The Stories, They All Sound the Same (Off The Grid: Day 10)

My brain is seething. I'm bubbling with hundreds of new ideas. They just keep welling up.
 

Perhaps it's possible to control thoughts to a certain extent, but to stop thinking is asking too much. My head is teeming with beguiling notions, I'm not able to fix them before they're ousted by new thoughts. I can't keep them apart.
 

I'm rarely able to remember my thoughts. Before I manage to dwell on one of my inspirations, it generally melts into an even better idea, but this, too, is so fickle of character that I struggle to save it from the constant volcanic stream of new ideas...
 

I read the opening paragraphs of Jostein Gardner's The Ringmaster's Daughter and my mind instantly recalls the dozens of notebooks filled with half-baked ideas, the pages and pages of synopses, each unique and pertaining to a specific story, typed up on my laptop.

I throw a glance at my window, to make sure Jostein Gardner isn't somehow keeping an eye on me. I feel vulnerable, exposed. Like someone decided to write about me on paper.  I feel a strange relation to his character who as you can probably tell, is something of a writer.

Then I think of every other fictional aspiring writer I've seen/read and realize I'm probably just a mass of their quirks and idiosyncrasies. I'm a collection of writer stereotypes. Except maybe for that whole childhood trauma aspect...

This "writer" brought to life in The Ringmaster's Daughter is named Petter, and I do share his pain. Whenever I let my brain roam too far it just starts churning, spitting out ideas and stories. I can write out a synopsis fairly easy. My ideas usually start out being so abstract -- a random scene here, a piece of dialogue there. I can expand it, detail it, to as long as 4-5 pages, at best. When I try to expand it even further, that's when I fumble with the words.

I suppose I lack the focus to write a novel. Like Petter, I also lack patience and soundness of mind. Sitting still in front of a desk can be unnerving. More often then not it feels like a waste of time, it's frustrating and tedious. No sooner after I begin typing, my mind is racing farther ahead. My hands may be set on writing down one scene, yet my brain is already working on another.

There's one aspect where I Petter and I differ. I'm unshakeable on my becoming a writer, despite the difficulties. Petter however, doesn't see the point. He has no intention of becoming a writer. He finds it a shame though, when his ideas are left untouched. That's when he comes up with a strange business idea. He'll sell his ideas, make his living out of it. Sell ideas and stories to aspiring writers who find themselves with nothing to say.

Little Petter Spider becomes the cure for the dreaded writer's block, weaving his own web of manipulation.
 

At last I've decided what I want to be. I shall continue doing what I've always done, but from now on I'll make a living out of it. I don't feel the need to be famous, that's an important consideration, but I could still become extremely rich.
 

Petter starts out as a very precocious child. He learns to talk and read and write before the age of four. He's quiet and in his head. He's creative, definitely. But he is also pretty damaged.

When he starts to decide to sell his ideas, through this ominous platform he dubs "Writer's Aid", it's a dubious trade. Petter cherished anonimity above everything, and although what he's trying to sell is something that's in demand in the writing community, he knows there's a risk. A risk of getting caught, being mistrusted and hunted down.

He pays attention to make his clients feel exclusive to his services when they're not. He builds up their trust, makes them believe he'll never spill the beans. Little Petter Spider catches his victims within his web with promises not to eat them. All the while he thinks he's doing them -- and himself -- a great service.

And I strangely found myself agreeing with him. That what he's doing is almost justified.

It's interesting to see into Petter's psyche. Although he was quiet and unsociable as a child, he grew up to be quite the people person. He's amiable, able to carry a conversation. But at times he simply uses that to his advantage. Every writer, editor, friend is merely an expansion of his network. A business opportunity, or a casual relationship to make him feel less lonely when he wants company. Some might call him a sociopath.

The result of this casual approach to relationships leads him to trouble, as we find out in the final chapters of the book.

He has pretty eccentric views. Jostein Gardner is known for being philisophical in his writings, and seeing some views from Petter sets the mind going. The thing about Petter is that he's a story-teller. And so projects these view in short stories he tells throughout the course of the novel.

All in all, I loved The Ringmaster's Daughter. It's thought-provoking and insightful, with a touch of fantasy. Some might find the material a bit heavy, but it's worth the read. Petter is a complex character, the kind reader's would love to unravel as they read. The plot was original, cohesive. A must-read really, for writers.

