The City, The City

Exaggerating the real world is a useful way to point out political issues such as immigration. This book is in the "science fiction" section at bookstores yet seems to close to reality to ignore. It reminds me of Kurt Vonnegut short story in which he creates a world of perfect equality. The dancers wear ankle weights and the intelligent are shocked every time a thought is forming. The price of equality is to weigh down any strength until everyone is on the same level. In this novel, so far it seems to be a point on immigration. Furthermore, it seems to be commentary on how Israel and Palestine were divided with undertones of the Great Schism in relation to religion. The derogatory word painted above one murdered man read "ebru" which I believe when spoken resembles "Hebrew". The idea of countries and borders is a construction of government, but more integrally man. It's fascinating how these two, potentially three, countries can all exist within the same geographical location. This story also reminds me of the divided Cypress. The people agree on an imaginary border and its taboo to cross or acknowledge anyone on the other side. It's a shared living rights on the same island divided by, from my understanding, Greeks and Turks. My mom said that there was a restaurant situated right on the border in Cypress and patrons were limited to sit in seats according to where the border fell. She never did go into how the waiting staff got around this obstacle, but it still echoes concepts seen in The City, The City shows.

Looking forward to seeing where this novel goes, but I anticipate its main points will be the role of the government, immigration, but most importantly a complex representation of "the will of the people" - why is it that people go along with "unseeing"? Out of Fear? I think this country will show a society that does not function democratically.

House Rules Part Deux

I'm going to have to agree with Gahagen on this one. It seems to be a book written for 40 year old mothers who can snag a minute to read in between doing laundry and vaccuuming (I'm not stereotyping anymore than Picoult). Sappy, predictable, "heartfelt", unsatisfying. A quick read, despite it's length, but leaves no lasting impression.

Three Points of Critique:

1) Why did no one ask the simple question: "Did you kill her?"
They talked about how this syndrome leads the a person to be painfully honest. Asking the simple question "did you kill her" would have resolved a lot of problems. Yes, the mom feared what her son might've done, and Theo was afraid of his involvement and ... the lawyer didn't want to put himself into a bind? I suppose the prosecution was afraid he would say no... Litterally, no one asked for his side of the story and I find this unrealistic.

2)The lawyer didn't ask Jacob for his story
Why not? Is this really how the legal system works? I figured lawyers knew the truth about their defendent and just kept a poker face during trial if they should be guilty. I was so confused as to this point. How can one make a sound case without as full a picture as one can get?

3)Ending
If I were sitting in on this case and then, out of the blue, the accused's brother comes forth with his involvement on the case, I would be completely skeptical. Jason is a crime genius - of course he could have planned all of this. What jury would believe this "stroke of luck"? It would seem as if the mother had a hand in all of this too. Picoult should've had Jason go to jail w/out the truth ever being uncovered. The exploration of Theo wrestling with guilt would have been a great read. It would have been a striking tragedy as opposed to a cheap, happy ending.

House Rules

The first time I tried to write on House Rules nothing came to mind. My solution? Put off my homework and take to the kitchen and prepare more food for the week. I already had sweet potatoes boiling in the kitchen and they starting to get too soft. Flipping through some recipes, I decided on "Tropical Sweet Potato Fries" (http://allrecipes.com/Recipe/Tropical-Sweet-Potato-Fries/Detail.aspx). After letting them steam dry, I removed the skins, chopped, and tossed them onto an oiled baking sheet. It was when I was coating them with olive oil that I thought to myself, "Jacob would go ballistic if he were here right now." For those of you who don't know, sweet potatoes are about as orange as you can get, and to top it off, I was using a rubber, orange brush to coat the potatoes with oil. Here I am, preparing food for the week and would never have known that Asperger's syndrome might make sweet potatoes inedible. From this book I am enlightened on the every day challenges of someone on this spectrum of Autism.

I believe this book isn't so much about who killed Olgivery, but instead about the difficulties faced by the "extraordinary". My housemate walked into the living room, and after seeing that House Rules was written by Jessica Picoult said "Oh, she wrote My Sister's Keeper. That author always writes about those challenged with health issues". Granted, that was a generalization, I flipped to the last few pages by accident and saw the last chapter labeled "My Brother's Keeper". With this commonality, I'm guessing there are other reoccurring themes such as sibling relationships in the face of disease, syndromes, etc. Her writing is valuable, I think, because it educates the masses on Asperger's syndrome which would otherwise only be in textbooks.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo: Demonizing S&M

Two oppositions presented in the book are normal vs deviation. Through the character of Lisbeth, we can a clear message of deviation both socially as well as cognitively. However, this opposition is presented not to establish that one is right, or one is wrong but to instead show the spectrum of personalities. Furthermore, this book advocates the breaking of stereotypes. Martin, a seemingly responsible and kind character turns out to be the serial rapist and murderer. Lisbeth, is initially perceived as a social deviant that is daft and contumacious. Although she is by know means a conformist, her appearance repeatedly misleads assumptions made by outsiders. Banal, but, "don't judge a book by it's cover." It acts to strip away the negative connotation of deviant, or different from what is normal.

However, this book solidifies a stereotype. Sexual deviation has often been used to demonize individuals as seen with the Ugandan anti-homosexuality bill. This is in part due to the fact that the most "deviant" behaviors are often shared by the fewest people. The fewer the people, the less likely the majority comes into contact with them. Therefore it can establish an "us" and "them" mentality leading to hostility and lack of empathy. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo demonizes those who practice S&M. Not does Lisbeth's guardian a practices of S&M who rapes her, but also Martin who is the serial rapist and victim. Through the presentation of S&M, it would seem that Larsson betrays his own true feelings. In the later books, (not that I've read them), Larson couples S&M with satanism completely demonizing the act. As seen in Laura Kipnis' Bound and Gagged, practicers of S&M are demonized. After googling "Stieg Larsson, S&M" I didn't find any group in retaliation of the books. I'm curious as to why this is. No formal S&M group? I'm misinterpreting this book's effects on stereotyping S&M?