don't think he was ready for it.

Theo started off as teenager with a life that was harder than most and has developed into the man of the house who has everything on his shoulders. The change happened quite suddenly and I don't think that he is ready for it. But he doesn't have much of a choice. He is now the only person in his family who can get things done since his brother is disabled, his mother is always busy with his brother, and his dad left when he was really little. I can only hope that as the book goes on Theo's back doesn't break with the weight of so much responsibility all piled up on him.

Izzy Blog Review

When I was looking for one to respond to I noticed that Izzy's Blog Post had been on the same book that I was reading. Izzy's post was on "House Rules" by Jodi Picoult having just started that book I agree with the points that she made. 

I felt really bad for the mother of Jacob and Theo because of everything that she was put through. It must be really hard to raise a kid with aspergers and on top of that have to raise another child as well. She was under appreciated and all she did was for her children. Part of the story was from her perspective and you could see that she had ambitions that she was never able to live out because of her kids. another thing that I saw that Izzy didn't mention was this scene about the mother not thinking about herself. It is the scene where the police officer comes to their house to ask them about the murder of Jess. The mother, Emma ends up talking to the officer and he comments on how much Jacob knows about forensics, Emma says "Tell me something I don't know." then the officer says "You have really pretty eyes."  I thought that this really highlights how the mother doesn't even think of herself anymore. 

I felt much worse for Theo than I did for Jacob or the mother because he was at a tough point in his life and he was fully aware of what people thought of him and his brother. I agree that Jacob ruined a lot of things for Theo and that he never lived up to the big brother expectations that Theo had for him. 

Also, Jacob is really smart and has an interesting perspective but I didn't really connect with him the same way that I felt bad for Emma and Theo. The only time that I really got caught up in the parts of Jacob's narration is when he began to talk about Jess. I thought it was so sad that he was in love with Jess, or at least assumed that he was, because Jess would never really feel the same. I was surprised that Izzy didn't mention this in her blog because it was a big part of the story, maybe she just hadn't reached that point of the book yet. It is a really interesting part of the book and I think that as a reader it was interesting and really gets you to pity Jacob. 

House Rules

I just finished the book "House Rules" by Jodi Picoult and it really got me thinking;

I found that most of the books I’ve been reading recently are about serious or sad topics. I was reading a book a little while ago about a murder investigation and my Father read the back cover and was slightly shocked that such a book was put in public school libraries. But the truth is most kids our age understand things like this and it is hard for me to find challenging books that do not have disturbing topics. It is not really surprising to me to see a book about a murder, serious disease, abuse, or other difficult topic. I think the topic is part of what makes the book difficult.

I think that while reading about a really suspenseful chase between a child and a kidnapper is really interesting, it can also be hard to read if one of your favorite characters is beaten or hurt. When you get attached to characters it is hard to see them get in trouble, harmed, or even killed. When you are reading a book about sad things you have to be ready for sad things to happen in the story. If there is a story about how a family gets through a death in the family, yes they do get through it eventually but first someone has to die.  I think that it is harder to read a book about a terrible thing. The only thing is that there is a whole other half to it.

It is more interesting to read about a terrible thing. In my experience I learn much more from books about murder trials, people with extreme diseases, or problems with government than I would from a book about the love life of a teenage girl in her summer abroad. I have nothing against romance stories; I’m just not a huge Sarah Dessen fan.

Maybe it’s just me but I find the stories about abusive parents or suicides to be so much more interesting than the books about the true life of a kid in a suburban high-school. I like the complicated scenario, multiple narrations, lot going on everywhere, kind of book.

One of my favorite authors who usually does all of this is Jodi Picoult. Another book about a serious topic that for some reason not everyone thinks of as a serious story is the “Harry Potter” series. I guess the reason behind that is there are funny parts of the story about friendship and growing up, there is also the super evil magician trying to murder the main character. A book about a serious topic doesn’t have to be a complete sob story or a super serious book; it can have some laughs and side topics. That’s part of what makes it a good book.

