Girl Detective

#61 in my book challenge for the year. My husband and several other people I know started Harry Potter #6 (Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince) only to say, “I completely forget what happened in #5.” Forewarned, I read #5 in preparation for #6. #5 is the 766-page, brick-sized, potential bludgeoning weapon in the series, so this was not something I undertook lightly. Yet I blazed through the book in just a few days, when books less than half as long have taken me twice as long.

I know there are many out there who don’t like the Harry Potter books, and especially don’t like the hype that they’ve garnered. Fair enough. J.K. Rowling is a fair, not a great, writer of prose, and her books have some serious plot flaws, chief among them, in my opinion, the continued failure of Harry and his friends to confide in adults who have proved themselves trustworthy again and again. If Rowling were a bit more precise in plotting, she could come up with much better reasons why Harry & Co. couldn’t or wouldn’t confide.

There is much to these books’ credit, though. First, they’re getting people to read who might otherwise not. Second, they’ve brought notice and acceptability to that bastard stepchild genre of literature, fantasy. It’s not just for nerds anymore. Third, in spite of plot flaws they are hugely enjoyable, eminently readable tales. And finally, they’re full of engaging, sympathetic characters who have grown more complex over the course of the series. In all, I think the books do much more good than harm. I think detractors are welcome to their opinion, but there’s no need to go on about it.

This book once again escalates the darkness and complexity. Harry is a very believable angry young man. He is confused about his attraction to Cho Chang, he is angry that Dumbledore is keeping him in the dark and ignoring him, he is frustrated that people don’t believe him that Voldemort is back, and he is reckless in his interactions with the new defense against the dark arts professor, Dolores Umbridge, who has been sent from the ministry of magic to keep an eye on things at Hogwarts.

The central plot of the book is solid. There is a group called the Order of the Phoenix that has re-formed in order to fight Voldemort. But other subplots, even if they are integrated, still felt extraneous, such as Hermione’s ongoing attempts to free the house elves, and the mysterious thing that Hagrid is up to this book. I found the shenanigans of Fred and George Weasley to be very entertaining, and was thrilled when they seized control of their fate. Someone in the book who is important to Harry does die, but I felt curiously unmoved both times I’ve read this book by it. On the one hand, it seemed inevitable. On the other, perhaps I was so distracted by the rest of the 766 pages (in the English, Bloomsbury edition) that I couldn’t focus my attention.

This book has the same extremely aggravating flaw as all the books beforehand, which is that Harry is unreasonably stubborn about confiding in trustworthy adults, and much distress might have been avoided. Rowling is great at making the reader want to find out what happens next, but I deplore this contrived way that she manufactures the conflict at points.

I am working at a readable summary of this book for those who don’t wish to re-read it before tackling #6. I found it a quick and enjoyable read, though, and am glad to have undertaken it.

#42 in my movie challenge for the year is this classic mystery adapted from the Dashiell Hammett novel, featuring Nick and Nora Charles and their dog Asta. The mystery of an inventor’s disappearance is less interesting than the intrigue among the suspects, which is secondary to the witty repartee between Nick and Nora, who steal the show. Particularly funny was a throwaway scene, the morning after a big party, where Nick leisurely pops balloons on the Christmas tree with a pop-gun. It’s rather shocking to see how casually excess drinking was taken, and how it is both a joke and sometimes a sign of upper-class urbanity. I wouldn’t be surprised if Nick and Nora needed some time in rehab following their adventures.

#41 in my movie challenge for the year, and quite a departure from the previous film, Key Largo. Harold and Kumar is silly, fun, and knows its limits at under 90 minutes. It has been many years since I’ve had occasion to crave White Castle burgers, but I do remember how urgent those cravings always were. When I was in college, we had a local chain called Little Tavern, and a bag of Little T burgers never seemed as good an idea the morning after as it had the night before.

Both the leads are charming and one of the things that stands out about this comedy is that, without exception, all of the heroes are minorities, while all of the weirdo bad guys are not. It’s a refreshing turn, and one that I’m pleased did well at the box office. Plus, I’m sure this will go on to be a campus classic.

