Thriller/Mystery Blog Space
Here's the place for comments from the thriller/mystery group....
posted by Ms. Clapp @ 9:45 AM
33 comments
Here's the place for comments from the thriller/mystery group....
posted by Ms. Clapp @ 9:45 AM
33 comments
33 Comments:
Well, I guess I'll kick off this blog about The Professor and the Madman.
After reading Chapters 1-3, I definitely found it interesting that Simon Winchester (the author) puts the definition of a word that his chapter is about at the beginning of each chapter. For Example, in Chapter 1, Winchester gave the definition of the word "murder", where Chapter 1 was centralized around the murder of George Marrett. Or even in the preface, here he gives the definition of the word "mysterious" and we are told of the mystery of William C. Minor (an inmate at an asylum). By giving these words and definitions to us in the beginning of each chapter, Winchester is kind of giving us an insight into each chapter and grabbing our interest because we want to know what is the story behind that word.
In chapter 2, we are given the background behind the creation of the Oxford-English dictionary as well as the back ground knowledge into James Murray, the editor of the OED.
Finally in Chapter 3, we are given the definition of the word "lunatic" at the beginning of the chapter, which is a chapter explaining the background of Dr. Minor. I kind of find it ironic that Minor is being called insane, but in this chapter, Minor doesn't seem insane, in fact on p. 65, it says " he suffered no apparent affects from his experiences".
I thought that the book, in some ways, was a little bland. I was not into the lexicography as much as the action, the story behind it. I wanted to hear more about James Murray, more action like the story given at the beginning, when James kills George.
He does explain a lot of what might appear to be unrelated material, but I found all of this fascinating anyway. There were parts of it that were very interesting and other parts that were the least bit interesting at all. The book ties together the story of a insane murderer. Also including the major factor of the story of the making of the Oxford English Dictionary and the lives of two major figures in the contribution of the making of the dictionary. I agree with Debbie when she says she wants more information of the killing of George by James. I was a bit disappointed when there was very little information provided. Therefore, I foreshadow that there will be more key elements in depth of the murder to come.
I know the details on the murder were lacking but I still found the story interesting. I love the way Winchester sets everything up by describing the scene first. I couldnt help but think of the technique "In media res" which is to talk about the scene then fill one in with the details leading up to it later. That writer technique is very fitting for a mystery. Plus he builds the suspense by not giving you any information. I admit i got upset but that just got me more into it.
When reading the first three chapters, I realized how the people of today are dependent on computers. I know most times, if I do not know something, I will go on google, and look it up. The people in the book, such as James Murray, had such an afinity for knowledge that is lost today. Sure, there are smart people, but not people who acn speak more than four languages, and self teach themselves all the knowledge that is available.
I loved how Winchester would connect small details, this guy would become the character in Pygmalian, another, the father of Alexander Graham Bell,Alice in Wonderland, there are so many connections.
Another detail I liked about the book was the reference to Eden. Ceylon, with the naked girls, contains people with no shames, people without clothes on. However, it is described as the opposite of Eden.
I do not think the book went too much into how William Minor goes insane, it was sort of like, he goes to the military, there are epidemics, he begins geting diseases, he goes a little mad, he gets monomania... then he is off to the aslyum. Afterwards, he is freed, but with a gun.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I found the book intresting in the way it was written. Usaully in the begining of the chapters authors use quotes that summarises what they are going to about. The author of this books uses definitions rather than quotes which give different meanings to words they are defining which I think is going to be very important when trying to understand the story.
I made a mistake with my previous post, there was not a quick transition between when Minor was healthy and insane.
Although the chapters from 4-7 are a little boring, I liked the information on how the dictionary was compiled. I would want to be a reader/ finder of words too.
I could never live like Minor, although he had all this money sent to him by the US Embassy.
I agree with Debbie because I also found chapters 4-7 to be a little on the boring side. However, on p.80, there was quote that grabbed my interest because it explained the convenience that an English dictionary provides us with today and how 400 years ago, people like Shakespeare didn't have the luxury of being able to look up words to help them and that we consider this convenience to be an "ordinary and perfectly normal function". This made me think of how much we take for granted in our times. The reminded me that even something like a dictionary should be appreciated because of the convenience and help it provides us,(yes, I am guilty of not appreciating a dictionary), and that we are lucky to have resources like it available to us.
Another quote that grabbed my interest for a brief moment actually branches off from my above paragraph on p.102, which was a question that asked us when the dictionary was created, it was such a bold and brilliant creation, a huge success, but, "who now really remembers their dictionaries, and who makes use of all that they achieved?" I think that although it was a great achievement during that time, the times have changed and there are better technologies such as computers to replace dictionaries. What are all your thoughts?
I agree with Debbie and Ravi that chapters 4-7 was not so excited as I expected it to be. I agree with Ravi when he mentions about the technology. Relating to the quote I believe it means that people do not seem to keep in mind all their helpful tools in life. Meaning they take things for granted, such as the dictionary. And for the second part I disagree with because in my opinion I believe that everyone tries to use what they know. The more they achieved the more they would want to show off their knowledge to the rest of the world.