Mercy

I just started the book "Mercy" by Jodi Picoult. Its interesting but I don't think that it is her best book. Ive read a lot of her other books and I think that this one really just doesn't compare. That doesn't mean that it is not interesting. I think that the author challenged herself when writing this one, its a murder mystery where you already know who the villain is. The only problem is that the villain killed out of mercy.

Its kind of hard to wrap your mind around but here goes, He killed his wife by smothering her with a pillow, which he did because he loved her so much, because she asked him to, because she was in constant pain, because she had cancer and she was going to die in 2 years anyway. So the reason he killed his wife was because he loved her too much to bear to see her in pain and wanted to end her suffering. This part of the book was really interesting, it was the other half of the story that kind of ruined it for me. While this murder trial is going on there is a man named Cameron, he is the cousin of the murderer (James or Jamie). Cameron is cheating on his wife with a woman he just met named Mia. I don't like the way this book is set up because it doesn't fit together.

One of the things that I tend to love about Jodi Picoult's books is that they are a bunch of complex plots and characters that intricately twist around each other but still make sense. Usually at least some of the characters are relatives but there's always some other one with their own story. Usually that story finds  way to fit in with all the other ones, it fits, makes sense, and seems to belong there. Sadly this book didn't have that great connection. The other person in this book is Mia, the other woman. She is an interesting character and she has an intriguing back story but she doesn't really relate at all to the main scheme of things. She is just a pretty woman who happened to catch a married man's eye.

Maybe if the book were centered around something different then it would make more sense. I think maybe the book should have been called "History". That would make sense because of a couple different reasons. One, Mia and Cameron met once in Italy before Cameron got married so they have history, the reflective part of the book is about the history of a Scottish leader(Cameron's father), part of the book is about Jamie's life before he killed his wife, and the actual court case is "making history" because of how odd it is.I think that that would have fixed the issues that I really had with this book.

Characters

I've been reading a lot of books lately that have one focused main character and I've been wondering what makes that character believable. I couldn't figure out if it was the way they thought, their imperfections, or the balance of their personality in general. But then I thought if that were true then there could be no perfectly angelic characters and no perfectly evil characters. I noticed that a perfect character seems a lot more realistic once they've done something wrong. And also how the bad guy becomes a lot more believable the second that he has a doubt about what he's done. It doesn't really matter whether or not he changes but the little waver is enough to convince you that he is real. It's much easier to think of a beautiful and equally stupid person or a smart and not-so-gorgeous person. Otherwise it seems just too good/bad to be believable.

It seems to be easier for some people to admire stories if they feel that they can relate to the main character. It doesn't have to be much it could be the gender, race, problem they're having, or even the fact that they have a little sibling too. It makes it easier for the reader to see the story clearly through the main characters eyes. It also allows you to bond with the main character a little bit. But most of all the story becomes a little bit more realistic, it could just be the little details but it all makes a slight difference. The story might be completely and obviously fictional, yet the reader has a new understanding if they can relate to the main character.

I used to think that it was all about the character having imperfections. But it can't be because if there is a perfect person and they are hated, it's not an imperfection on their part. I think it would be much easier to consider these characters if the narrator is jealous of them because it shows jealousy which is believable. If a main character is perfect then something has to go wrong because no body wants to read a boring book about the non existent problems in some one's faultless life. You can only write a story about an problem or an event. Say there is a book about a girl who wins the lottery. The book will most likely be about the struggle in her life leading up to that or how the greed and wealth corrupts her. There's a reason why happy endings happen at the end of a story.

It's hard to believe that a person is good or evil in real life, why should it be any different in a book. There are the typical bad guys the villains of fairy tales it is assumed that they are good or bad. But in the real world everything is in shades of gray, its not all black and white. Have you ever wondered why people like stories that favor the bad guy? If you have ever really read the book "Wicked" you'd know that it is not about an amazing friendship between two girls (as you often hear on all the commercials). Its about what could make this girl Elphaba grow up into the wicked witch of the west. I personally think that people are drawn to this story because they find it hard to believe that she was a completely evil character since the day she was born, They know that something must have happened to make her into the person that you see through Dorothy's eyes in "The Wizard of Oz".