#60 in my book challenge for the year. I was given this book (and its sequels) by a kind friend of mine when I was having postpartum trouble nearly two years ago. It continually got shuffled around and never made it onto my reading list till now. I can see why my friend sent it. True to its cover blurbs, it is a funny, touching, life-affirming book. Botswana itself is so carefully and lovingly described it is almost a character itself. But the main character, Ms. Precious Ramotswe, is a gem. She is honest, down-to-earth, and intelligent. I was thrilled to see her detective business succeed. This also was a good reality check book, with many reminders of what is and is not really important.

I had a few quibbles, though. First, the novel jumped around from story to story, often with little connection or continuity among her cases. Second, there was a little too much reverence for the simple life. The east/west dichotomy is not always so clear cut. Finally, I found the ending strained belief, though it was a relief. These concerns, though, are minor compared to the experience of the whole, which is overall quite worthy.

Drake turned two over the weekend, and we invited a few of his friends and their parents to our house to celebrate. The parents had a good time, the kids played well together, and Drake was still wound up the next day from all the fun. We ordered pizza and I made three kinds of cupcakes: yellow with chocolate ganache frosting, dark chocolate with cream-cheese frosting, and carrot with vanilla-bean cream-cheese frosting. For party favors, we went shopping at our favorite used bookstore and got a selection of Drake’s favorite picture books, by Kevin Henkes, Russell Hoban, and James Marshall, mostly. I was very stressed getting the house in order beforehand, but I love the aftermath of a party–everything is tidy and presentable.

Tomorrow is Drake’s second birthday, and we’re have a few friends of his over. I’ve been doing a little bit of cleaning every day. I tried to put off the kitchen floor as long as I could, but yesterday it reached a point of maximum disgustingness; I had to act. First, I scrubbed it by hand with a Dobie sponge using 2 teaspoons of Doctor Bronner’s Sal Suds to 5 gallons of hot water. Then I went over it with a mop and 1 1/2 cups of white vinegar to 5 gallons of cool water. I did every nook I could reach. That floor was as clean as it has been since we moved in. Yet it still looks dirty. The ancient, originally white tile looks grey and is stained. The corners have gunk in them that I could not scrub up. Like most other things in our kitchen (oven, sink, lack of dishwasher) I don’t love it, but replacing things piecemeal doesn’t make sense, because when (if? whimper) we do overhaul the whole, it would be a shame to have to re-do things. So for now, I do my best with what we’ve got. And I dream of a future kitchen, with a floor that doesn’t show dirt, even when it’s dirty.

My husband G. Grod and I moved to Minnesota seven years ago when he got a job here. We were open to moving, and the best offer was here, so we moved. I had never been here before, but had heard good things about it from friends and thought it auspicious that a number of authors whose books and comic books I admired lived here, such as Neil Gaiman, Steven Brust, Lois McMaster Bujold, and Zander Cannon. A few years ago we bought a condo, then last year we sold that and bought a house, so I think that we’ll be staying.

We’ve received a fair amount of grief from family and friends over our choice. They complain that it’s an expensive, long trip (though most of them have made the expensive, long trip far fewer times than we have made it in reverse). But over time, Minnesota in general, and the Twin Cities in particular, have inveigled their way into our good graces. For many reasons large and small, we like it here. I’m beginning a new category in which I can wax rhapsodic about things Minnesotan that particularly charm me.

Today, for example, I got the reminder in the mail that a local charity will be picking up at the end of next week. I will go through the house, collecting clothing, books and toys that we no longer need, then place them in a bag by the curb in front of our house next week. When it is picked up, we will get a receipt for taxes dropped in our mail slot.

Curbside charity with an advance reminder. It’s one more reason to love living here.

#59 in my book challenge for the year. This book had some serious wow factors. It is a noir cop novel set in Bangkok. The main character is a Buddhist who uses meditation as a detection method, and can see the past lives of those around him. Several times I paused in reading and thought, this book is really cool. There is murder, corruption, drugs, and a damsel who may or may not be in distress. The book covers lots of ground–east/west culture clash, a few short but stunning passages on Thai food, and the complex situational ethics of Bangkok prostitution. The main character of Sonchai is one of the most compelling I’ve read. The ending is somewhat vague. Some might find it frustrating, but I thought it balanced well, karmically. It’s not nice and tidy like a typical American detective novel, but it’s not inconsistent with the rest of the book, which is pleasantly different from a typical American detective novel.