(My name was eerily mentioned in the book, which was just unnerving and let's hope not foretelling)

There's one specific aspect of the story which I find interesting. While selling in Writer's Aid, Petter made sure he never sold the same idea twice, to prevent suspicion. But as the book came to the end, ironically, I realized there were parallels spreading throughout the entire thing. I began to see how a short story told when he was older happened to correspond to things that happened to him as kid, and vice versa, a story he told when he was younger strangely related to something that happened later in his life.

A coincidence? Maybe. But then again, maybe not.

There's a huge debate in the writing world on whether or not anything anyone comes up is really "original" at all. Like Sherlock Holmes once said, "There is nothing new under the sun. It has all been done before."

Somewhere out there, someone's falling for their best friend. Someone is cheating on someone they love. A little kid is chasing their dream. Someone's getting married, getting divorced. Someone's celebrating a birthday, going to a concert. Someone's fighting for what they believe in. Someone's moving to another country. Someone's taking a leap of faith.

It's a weird thing when you think about. But it's undeniable too. They may differ in the details, but when you strip down the stories, they all sound the same.

And that makes me wonder whether I have anything worth saying at all.

--Karin Novelia, Just Bursting With Ideas

Both Ends of the Same Spectrum

Recently, I read a really insightful book called Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking written by Susan Cain.

(Coincidentally, the only reason I know about the book was because she was the first person I watched on TED, a conference where people discuss ideas. It's pretty cool, so if you feel like being inspired visit the TED website here).

The book is psychological non-fiction, based on Susan's intensive research about human temperament, mostly focusing on the terms introvert and extrovert. Susan has observed that there's a phenomenon she's called the Extrovert Ideal where the outgoing, loud, gregarious types are more favored over the cautious and contemplating.

In this modern age of media and competitiveness, there's sort of this need to 'self-promote'. You need to show off all your good qualities, so people can see them. People won't really take the time to find out what's lying underneathe, you know? And I get why that is. But the "Extrovert Ideal" as Susan explains can also be a double-edged sword.

Now, just to be clear, this book does not glorify introverts and belittle extroverts in anyway. In fact, Susan discusses the pros and cons of each side of the spectrum, and adresses the fact that there is a sense of favoritism leaning towards extrovertism, making the benefits of introvertism feel overlooked, challenging us to rethink our paradigms and shift them into a more open-minded direction.

This isn't really a book review. I'm not going into detail about what Susan Cain wrote, I just want to share my own thoughts on the subject, focusing on the introvert side. (I do think it's a really good book, so satisfy your curiosity and read it for yourself!)

Labels can be a bit of a scary thing, especially when there are negative connotations attached to them. So as I read Quiet I was excited and apprehensive at the same time. I felt like I could relate to the book. Susan shares so many experiences, stories she gathered from other people, some she experienced herself, about people just like me (quiet, reserved, the-always-stuck-in-their-heads type). And in each of those experiences there's this feeling that being that way (which for us is simply being ourselves naturally) is something that's discouraged, frowned upon.

There were times in the book when I smiled and thought Hey, I'm just like that! and times when I frowned and wondered Is that how people see me?

The problem is, that statistically one half to one third of the world's population are introverts. Like that quiet, smart kid that's sitting in you class ace-ing tests? They're probably an introvert. And you know what? They're probably getting bullied and made fun of too.

And that's really heartbreaking. Sure, they may be quiet, but being quiet doesn't mean someone isn't brilliant. They might have a hard time getting their ideas out there, or making sure their voice is heard, but that might be because there's never anyone around who's willing to listen.

People like that usually think before they speak. They have inhibitions which may seem like a disadvantage, but sometimes that cautiousness comes in handy in avoiding possible mishaps. But it is also does quiet thinkers who have a lot to contribute in the world. Think Vincent van Gogh and Albert Einstein. They didn't have their Eureka! moments at a pool party, hanging with the gang and socializing. They retreated into their minds and simply thought about things. You may not hear much during the process, but once introverts are sure with what they have, you can bet that the product of their thoughts is pretty damn amazing.

  

One aspect of the book that unnerved me was the fact that temperament is almost something genetic. The way you were born (like how sensitive you brain system is) can deeply influence how your basic instincts and personality is. I suppose some people can call that a relief. I am the way I am because of genetics. But it also seems to chuck our whole 'free will' philosophy out of the window. Like what if I don't want to be an introvert? Why can't I be peppy and loud and outgoing like others are? Because of genetics?

The book clearly underlined that though there is a acknowledgable scientific foundation to the formation of temperament, a lot of other variables such as the way you grew up, your environment, and yes, your choices will add up to who you are.