I think that it is really a combination of this that makes characters believable, likable, and interesting. I think that next time you read a book think about the first time you actually began to like a character. What did it? What changed to make them likable? If it hadn't happened would you still like the character? If you didn't like the character would you still be reading the book? Just think about it because I think you'll realize something about the writing that you might have never even seen before.

The Odyssey of KP2

I'm in the middle of a really interesting nonfiction book. Usually it is hard for me to find a non fiction book, that's not a memoir, that I am actually interested in. But this book really caught my attention and the way it is written is amazing as well as it's topic. "The Odyssey of KP2" by Terrie M. Williams is about an abandoned seal pup (known as KP2) which causes quite a commotion on its island and in it's specie's history. The book is also partly about the biologist who takes on the task of caring for the young pup. The biologist's name is Dr. Terrie M. Williams, she wrote the book as well. I think that hearing this story from the perspective of someone who lived it, sort of makes the book a memoir. But on the other hand there is also a lot about the seal pup that the author wasn't there for. I'm kind of confused about what the definition of memoir is, so I'm not sure exactly how this book would be classified. Putting all that aside, it is a really interesting book that is full of interesting but also manages to really reach out and make you sympathize.

KP2 stands for Kauai Pup 2. This means that KP2 was the second Hawaiian monk seal pup to be born on Kauai (the island) in that year. He had been abandoned by his mother right after he was born and was rescued by islanders when he was only two days old. The interesting thing about his abandonment is that it was very unknown for a mother monk seal to not protect her pup. Yet when KP2 was attacked by a 400 pond grown male, his mother did nothing to protect him. Normally mothers would rush at the attacker and even put their own lives in danger simply to protect their pup. The islanders who rescued KP2 had seen his mother do this before, to his sister a couple years before. The mother seal was the only one they had ever seen do this, it seemed that she just lacked the natural maternal instinct. I read this and instantly felt so bad for the little seal. He was being abandoned by his own mother, and mothers are the only ones who really look after pups, if he didn't have her then he had no one. Luckily KP2 was rescued soon enough. It was really sad to hear that his sister before him had to be euthanized (put to sleep) because the mother was ignoring her ad she was starving to death.

I love animals, I'm a vegetarian, I have four pets, and I am always the one that is completely preoccupied with any dog that is around. I personally love to hear about people that actually make a difference when it comes to animals facing extinction. This story touched me because I would love to imagine me being the one who can rescue a baby seal pup and turn around the threat of extinction for an entire species. I hear about these adventures in the arctic where they face extreme snow storms and other dangers when tracking down a polar bear that is nearly impossible to find. I love that because I read about it, hear about it, and I just wish that it was me. I loved the book and I'm really looking forward to finding out what's going to happen. If you are as much as an animal lover as me, if you just like hearing about dangerous journeys in the arctic, or if you just like heart-touching stories about people who are willing to do everything they can to save one little seal, then I think you would love this book as well.

The Secret Life of Bees

I've found that I tend to be drawn to books that have a serious conflict or issue in them. I tend to like realistic over fantasy. Even though I love a good Harry Potter book, I like the refreshing feel of hearing a close to real life situation that makes you think about your life in a new light. I feel like this happens more when you are reading a realistic fiction book or a memoir. Of these kinds of books I prefer the ones with really dramatic issues, I love Jodi Picoult and her subjects tend to be really sad topics like school shootings, suicides, losing a parent, being abused, or some other really depressing thing that somehow makes an amazing book.