G. Grod is back to work these past few days after his gall bladder surgery, and is tired, but in no pain. He is rather cranky at the continued restriction on fatty foods–and who wouldn’t be?–but is being a good sport. Drake is confused and put out that G. Grod can’t pick him up, but we’re managing. Some friends (saviors, as far as I’m concerned) brought us meals to help out, other friends have made sure that we have what we need, and still other friends wrote and called to check in and give cheer.

We are very thankful for friends, near and far.

It is an growing peeve of mine when literary folk look down on comic books. (What does a peeve grow up into? Mine has gotten pretty big over the years.) Yesterday I read comics referred to on a literary blog as trash reading. In Ebert and Roeper’s review of Stealth, both agreed that it had “comic-book” effects, meaning flashy and non-substantive. “Comic book” is not an adjectival phrase that means simple and bad. Yes, some comic books are trash, just as some books are trash. But comic books and graphic novels can be art in a way that non-picture books can’t. Comic books and graphic novels can be literature told with words and pictures. If one loves books, I believe one can love comics. Comics, like all art , have myriad genres. If a comic book neophyte tells me what kind of book she likes, I can recommend a complementary comic book or graphic novel.

Victorian lit? League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Cop thrillers? Top Ten
Horror/fantasy? Shakespeare? Sandman
Military/Spy novels? Queen and Country
Mysteries? The Whiteout graphic novels
The Kite Runner/Reading Lolita in Tehran? Persepolis 1 & 2
Young adult coming of age? Goodbye Chunky Rice, Blankets
Travelogue? Carnet de Voyage

One of my favorite events is our family’s weekly trip to the comic store on Wednesday, which is new-comic day. Yesterday there were three–three!–new graphic novels (Tricked by Alex Robinson, Mort Grim by Doug Fraser, and the hardcover collection of Bryan K. Vaughan’s Runaways) plus a few issues from my favorite ongoing series (Fables and 100 Bullets.) When I go to the comic shop, I get to see friends, buy books, and watch Drake while he runs up and down the aisles, crowing with glee. It’s a rich joy, not non-substantive trash.

#40 in my movie challenge for the year is a Bogey/Bacall classic. Key Largo (1948) was directed by John Huston. Bogey plays the former military commander of Bacall’s late husband. He visits her and her father in law at the latter’s Key Largo hotel, only to find the place has been taken over by gangsters. Bacall is amazing–lovely to look at, entertaining to watch, and oh, what a joy to listen to that voice! She has a presence like few others. This is a dark thriller with a kind heart, much less naughty than The Big Sleep.

#58 in my book challenge for the year. I re-read the book after seeing the movie, and can now say that the movie gets muddled when it departs from the book. I can see why the film director chose to depart, because the book is complex. It centers on Sophie, a young hat girl who is bewitched to look like an old woman. Ashamed of her appearance, she leaves home and takes up residence in the moving castle of the title, owned by the wizard Howl. There are many mysteries that Sophie must solve, and she must stand up to any number of witches and difficult situations. Sophie is a strong, well-realized female character, and her story is a compelling one. I recommend this and other books by Diana Wynne Jones for fans of fantasy and Harry Potter.

I learned to cook when I found myself living alone for the first time in a tiny sublet that had a food processor. My mom sent me a copy of The Moosewood Cookbook, not because I was vegetarian but because it was easier to learn to cook on vegetables. I was so ignorant that I had to ask a foodie friend whether a clove of garlic was one segment or the whole head. (She never forgot that. Never mind that I’d been pretty sure of the answer, and was just checking to be certain. Years later she still laughed.)

It was a few years later that another foodie got me a subscription to Cook’s Illustrated. I’d read other cooking magagazines before–Food and Wine, Gourmet, and Bon Appetit. I liked them fine, though I found them largely the same. Cook’s Illustrated, though, was something else. It had no ads, just a few recipes per issue, plus a tasting and an equipment testing. Best of all, they were obsessed with food, so that when they published a recipe, they let you know just how many times and what variations were tried before arriving at the final recipe. It was like the Consumer Reports of cooking. I have been a subscriber now for about ten years.