Lesson: No matter what anyone says, you can change yourself for the better.

Another heart-breaking point was seeing how people who were introverts at heart, had to become pseudo-extroverts, just to fall into the mold of the Extrovert Ideal. I do realize that being quiet all the time, doesn't do you any more good than talking too much does. There are times when you need to stand up and speak your mind, so others can hear what your thinking. There are also times when you need to step back and think, because charging ahead might cause you to crash.

But if you constantly have to go out and do something which doesn't come naturally to you, without letting anyone see your other side than isn't that the same as pretending? Lying to yourself, not being who you really are?

The problem is that introverts are being shamed into acting like extroverts. Some people feel like being quiet, means that there's something wrong with you, so does who naturally are, question themselves, try too hard to change. Some are even see as depressed or retarded, in need of therapy or medication.

Typical for human beings to see the different and outside-of-the-norm as mental illness, huh?

Some people think I'm quiet. Okay, I won't deny that because that's true. But when people use that against me and label me as 'anti-social' or 'arrogant' by jumping to conclusions it... It doesn't feel great. I feel like I'm being judged before I'm even presenting myself, and my instinct to that is to pull back, shy away...

And that's just really frustrating. Because I know that I'm not always what people make me out to be. I am so much more than they think or see. I can be loud, I can be weird, and I can be soooo lively around other people. But only if I feel comfortable with them, which might take a while.

It's sad to think that most people don't bother to look past those first impressions.

Which one was I then? Introvert or extrovert? Of course, noone can be a pure introvert or extrovert.

I can honestly admit I've been having a bit of an identity crisis lately for the past few years. It's like everytime I wake up I have an idea of who I want to be today. The cheery up-beat me that's gonna enjoy school and learning like she used to. Then there are the days I can't help but be the quiet, thoughtful me who over analyzes everything and can never seem to feel good about herself.

I think of myself as a walking mass of contradictions. There are a lot times when I confuse myself. I'm not really sure which of those sides are the real me. Sometimes I convince myself "All of those sides are you" and just confuse myself even more. But can a person really be so optimistic and brooding at the same time? Can a person really be so impulsive and cautious?

I've come to realize that I don't really feel the need to pick a side. I am sometimes one or the other and sometimes I can be both ends of the spectrum.

So here's what I think. Labels like introverts and extroverts, can be useful. They can help us understand who we are a little bit better so we can live our lives in way that's compliments that. But if you jump to conclusions and just tack them on so carelessly, then that my friends, is called prejudice.

So don't assume you know everything about someone. We are very, very complicated and cannot be summed up by a few trivial words. People are complex, so much bigger on the inside.

Even though you might be one over the other, just remember that basically we all exist on that same spectrum. Deep down, we are all the same.

Right now, I can't think of any other word that best describes collectively who I am other than this: me.

I. Am. Me.

One of a kind. And so are you.

So no matter how alienated you feel, no matter how different the world perceive you just remind yourself: I am me and noone else. Noone else can be me.

And believe me when I say, you can be so damn brilliant.

Thanks for reading!

-- Karin Novelia, Being the Best Me I Can Be

The Essence of Dreams (A Book Review of The Night Circus)

*May contain slight spoilers

What are dreams but mere ideas? Ideas that take up a life of their own, growing in proportions, intensity, detail. The are the fruit of imagination, the culmination of what our subconscious mind ponders on. But the experience of a dream -- in our heads, or even in our sleep -- can't stand true in reality. Like two sides of the same coin, they are distinctively different, yet sometimes impossible to discern.

The Night Circus, a novel written by Erin Morgernstern brilliantly blurs the line between dreams and reality. It is a story about magic, a game and the attraction between two magicians caught in the middle of it all: Celia Bowen and Marco Alisdair, two proteges of two very different magicians.

Celia is the daughter of Hector Bowen, who passes his powers off as simple illusions, perfoming magic tricks in stages across a number of countries as Prospero the Enchanter. Celia comes to him unexpectedly, dropped off to him after her mother had committed suicide. He sees potential in her abilities straight away. He believe magic is something you are born with, a natural talent for those who are lucky enough to possess it. His methods are unorthodox, sometimes cruel in training her. He comes across as a very uncompassionate father.

Marco is taken under the wing of a Mr. Alexander, the enigmatic type of character, whose past and last name remains quite undisclosed to the reader. He believes magic is something that can be taught, and pushes Marco to read and practice in solitude albeit in very luxurious conditions.

