?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
06 June 2009 @ 12:31 pm
#19  
The Duke and I, Julia Quinn

This chick really should not advertise the fact that she attended Harvard - the reason being, I associate Harvard with super-duper smart people. Not people who don't know the difference between 'cutting a SWATHE' and 'cutting a SWASH' (whatever the fuck a swash is. It's probably related to swabbing).

This book was purportedly set in Regency England and yet it was rife with horrific modernisms AND Americanisms. I really, really can't believe someone from Harvard didn't know even one English exchange student that she could have inveigled into reading over this and informing her of some salient points, like:

- People in 21st century England don't use the term 'block,' so it is far from likely that people in 18th century England would have. I've been reading American books since the Babysitter's Club as a bb, and I still have yet to figure out what the fuck a block is. A housing block? An apartment block? A street? WHAT? Regardless, I doubt there's a Duchess on record who ever used that term. Okay, maybe Fergie, but she so doesn't count.

- Simon, or indeed any other man, could not sit on his 'fanny', for the simple reason that the distinguishing feature of a human male is the lack of vaginas.

Someone had the audacity to call Quinn 'the modern Austen'. What cheek! Okay, I did stop to ponder whether it would have been more toolish for her to try and write in a contemporary style, but there are some simple rules to follow in cases like these:

Don't use 'a bit', use 'a little.'
Don't use 'sort of/kind of,' use 'rather.'
Don't use phrases like 'ditched her groom'.

The sex scenes were so incredibly, amusingly bad. 'Cradle of her feminity'! OH HOW I LOL'D. Also, I've decided that 'climaxed' is the worst synonym for 'orgasmed', like, ever.

At least this book never aimed to be anything other than mildly bad. It makes a change from lauded classics that are supposed to be the model for all literature and are still bad. I suppose.

Previously, on Book Glomp 2009:
He Knew He Was Right, Anthony Trollope
The Bostonians, Henry James
For Whom the Bell Tolls, Ernest Hemingway
For Esme - with Love and Squalor, JD Salinger
The Outsider, Albert Camus
The Princess Diaries: Ten out of Ten, Meg Cabot
The Vicar of Bullhampton, Anthony Trollope
Molesworth, Geoffrey Willans
Villette, Charlotte Bronte
The Portrait of a Lady, Henry James
The Way of All Flesh, Samuel Butler
Cecilia, Fanny Burney
The Catcher in the Rye, JD Salinger
The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie, Muriel Spark
Breakfast of Champions, Kurt Vonnegut
Valley of the Dolls, Jacqueline Susann
Siddhartha, Herman Hesse
The White Tiger, Aravind Adiga
 
 
 
Merit: GWmeritjubet on June 6th, 2009 01:04 pm (UTC)
I also wanted to know what a block was when I was younger. "It is only three blocks away!" always confused me. Even the above explanations don't really help since it isn't a precise form of distance! *pedantic* Not to mention they obviously have never lived in places where there is just one long road. The hick in me is probably showing *g*

- Simon, or indeed any other man, could not sit on his 'fanny', for the simple reason that the distinguishing feature of a human male is the lack of vaginas. Unless this modern day Austen was treading a rather risque subject. Sadly no? :/
every Starbucks should have a polar bear: JK on DHscoradh on June 6th, 2009 05:46 pm (UTC)
I always pictured blocks as housing blocks, and never understood why they ever complained about walking anywhere. As for the town planning, it must be the same in every town and city in America for this to work.

What, like transgenderism? (Is that an ism?) I don't think so. That would be quite out of her league.
Merit: Disney Proud to be Fairiesmeritjubet on June 7th, 2009 03:20 am (UTC)
All the possible differences made the whole idea of block rather contradictory in my mind.

Yep. And anyway, if she is a modern day Jane Austen shouldn't she be writing about modern manners and love? *nitpick*