A few years ago they began a show on PBS, America’s Test Kitchen. I was surprised to find that the show was a good complement to the magazine. It highlighted just a few recipes, plus one tasting and one testing. It featured staff from the magazine, and they were fun to watch. The style of the show was like the magazine–straightforward, not fancy, and above all, informational.

Last summer I spent a lot of time away when we sold our condo and bought a house. I decided to sign up for Cook’s Online, which includes all the recipes, as well as searchable databases. It has been a useful subscription even when I’m home and have access to all my back issues of Cook’s.

Finally, last year Cook’s sent out a solicitation for their new sister magazine, Cook’s Country, which a friend has jokingly called “Red-State Cook’s”. I was going to pass, since I felt one subscription plus online was enough, but was swayed by the “try it for free” offer. When it arrived, I prepared to write cancel on the invoice. That is, until my husband waved the magazine in my face and said excitedly, “Have you seen this? There are about seven recipes I want to make in here!” And so we became subscribers to Cook’s Country, as well.

We were converts to the Cook’s empire, then, but I’d managed to shed other cooking magazines and shows. Then a friend recommended Everyday Food, a digest-sized mag from the Martha Stewart empire. I checked it out, and found it had good photography and simple recipes that were true to the title. I also found they had a cooking show. The show, though, like the magazine, features a lot of recipes. It goes through them very quickly. There are some tidbits of information, but they are mostly very basic cooking tips, like generously salt water for pasta, and save some pasta water to thin the sauce if necessary. It isn’t a bad show, but I found it redundant to the magazine for me. Perhaps it would be more useful to someone newer to the cooking learning curve, however. I am going to give the magazine a try, though I’ve had a hard time tracking it down in stores. It features simple, straightforward recipes that would be ideal for weeknight cooking. I think it could be a good balance for Cook’s, which favors quality above all, sometimes resulting in longer cooking times.

My first “dinner party” was a disaster a la Bridget Jones. I had invited a few good friends over, and planned an overambitious menu. I had no sense of timing or the recipes. I was making a risotto for the very first time with roasted garlic. I burned the garlic, and one of the guests had to coach me through the risotto, which seemed to take hours. I forget what there was besides the risotto, but I’d planned some sort of ice cream concoction at the end that I didn’t have time to put together. We ended up just eating plain ice cream from the carton.

Some of the lessons I learned right away: Do not cook a recipe for guests that I haven’t made already. One time-consuming recipe a night (if that). Always have a dessert back up in case time runs out.

But one risotto lesson has taken me many more years to learn. I’d buy a bag of arborio rice, make risotto, be reminded of how time consuming it is (even when I use the dump-and-stir method recommended by Cook’s Illustrated, of dumping in the first 3 cups of liquid, letting it boil down, then adding the rest in 1/2 c. increments) and how it doesn’t always make a meal itself, and often doesn’t leave leftovers, or at least tasty ones. So the bag of arborio would sit in my pantry until I was sufficiently removed from the experience to try risotto again. That bag would usually provide 2 to 3 risottos. I was always frustrated that no matter how long I cooked the rice, it still had a chalky texture. Then I bought a new bag, and noticed that the risotto wasn’t chalky. I realized the months-old, pantry-sitting arborio was probably to blame. So my new lesson on risotto is to buy arborio rice from the bulk section, in just the amount I need. I do the same thing with lentils. Just because something is dried doesn’t mean that it can’t be too dry. So now I only buy fresh dried lentils and arborio. It definitely makes a difference.

I don’t know why it surprises me when I find out someone reads this weblog. If I didn’t want or expect people to read it, then I’d write in a journal, not online. Over the years, I’ve found I can’t predict who will or won’t read it. There are close friends and relatives who don’t, yet distant acquaintances who do. Then there are also strangers, and others who I’ve come to know in person and online. This strange mix challenges me to try to write things that have significance beyond just my little midwestern life. I began a public weblog to keep me honest about my writing practice. The expectation of M to F posts helped ensure I was writing SOMETHING on a regular basis. And since that something was for public consumption, then it better be of interest to other people besides the ones who liked me already.

