Dickens
Holiday Diversions
With snow coming down outside in one thick blanket
(we're expecting up to 35 cm by the end of Saturday),
today is a good day to curl up and do nothing. Not
that we've been doing much for the past couple of
days! Mostly reading and watching DVDs.
Patti borrowed a number of vids from the local library for the holidays and we've plowed through most of those. In honour of my commitment to reading all of Dickens, she picked up the BBC mini-series of David Copperfield (starring a very young, pre-Potter Daniel Radcliffe) as well as the recent theatrical film version of Nicholas Nickleby. We watched the first 90 minutes of the mini-series (the thing is more than 180 minutes in total) before giving it up as too depressing. Nickleby lasted only 20 minutes before we hit "Stop" and walked away. Maybe Dickens is better read than viewed.
As I was flipping among the various American college football bowl games yesterday, I noticed that Vision TV was showing all six hours of the BBC's version of Little Dorrit, the Dickens novel I am actually reading right now. Awful. Though it did seem to be a little more light-hearted than the others, it was still really bleak. I'm starting to reconsider my intention to read the whole Dickens oeuvre.
We have been watching the first season of Mad Men, the American TV show set in the 1960s, and are finding it a challenge. Yes, the racism, anti-semitism and misogyny so blatantly on display in the show are likely accurate representations of the time but they are very hard to watch. And I can't help but wonder if the decision to set the show during that time period and to focus on those kinds of behaviours (as well as smoking and drinking) isn't, itself, a form of backlash against the small progress we've made as a society towards inclusion and equity. Many have argued that the show represents a critique of such conservative, hate-filled attitudes (a la All In the Family) but I'm not so sure.
I'm happy to report, however, that the problematic aspects of the show seem to decline as the first season goes on while the plots develop in interesting ways and the characters and their relationships continue to be quite fascinating. The jury is still out but we still have six episodes of the first season to watch before drawing any conclusions.
I have enjoyed reading the two volumes of The Complete Peanuts I received for Christmas: 1971-72 and 1973-74. These two Peanuts volumes involve the introduction of both Marcie, the bespectacled little girl who calls Peppermint Patti "sir" all the time, and "Rerun", the baby brother of Lucy and Linus. As a result, I was concerned that, at this point in the comic strip's history, we might have reached the "jumping the shark" moment that plagues many a successful series (be it a TV program or a comic strip), when the writer runs out of ideas and the characters become mere caricatures of themselves.
I'm pleased to find that my fears were unfounded. In fact, I think I've laughed out loud more often with these two volumes than with any of the earlier books. And I'm finding it very interesting to see how Peanuts strips are reflective of their times. For example, in a February 1972 strip, Snoopy mentions Star Trek, the first time that iconic sci-fi show was ever mentioned in the Peanuts world. This is notable because the original series of Star Trek aired on television between 1966 and 1969 and passed unnoticed by Charles Schulz into oblivion. It was only when the show began to pick up speed in syndication that it became important enough a cultural force to make its way into Snoopy's world.
OK, so maybe I'm just pleased to see Star Trek make an appearance in Peanuts. Cool. I like to see my interests meld. Now all we need to have is Hermione refer to Spock and McCoy in the next Harry Potter film.
Patti borrowed a number of vids from the local library for the holidays and we've plowed through most of those. In honour of my commitment to reading all of Dickens, she picked up the BBC mini-series of David Copperfield (starring a very young, pre-Potter Daniel Radcliffe) as well as the recent theatrical film version of Nicholas Nickleby. We watched the first 90 minutes of the mini-series (the thing is more than 180 minutes in total) before giving it up as too depressing. Nickleby lasted only 20 minutes before we hit "Stop" and walked away. Maybe Dickens is better read than viewed.
As I was flipping among the various American college football bowl games yesterday, I noticed that Vision TV was showing all six hours of the BBC's version of Little Dorrit, the Dickens novel I am actually reading right now. Awful. Though it did seem to be a little more light-hearted than the others, it was still really bleak. I'm starting to reconsider my intention to read the whole Dickens oeuvre.
We have been watching the first season of Mad Men, the American TV show set in the 1960s, and are finding it a challenge. Yes, the racism, anti-semitism and misogyny so blatantly on display in the show are likely accurate representations of the time but they are very hard to watch. And I can't help but wonder if the decision to set the show during that time period and to focus on those kinds of behaviours (as well as smoking and drinking) isn't, itself, a form of backlash against the small progress we've made as a society towards inclusion and equity. Many have argued that the show represents a critique of such conservative, hate-filled attitudes (a la All In the Family) but I'm not so sure.
I'm happy to report, however, that the problematic aspects of the show seem to decline as the first season goes on while the plots develop in interesting ways and the characters and their relationships continue to be quite fascinating. The jury is still out but we still have six episodes of the first season to watch before drawing any conclusions.
I have enjoyed reading the two volumes of The Complete Peanuts I received for Christmas: 1971-72 and 1973-74. These two Peanuts volumes involve the introduction of both Marcie, the bespectacled little girl who calls Peppermint Patti "sir" all the time, and "Rerun", the baby brother of Lucy and Linus. As a result, I was concerned that, at this point in the comic strip's history, we might have reached the "jumping the shark" moment that plagues many a successful series (be it a TV program or a comic strip), when the writer runs out of ideas and the characters become mere caricatures of themselves.
I'm pleased to find that my fears were unfounded. In fact, I think I've laughed out loud more often with these two volumes than with any of the earlier books. And I'm finding it very interesting to see how Peanuts strips are reflective of their times. For example, in a February 1972 strip, Snoopy mentions Star Trek, the first time that iconic sci-fi show was ever mentioned in the Peanuts world. This is notable because the original series of Star Trek aired on television between 1966 and 1969 and passed unnoticed by Charles Schulz into oblivion. It was only when the show began to pick up speed in syndication that it became important enough a cultural force to make its way into Snoopy's world.
OK, so maybe I'm just pleased to see Star Trek make an appearance in Peanuts. Cool. I like to see my interests meld. Now all we need to have is Hermione refer to Spock and McCoy in the next Harry Potter film.