The two master magicians, being 'close friends', make a bet; a dangerous one they have made before and are willing to make again. They will pit their pupils against one another, in a clash of magic, to see who is better.

And so Le Cirque de Revěs is born. Being translated as The Circus of Dreams it "opens at nightfall" and "closes at dawn". Here, Celia and Marco use their magic to build the most impossible attractions. From a circus tent that holds a maze of clouds you can climb and jump on, a carousel of creatures that fly through the stars, what they create elicits awe and disbelieve from the circus-goers -- all of which are oblivious to the existence of magic.

What I love most about the book is Erin Morgenstern's very descriptive style of writing. All the magical details that come to make her creations of the impossible are fully conveyed to the reader. The book is beautifully written and jumps at the senses, from sights to smells, even tastes. It's the little things, the tiniest of details that really sticks into your mind, enhances the experience of immersing yourself in the prose that you feel like you're going through it all yourself.

Closing the book, feels like waking up from a dream. You know that it could never happen, but your heart aches and wishes that it could be somehow true.

Plot-wise, I think it was just perfect. I've heard some people complain about that the pacing is too slow, the story isn't that clever or well thought-out. But that's what makes The Night Circus so different from other books. People like a cinematic, action-packed, high-paced stories that tackles you. But The Night Circus creeps up on you, it's a story that is expansive and spans through many lives and many years that it cannot be told in a matter of days, and the sense of mystery and surprising revelations add to the tale's depth.

Some people have also been disappointed or felt misled at the term 'duel'. They thought of Harry-Potter-likes duels where spells fly and things erupt into chaos. What they got though, was more of an duel of the mind. They're creativity and innovation skills are being tested not their strength. The rules of the duel are arbitrary and has one twist -- it doesn't end until one of them dies.

Then here are sub-plots, which introduce characters as enchanting and wondrous as The Circus itself, gives them a decent story, a sense of involvement and influence in the main plot that no character Erin has created can really be called 'minor'. There's the creative director of the Circus' design, the fashionista that coordinates the acts costumes, a clockmaker who makes the centerpiece item and even a child that sneaks into the circus grounds. The magic of the Circus touches them, drives some insane. All these characters are affected by Celia's and Marco's actions and are simply a delight to read about.

I rate the book at 4.5/5 stars. There were some parts of the story that did seem tedious, but I was already caught in its spell to think much about it. In a nutshell, The Night Circus is a gem of a novel. It's style is descriptive and magical. It may be slow, but that doesn't mean its a bad book. If you have the patience to unravel the story and undergo the experience, reading The Night Circus will possibly be the best thing you've ever done.

Magic is something we can all relate to. It's something that we want to see in our lives, some even crave a semblance of its power. We may not have magic wands or spellbooks filled with curses to cast, but we each have a little bit of magic in us. We have the power to magically imagine, to create things with our minds.

So don't ever stop dreaming. As harsh as reality might seem, there are some dreams that really do come true.

And if reality does get a bit too hard to handle, know that the gates of Le Cirque de Revěs are always open for you to explore.

'Till the next post!

-- Karin Novelia, Restless Rěveur

Who You Love, Who You Fight For and Who You Are

One aspect of human nature, which I find slightly disturbing, is our constant habit of labeling things. Not in a Sheldon Cooper like obsessive-compulsive way of labelling inanimate objects, but labeling human beings in mostly prejudicial ways.

You look at someone and start forming your opinions. You might notice their excessive body fat and assume they're lazy, insecure. You might make fun of them. You might joke around and call someone a name, in a way so ignorant that you may not realize that you're saying something that really hits home.

"I was called a faggot. I was called a homo, a queer. It was scary going into that building realizing these kids were taunting me with a word that was so close to the truth." -- Ryan Kendall in "8".

Homosexuality has been a controversial topic for years now, being the highlight of court battles, the basis for criminal sanctions and fuel for the discriminative flames of schoolyard bullies or even narrow-minded adults. The fact that the taunts thrown at them (in rude and inexcusable ways) are actually true, can only send someone over the edge, make them question who they are.

The quote above is taken from a legal-drama play called "8" which I found on Tumblr and watched on Youtube (a link to the video here). It is based off the transcripts of the trial that opposed Proposition 8, a ballot-initiative in California that banned same-sex marriage rights to citizens who were already enjoying them. It was absolutely captivating, with a live-streamed reading by a star-studded cast whose mere voice acting and subtle body language did justice to the true emotional essence that drove the historic trial to victory.