Since starting at this new URL last fall, I’ve had it happen not once, but twice now, that people involved with something I’ve critiqued have written to me. Both times, the responses have made me go back to what I’ve written and wonder whether I was fair and accurate. The good news is that the answer was mostly yes. The whole truth, though, is that sometimes things bother me out of proportion (see the topic category of “Weird Things that Bother Me”, for example) and that can skew a review to the negative. I’ll be editing a recent book review because the author asked me to clarify what it was that bothered me. In so doing, I also took the time to clarify what I admired and liked about the book.

I began this weblog three years ago as writing practice, and have kept it (perhaps, no, probably, at the expense of paying writing gigs) because I enjoy it. It is a good reminder to me that not only are people reading, but I can’t know who is reading. If I keep it honest, and fair, and fit for public consumption, then maybe I can please most of the people, most of the time.

And, just in case anyone who works on Battlestar Galactica is reading, I don’t take back my gripe that nothing happened in the first two episodes of Season Two. I was somewhat heartened when two things happened in the third episode–the team got off Kobol and Tigh declared martial law. But so many things happened on the last episode that I can’t even count them; I was thrilled. It was a very slow start to the season, but things look very good again.

It’s taken me some time, but I’ve finally managed to work my way through at least one issue of each of the shopping magazines: the original, Lucky; spinoff #1 Cargo for men; copycat #1 Shop, Etc.; and spinoff #2 Domino for home.

Years ago a friend told me Lucky was a great magazine. I scoffed. The shopping magazine? Then I checked it out, apologized and became a subscriber. Lucky is one of the most successful magazine launches in recent years. It positions its editors as in-the-know girlfriends, dispensing advice on how to dress and what products–classic and new–to try. Lucky is a great magazine for ideas, and it features a wide range of items, from drugstores to exclusive boutiques. The production quality is high with accessible layouts, and good photography, models, writing, and paper stock. Editor-in-Chief Kim France and Creative Director Andrew Linnett are alumni of the late, lamented Sassy, to which Lucky is a much more worthy heir than is the celebrity-suck-up Jane.

I picked up a few copies of Cargo to get fashion ideas for my husband, who tends to be somewhat sartorially challenged. Cargo, though, gave me a headache. It was too bright, too busy, and it’s pitched to a young, metrosexual consumer.

Shop, Etc. has tried to copy Lucky’s success. I found its first issue to be like a low-rent version of Lucky–poorer photography, cheaper paper, fewer models to save on costs, and clumsy attempts to write Lucky-like copy. A subsequent issue themed “everything under $100″ got my attention, but then annoyed me when I spotted the $100+ Mason Pearson hairbrush. I noticed from the letters column that readers seemed to believe it was a shopping magazine for more average lives and budgets, but I’m not sure that’s intended. It may be a response to the cheaper price and production value of the magazine. Aside from the under $100 issue, it features a wide range of items and costs. I found nothing in Shop, Etc. that Lucky doesn’t do better or that I felt Lucky lacked.

Finally, the newest entry, Domino, is like Lucky for the home. The premier issue did all the same things as does Lucky, but didn’t strike a chord with me. I found some of the items in the ads more compelling than the stuff in the features. Maybe it’s that I’m not a DIY-er, so I’m not the target, but I found the mini sections that Lucky has on home items to be sufficient. This full-length magazine was just too much for me.

Interesting, also, was that Cargo, Shop, Etc., and Domino were all difficult to find. Lucky is available up front at Target. The others I had to go to a bookstore to find, and even then, I had to go to more than one bookstore. At the end of my experiment, I’ve found I’m loyal to Lucky. One shopping magazine is enough for me, if not for the magazine industry.

My husband G. Grod has his gall bladder out today, stones and all. The doc said the procedure went perfectly, so he is home now and doing as well as possible, given 4 incisions and the loss of an organ.

We returned home to find that the company G. Grod works for has been bought out by another. Sigh.