In "The Secret Life of Bees" the main character is a girl named Lily Owens who had a rough childhood, believes that as a child she shot her own mother, and her father is a cruel man who is makes her kneel on grits when she is bad. Where I've gotten in the story, She is living at the house of three sisters who have a bee farm. It sounds odd but the truth is that she had just run away from home with her black maid/housekeeper/cook who is named Rosaleen, who had been having trouble with the racists in their town. The story is set after the Civil war when African Americans are legally free but are still treated like dirt by a lot of people. Lily is not racist and loves Rosaleen because she is almost a mother figure and tries her best to protect Lily from the abusive father T Ray. They came to stay with the sisters because Lily thinks that they knew her mother. Part of the ongoing theme in this book is Lily's guilt toward killing her own mother. She was really young and found a gun on the floor while her parents were fighting, It went off accidentally and her mother was hit.

It's such a terrible depressing idea, a little girl who is going to have to live with the fact that she killed the one person who she loved more than anything. To put it in the authors words "She was all I wanted. And I took her away. " It's really sad but you don't really know what to think of the mother because you've got the bits and pieces of memory from a four year old and possible lies from a drunk. As a reader you don't really know what really happened, all you know is what Lily thinks happened.

I guess one of the reasons I like books like this is the way they make you feel about yourself and your own life. Reading this made me think about what my life would be like if I didn't have my Mother and how different I would be if I had grown up without a mother. This is a historical fiction book so you can also think of what a life would be like in that time period and what you would think of differently especially being a girl. I don't know about everybody else but that's one of the things that I love about reading. It really opens up your imagination and allows you to think of all those what ifs.

The Evolution of Calpurnia Tate

I just finished an amazing book called “The Evolution of Calpurnia Tate”. It’s about a girl named Calpurnia Virginia Tate or “Callie Vee”. Callie is a young girl who was fourteen when the first cars were being toured around Austin. She lives with her parents, her six brothers, and her reserved, former captain, grandfather. She is a girl, and on top of that she is her mother’s only daughter so she is expected to become a young woman and sew and cook and knit. As a girl, I personally feel for Callie when she is expected to be a certain person simply because women at the time were not thought as equals to men. The problem is that Callie is not interested or good at the things that she is expected to do. When her grandfather introduces her to the amazing world of science (something she’s never been able to learn in school) she finds that studying science is something that she really wants to do with her life.

The story is really interesting to me because I have so many opportunities open to me that I could never have dreamed about if I was alive in Callie’s time. People were extremely sexist back then and it’s nice to see that society has changed and improved so much since then. One of the things that I like about this book is that it really gives you a chance to see how things worked in a typical family back then. I thought it was really interesting to see all that from this girl’s perspective because it really accents how she was really put below all her brothers for even the simplest of things. For example, every year her family assigns one of the kids to look after the turkeys before thanksgiving because it’s a chore that no one wants, then for Callie’s year she is skipped and the next oldest boy after her has to take care of them. This causes a lot of problems because her little brother is too young to understand that the turkeys are going to die and he tames them and, understandably, gets extremely upset when he finds out that they’re going to be eaten. All of this could have been avoided if her parents had let her do the chore even though it was considered a boy’s chore.

Half of the book is on her relationship with her grandfather and their expeditions to look for plant samples and specimens for the “laboratory” which is really an old shed in the back yard that her grandfather claimed and filled with his artifacts. She is the only one other than her grandfather that ever goes in there because her parents don’t want to bother him and most of her brothers think he’s crazy because he is not very social. But Callie is drawn to this man who seems to have the answer to everything and can actually teach her to find the answers to things that she doesn’t know. I think that if I had a person like that in my family I would want to know everything they had to say about anything. She and her grandfather believe that they have found a new species of this plant called “vetch”. She and her grandfather go through all the stuff to send pictures of the plant to a university to see if they would record it as a new species. At the end it is recorded as a new species and they name the plant after their family.

This is a book that I would recommend to other girls that are actually interested in seeing what it was like for girls like us a long time ago. I think this book has the perfect balance of science history and a real storyline. Calpurnia is a really fun main character because she is really opinionated and you get great perspectives on that kind of life. All in all I just loved this book.