Personally, in Indonesia, you don't hear much about LGBT trials or cases. The majority of Indonesia (being Muslims) are highly religious, and it is based on those religious beliefs that homosexuality is considered wrong, in some provinces even, a crime. There is a lack of activity on the LGBT rights front, but I'm speaking from personal experience that there is at least one homosexual person in this country, and I bet that in reality there is much, much more.

What does homosexuality have to do with legal rights? Well, in most legal constitutions, the group homosexuals aren't explicitly addressed. Perhaps in a world where we all are open-minded and unfamiliar with the concept discrimination, homosexuality would not even be an issue. But it is, mostly because it is widely unaccepted in society. So, a chism has emerged from both sides of the story: people who, gay or otherwise, support LGBTs and people who don't. The people who don't accept homosexuality are finding ways to supress it, deeming it wrong and susceptible to harassment.

You ocassionaly hear someone being beaten because of their sexual orientation. Being called a freak, a faggot, far too many times that it causes them to take their own life. It's the cases like these, the discrimination and the harassment, that has pushed people to take a stand. To tell people that this is not okay and homosexuals do not deserve to be treated like that. The law is a indisputable concept developed by man which protects and creates order. Where else should these matters be taken to other than court?

Proposition 8 focuses on marriage, and it really gets you thinking. What makes gay people so different from heterosexuals? What makes them abnormal? What gives us the right to deprive them from a life of love? The Prop 8 trial focused on the definition of marriage and that it strictly had to be between a man and a woman.

Those words and definitions are man-made concepts. We're human, we make assumptions, make mistakes. Whose to say that we are not mistaken with our ideas that marriage can't be homosexual? Who can tell whether or not it will change the very core of society? Are we so arrogant to carve these paradigms into stone, without considering that change is bound to happen? In the play you'll see the defendants (the defenders of Proposition 8) have a hard time delivering their argument. Same-sex marriages or relationships are not doing any harm.

"It's not about who you're attracted to, it's who you fall in love with." -- Holly Holiday from Glee on sexuality.

Have you ever fallen in love? I, myself, don't think I have yet. How would you feel if someone told you that your love is something wrong? That this relationship that makes you feel good about yourself, makes you feel complete, is an abomination to nature and is publicly admonished? What can you even do when falling in love is something out of your control?

Love is something inspiring. And it's in my opinion that homosexual love, is the most inspiring of all. Despite all the negativity, the bigotry, these two people deemed by society as freaks or mentally-ill, come out and truly be themselves, express their love for each other in a way that is pure, touching and in the end, enduring.

I know that homosexuality is a very touchy issue, but I feel that I had to write this post on it just to let people know where I stand with it (being open-mindedly opinionated as I promised). I know that many people might not agree with me (just seeing gay couples on TV makes most of my friends disgusted).

So this is what I think -- no, this is what I believe. Homosexuality is okay. It doesn't make them any less better than heterosexuals. They are confident in who they are and we shouldn't ask them to change their ways, or pretend to be something they're not. We should not make it seem like they should be condemned, we need to make sure that they feel accepted and happy, like every human being has a right to be. They're human. Just like me and you. They might seem different, but they're not wrong.

Most might find homosexuals to be scary or feel it makes them uncomfortable, and you know what, that's okay too. We've spent most of lives seeing opposite-sex couples that same-sex ones seem foreign to us, outside of the norm. But do not ever let that fear or prejudice become an excuse for degrading a person's dignity. Do not ever make someone feel worthless when they are simply being who they are.

I don't care if your straight, gay, transgender or bi. Live the life you want to live. Love who you want to love. Marry who you want to marry. Be who you want to be.

Who you love might determine your sexuality. But your sexuality doesn't determine who you are as a person. No matter who it is, who you love will ultimately become who you fight for. Who you fight for, in the name of love, determines who you are. And that makes you human.

So take my advice. Don't hate. Be human.

I find that I get really emotional when it comes to this topic, so emotional that it clouds my heads and hinders me from fully conveying my feelings on the matter. I just hope that I make sense in what I've written, though I'll admit that I am no expert in the historic or legal or politic aspects of homosexuality rights. I'm just a person who thinks that discrimination is wrong, and urge you all to think the same.

Thanks for reading.

--Dreaming of a World Free of Hate, Karin Novelia 

The Beauty and Brutality of the World

As I've been alluding to, my one saving grace is distraction. It keeps me sane.



As the words float off the page and resonate deep within my heart, I can't help but feel a certain connection with the writer.

Then I satirically realize that I share a similar mind-frame with Death.