#57 in my book challenge for the year was Freakonomics by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner. It was a fast, flashy read that at first blush was quite clever. A little distance made it less brilliant, but still worthwhile and enjoyable. The Guardian has an amusing digested read of Freakonomics. Levitt is an unconventional economist who tackles puzzles that interest him rather than financials. He targets conventional wisdom, and notes that something becomes convention because it’s convenient and easy to believe, while not always true. Among the objects of his scrutiny are drug dealers, schoolteachers, and worried parents. Some of the comparisons he draws are overly extreme, as when he compares real estate agents to Ku Klux Klan members.

One of Levitt’s most contested points was that the unexpected crime drop of the 80’s was due to the aftereffect of Roe v. Wade. The pool of potential criminals was smaller because they had not been born. The authors wait until the end of the chapter, though, to say (in somewhat murky prose) that abortion is not effective crime control. They did point out, though, what many tracts on abortion don’t, which is that abortion is largely an issue for poor, minority women. Financially secure white women will always have access to safer abortions, whether they’re legal or not. One of the numbers they did not mention, though, is that when abortion is illegal, more women (usually poor, minority women) die.

I appreciated the chapters on effective parenting. They discovered that there was no correlation between success in school and reading to a child every day, the amount of TV kids watch, or how often children are taken to museums. There is, however, strong correlation with the age and education of the mother and number of books in the home. Interestingly, they did not define what they considered success in school. There was a murky bit when they argued that school choice didn’t matter–students who applied in a lottery for a different school did the same whether they went to that school or their local one. But another section argued that young children at poorer, mostly minority schools did worse than counterparts at wealthier, whiter schools. This may have been a distinction in age–young children versus high schoolers, but that wasn’t made clear.

#39 in my movie challenge for the year was Collateral, directed by Michael Mann. While Tom Cruise may be an insensitive buffoon, he can sometimes act well, and here he does. Jamie Foxx is the everyday guy whose life quickly spirals out of control due to a bizarre chain of circumstances. He absolutely deserved his Oscar nomination. Collateral is beautiful to look at, well acted, fast paced and mesmerizing. I was so impressed with this film that I watched all the extras; I rarely watch even one. They made me appreciate the film, its direction and the acting all the more.

Last week I read Bruce Campbell’s autobiography If Chins Could Kill: Confessions of a B-Movie Actor (#56 in my book challenge for the year) and went to see Bruce host a screening of The Man with the Screaming Brain (#38 in my movie challenge for the year).

Bruce Campbell is best known for his starring work in the Evil Dead trilogy, a set of B-movie horror flicks from the 80’s and 90’s. I saw Evil Dead for the first time when I was in college (in Henle 21, for the record), because some guy friends were big fans. It was bloody and it was funny, and I remember one of the guys kept up a continuous chorus of, “Oh, this part is so awesome.” It was clear that the guys had the movie memorized.

The director of the Evil Dead films, Sam Raimi, hit the big time finally with the very good Spider Man and even better Spider Man 2. Campbell has managed to stay alive in Hollywood as a B actor, but he doesn’t bemoan his fate. He has genuine affection for the early movies and how much creative control he and his friends had on them. He’s been in some big movies, such as the Coen Brothers The Hudsucker Proxy, and has spent a lot of time doing series television, first on the short-lived Adventures of Brisco Country, Jr. and later as a recurring character first on Hercules: The Legendary Journeys and later on Xena: Warrior Princess. If Chins Could Kill is an entertaining, anecdote-laden trip. Campbell is humorous and self-effacing, and comes off as a likable guy. Bruce is touring in support of his new book, How to Make Love the Bruce Campbell Way.

The Man with the Screaming Brain is his first time directing a film. It was financed by the Sci-Fi channel, who told him he had to film in Bulgaria, so he re-wrote the movie around that. During the Q & A after the showing, Campbell joked that the film wasn’t released, it had escaped. He did a good bit of bantering back and forth, solidifying that funny, good-guy persona. The Man with the Screaming Brain is the story of a mad scientist (Stacey Keach) who discovers a way to merge brain cells of different people. It’s played for slapstick, and it is quite funny at times. Both City Pages and The Beat have reviewed it favorably, and perhaps a bit kindly, but it’s hard not to want to be kind to Campbell. It will air on the Sci Fi Channel on Septemer 10.