Still with me? Then in the same being's words, I write to you, dear reader: Come with me and I'll tell you a story.

A story of opposites, put simply. Life and Death. Losing and finding. Giving, and most paramount of all, thieving.

The Book Thief by Markus Zusak is a well-written masterpiece with such poetic prose that toys with the emotions and etches itself into memory. It tells of the dark inkling of time that imbues human history -- Nazi Germany and World War II, the years that fell under Adolf Hitler's tyrannical rule.

I must admit that I'm not an expert in the historical aspect of the subject. All I've ever heard about of Hitler, in passing, is that he is a horrible, horrible man, and a mass murderer with a strong sense of discrimination.

The characters are unique and individual, described by Zusak in a way that shows off their trademark. We are given a look into their lives and see just how steadfast they all are in a time that calls for strength, amidst war and depression.

The centerpiece of the tale is a girl named Liesel Meminger who, for a girl still young, draws in Death and tragedy in her wake. She's not to blame, of course, concerning her circumstances. Who would ever ask for their brother to suddenly drop dead on a train ride to their new foster home? She experiences such terrible loss, is separated from her family and becomes a first-hand witness to the destructive force of World War II.

After burying her brother and pilfering her first book from a mound of snow (fittingly entitled, The Grave Digger's Handbook), she arrives at Himmel Street in a town called Molching. Ironically, especially in the heart-breaking final scenes of the book, the meaning of Himmel to be translated to Heaven could not be farther from reality. She meets her new foster parents: Rosa Hubermann who, underneath the constant string of profanities, houses a heart of gold; and Hans Hubermann, an accordion-playing painter who soon teaches Liesel how to read.

Liesel's first encounter with the written words may seem like a solemn one, but The Grave Digger's Handbook was the first book she ever held in her hands and only a prelude to the more enticing ones that color her new life. She finds a new joy in reading them, even resorts to stealing them when she can, because then money for her family was scarce and they were even a luxury she could not continuously indulge herself in.

Her fixation with books and reading reminds us how words can transport us. We can get lost in the pages and get swept up in the stories they tell, leaving behind our reality to enter the fictitious ones between the lines.

I've always been a believer in the power of words. But this book also shows me that they are a double-edged sword. Words can have the power to change things. Dramatic as it sounds, they are even capable of changing the world. It can save lives. Move nations.

They can be twisted and edited, used to lie and manipulate. As was the custom then during Nazi Germany, the Fuhrer's words became gospel. He brain-washed the people under his rule with propaganda, and as the story unfolds we see the harsh consequences of such abuse. They follow his every word like robots, like zombies. He has the Germans thinking that they are a superior race, superior enough to risk their lives in a bid of war. A war that led to so many deaths.

So many people had placed their faith blindly upon him, to the point that if you weren't a Hitler supporter, the repercussions would be dire. Liesel's new Papa was among that small percentage that weren't Nazi believers and that paradigm hinged on the fact that he owed his life to a Jew. The very people Adolf Hitler discriminatingly despised.

Hans Hubermann was one of the few people who didn't believe that Jews had to be exterminated. But he never could act upon those beliefs, even speak them, all because he was afraid that once those words leaked from his lips, he could not take them back and anyone who heard them would punish him for standing up against what is obviously immoral. Maybe most of the Nazis who claimed their support were the ones who were most against it.

We're given a look at what it is like to be a Jew during that time, looking through the eyes of Max Vandenburg. He's on the run, to the point of dehydration and starvation and for what reason? Because he was born a Jew. Because a man in a fuzzy mustache says that every fiber of his being is wrong, simply because. What in the world could justify such thoughts? How deep could a racial hatred grow to make someone go through such suffering? He is coincidentally the son of the man who saved Hans Hubermann's life, and now without a home or a family, he turn to him and asks him to do something that could risk his life more than anything: to hide a Jew in his home. Implicitly, he is also asking: How far will you go to uphold your beliefs? How much of a human being are you truly are?

I momentarily tend to forget the story is fictitious and my heart aches for the poor souls, in another place, another time. Out of my reach. The realistic scenarios aptly depict the harsh times and I can't help but wonder what kind of suffering people in the real world had to face. Perhaps there were Liesels and Hubermanns and Maxes facing all sorts of dilemmas. Or perhaps it was far worse that Markus Zusak could ever try to depict.

What binds all these characters, places, and stories within stories is the omniscient narrator who comes off a bit too... human for my liking. The most uplifting story-telling of The Book Thief is the use of Death as its voice. As the war rages on, he becomes quite busy, as you can imagine, reaping souls and dropping them off to only he knows where. Zusak defies common perception that Death is a cold-blooded, empty soul in a black cloak who wields a scythe, and instead gives him a heart. We read that he is burdened with his task, he finds no joy in it, no satisfaction. He distracts himself with all the deceased souls he sees everyday by vacationing in increments. In colors.

It's not that he needs to distract himself from the souls he need to collect -- it is after all his job, and no matter how much he chooses not to, he will not stop seeing them. He needs a distraction from us. From humans. From the survivors that stand in the wake of Death, humans who can kill and save lives, who are capable of nearly anything good, even bad. He is obsessed with them, with their stories, even though he knows he should not.

This novel tackles quite a few issues and themes, like discrimination and duality, but the one that sums everything pretty well is this: human nature. It puzzles Death to no end. The way humans can be so complicated. How they can bring upon their lives such beauty and brutality, such order and chaos, as if one could not exist without the other.

We wish for peace yet continue to war with one another. We fight for life but then kill. Through the darkest days we still manage to see the silver lining. We are afraid of Death yet... we continue running towards him.

A small excerpt from his "Diary" might help to clarify:

It was a year for the ages, like 79, like 1346, to name just a few. Forget the scythe, Goddamn it, I needed a broom or a mop. And I needed a vacation.

* * * A SMALL PIECE OF TRUTH * * *

I do not carry a sickle or a scythe.

I only wear a hooded black robe when it's cold.

And I don't have those skull-like

facial features you seem to enjoy

pinning on me from a distance. You

want to know what I truly look like?

I'll help you out. Find yourself

a mirror while I continue. 

I also find it incredibly fitting that in the end, Liesel uses the words to tell her story by writing it down. No one could ever had guessed that the story, written in a small bounded notebook, would fall into the hands of Death. In his introduction he tells us his reasons for keeping stories of survivors: It is one of the small legion I carry, each one extraordinary in its own right. Each one an attempt -- an immense leap of an attempt -- to prove to me that you, and your human existence are worth it.

In the end he's even at a loss for words to describe what he has seen.

All I was able to do was turn to Liesel Meminger and tell her the only truth I know. I said it to the book thief and I say it to you now.

* * * A LAST NOTE FROM YOUR NARRATOR * * *

I am haunted by humans.

So ask yourselves this reader: Is our existence truly worth it? Can we even call ourselves 'human' beings?

It has been a long while since I wrote a book review (again, my use of the word 'review' is a loose one), but I do enjoy writing them, analyzing what they have to offer, entertainment or education-wise. I know it is long, but if you've taken the time to read this, then thank you. I hope that you can take what I've written as some food for thought, and might even decide to pick up this book for yourselves and fall in love with it like I did, from the very first page. As I writer, I recently realized that I suck at words. I could associate my lack of inspiration to a thing called writer's block, but it is nothing but a blatant excuse. So, like Liesel Meminger said at the end of her book, The Book Thief:

I have hated the words and I have loved them, and I hope I have made them right.

-- Haunted by the Words, Karin Novelia

A Hunger for Entertainment

Dystopia. It is a word that I have learnt its meaning only recently in my researches regarding literary works. I often turn on my laptop and surf the net finding titles of books that pique my interest and the Hunger Games was definitely one of them.

The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins falls into the dystopian category for its setting in a rather bleak and fallen civilization. I watched it on the big screen yesterday evening, and note that while I will attempt to review the movie, in the loosest sense of the term since most of my attempts at objectivity to turn out to have a slight hint of emotional attachment, I have yet to read the Hunger Games trilogy and so cannot give a comparison between the written works and movies.

The story begins rather ominously with a simple, blankly black screen with fading words that foretell the history behind the fantasized nation's current state and the creation of the spectacle that is the hunger Games. Suddenly we are thrust into a district that is nestled away in some niche among the forests, reminiscent of times of war and hardship where people work hard to meet there needs, being thrown into a state of depravity that it's obvious everyone is struggling to keep themselves clean or fed.

The cinematography in this movie is spectacular. Though some might find some scenes to be too drawn out, that's the way things are more likely to play out in real life. In silence, as the character is in deep thought. It's not like real life has its own background music now does it? The hallucination scene was a real treat. The stop and start choppiness of the transitions, the breaks in sound (which I initially thought was a malfunction in the theater's sound system) gives a very good interpretation of what dwindling mental state is like. The scene where the coal-mine blew up, presumably with Katniss' father in it and the drowned out screams of Katniss at her catatonic mother had a powerful effect that made my eyes water. It was moving, and gave insight the reason why Katniss is as hardened and stoic as she is. The riveting soundtrack and use of effects also added depth to the experience.

Speaking of the protagonist, Katniss Everdeen, what I like about the characters is that they're well thought out, complex but not dynamically so, consistent in their demeanor and way of doing things. She's lean, strikingly beautiful (though oblivious to that fact) and in hard times knows how to handle things, such as hunt with a bow. She remains pretty cold and guarded for the first half of the movie, embracing her 'I don't make friends easily' self and coming off as slightly bad-ass.

Then there's Peeta Mellark, the second half of District 12's star-crossed lovers, was a bit of a cliche though to be honest, the distant lover who has crushed on the main character for so long, it seems to have turned into an undying and unconditional love. He is rather the underdog, being the weaker of the pair, but he does have hidden skills like massive upper body strength and camoflage.

I'd prefer to see more of Gale though, his almost brotherly relationship with Katniss is something I'd like to see. The love triangle between them and Peeta will surely spark some drama in the coming sequels. Building up to the premiere, I've seen that many of the original books fans weren't that happy with casting. Again, I have not read the books so I cannot compare the movie versions to the ones described in the books, but I think Jennifer Lawrence looks stunning. The dark hair suits her, and her features to give a sort of deadly beauty look. Though I'm not sure about Josh Hutcherson. He did some decent acting, but I just don't like his hair blond. I swear, in some scenes I kept on wondering where HIS EYEBROWS went.

On that note of outward appearances, the opening parade that introduced the Tributes to the Capitol, was a spectacular show. The make-up and costume department certainly had a lot to work with, if they build off what Suzanne Collins had written in her books. The exaggeration of pop culture in the Capitol residents' hair and make-up gave the whole world a comical and other-worldly feel. The costumes during the parade were just as exagerrated, but admitedly so to give District 12 a chance to shine. It is a good stroke of luck though that Peeta and Katniss managed to end up with nice team of the well-tasted Cinna and the experienced though eccentric and drunk Haymitch as mentor. The use of fire, earning her the title of "The Girl on Fire", as their main selling-point was really inspired.

Fire is hot and eerily beautiful in a way. It can be made, but then go beyond your control. You can use it to your advantages, or it can be used to hurt you. It symbolizes blazing spirits, fiery tempers and power. It's a force of nature and has the BBC's Sherlock once said, "exposes our priorities".

Plot-wise, the climax of a fight to death lets us question that side of our humanity: what lengths will we go to for some 'entertainment'? Like the citizens of Panem's Capitol, do we hunger for entertainment like they do?

It's true that while in real-life we do not pit ourselves against the other to kill each other off, we still do some pretty inhumane things because we find them funny. Take bullying for example. We ridicule someone, bring them down, in more extreme cases, use physical violence, make a spectacle out of a another person's weakness and laugh at such a thing. Then of course there's the obvious pro-wrestling, which thankfully I haven't seen much on air these past few years. And we do all these things for what? Entertainment? A quick buck?

If our current paradigms do not shift, who's not to say that our civilization won't end up as barbaric as the one in the Hunger Games?

Just some food for thought. Another thing plot-wise, I couldn't help but find Katniss and Peeta's love to be very cheesy and well, fake. Again, haven't read the books for reference, but I theorize that it was all just a ploy to get out of the Games alive. Haymitch did say that he could sell the whole 'star-crossed' lover bit, and maybe they used it in their favor. Though in a way, that is a double-edged sword, seeing how Katniss is sort of obligated to keep her charade, assuming Peeta is oblivious to her acting and his feelings are actually real. Then there's the whole Gale thing.

Overall I'd give the movie a good 4 stars out of 5, my only complaint is that the main theme and plot is a bit cliched, but it does appeal to a broader, younger demographic.

Well, I guess that my first review. Though I doubt I've written anything assembling to one, since I am, gently-put, opinionated and tend to drone on and on than anyone would care to read. Maybe I should think of a proper template to review upon, the clear aspects I want to talk about such as Cinematography, Set and Costume Design, Soundtrack, Characters, Plot, etc. (Well, lookie, I guess I just did).

That's all for now. Hope you have a good life and are at least a little bit entertained by my writings here on this blog. Thanks for taking the time to read. 'Till the next post then.

And may the odds be ever in your favor. ;)

--Karin Novelia, Happy-Go-Lucky Cinema-Goer