This book is not as great as I thought it would be. For a thriller book it is lacking a lot of thriller.Though what gives me interest in this book is William Minor. Even though he is technically insane he still made a contribution to the dictionary. It makes me think a lot about the human mind and its potential. Minor is seen as a lunatic but he is actually intelligent and sane in his own way. I found it interesting that we lock these kinds of people up yet they could still contribute greatly in society which is taken for granted. Maybe these people can contribute more to society if we look at things from their perspective once in a while.(of course i dont mean to commit crimes while looking from their view point)
This comment has been removed by the author.
Agreeing with most everyone else, I must say that this book isn't as thrilling as I would have hoped, but I do find it interesting. I was thinking that, since the creation of the dictionary, it would make sense for the definition of words to not change as much over time, which was an issue for its creators. Changing culture made staying top of the language difficult. Also, Ms. Clapp told me that there is a twist in the end, so hopefully it will get interesting again. I think we should also pay attention to setting in this novel now that we've talked about it in class, because the characters seem to connect strongly to their surroundings.
I think this chapter lacked any thrill because it was used as a base for events to come. In the first chaper on the first page the author writes " It was also on a foggy day in November, nearly a quarter of a century earlier, that the events on the other side of this curious conjunction got properly under way". From this I can tell that the events in this chapter are going to be relavent later, but I still agree that this chaper was really boring
After reading the book I only found the last few chapters a little more interesting in the sense that I actually understood what was being said. On the last chapter Winchester defined "memorial." He explained that Minor was famous for his work while the person he killed to acheive it was unimportant. In the book George Merritt was barely mentioned after the beginning which leads me to think his death didnt matter, it was only important to begin the plot. Basiclly the only people that would ever get remembered in the world are those who have contributed to society while others who dont are not significant to life at all. Harsh but true. No one is going to remember the guy who pumps gas in your car. Most likely everyone will remember Barrack Obama though.
I agree with you Carlos, I was also surprised by how little of a role George Marrett played in this book. I mean, in the beginning I thought that Marrett would prove to be this important, powerful character who was preventing the dictionary from being written, but we are since told that he was just a poor, working class farmer's son, basically a nobody.
Also, while I was finishing this book, I noticed that Winchester shifts his view of Dr. Minor from being this crazy guy that we are all supposed to hate, to being this frail, old man that we aren't supposed to fear, but to pity. Did anyone else pick up on this shift in view?
Finally, I just had to bring up the whole part where Minor cuts off his own penis. We were told that he did it to please god and escape from his sexual fantasies, but the real reason was because he felt guilty abut sleeping with George Marrett's widow. I mean this guy cuts off his penis because he felt guilty?!?! Anybody else have any thoughts on this?
I agree with Carlos and Ravi when they mention the fact that George Marrett was not mention throughout the book. However, only in the beginning, which was disappointing since that was the incident that made the book seems interesting. And about how Minor cut off his own penis only because he was feeling guilty was a bit extreme in my opinion. Even if he was responsible, there was no need or even justified for cutting his own penis off. And Jenna mentioned in the previous post that Ms.Clapp has said there was a twisting end. I’m not so sure exactly where was the twist. Does anyone have any thoughts on the turning point? Overall I thought the book was interesting due to the English Dictionary, yet; overall it did not really entertain me.
I found it sad that Minor was so happy with words, he seemed so sad, because his only amusement was from words like horsebread or buckwheat.
I find it strange that Murray and Minor could keep in contact for twenty years without ever seeing each other.
Although this booked was interesting at first, my attention strayed away after the first chapter. There was more about the dictionary than I wanted to know about. I wanted to read about mystery and sadly this book has not fulfilled my expectations.
I found the end of the book to be depressing because people like Old Fredrick and Murray who admirably worked hard to finish the dictionary never saw the completion of the dictionary. They had hopes of its completion, but one by one they died grateful for their contribution, but also sorrowful for not being able to finish it which in my opinion enriches the end of the story. After reading it now I find it interesting how the writers of the dictionary and Minor made contributions to human knowledge. The writers of the dictionary gave the world an indispensable work of literature for quick knowledge and although Minor’s contributions were out his control the discoveries acquired from his abnormalities created new discoveries in the medical field and human understanding of mental disorders.
Yeah, I'm not sure that there was really a twist at the end, but there was more something of a gradual turn in the plot, kind of like how, as Ravi mentioned, it is suggested for the reader to shift his/her opinion of Dr. Minor as the novel progresses in the end. Also, as much as it was kind of a shock when Dr. Minor cut off his penis, it seemed like something his character would totally do. His sexual desires and religious beliefs have been conflicted since the very beginning.
It's true that this wasn't much of a thriller, which is what we all were hoping for, but it was interesting at times. Can we please read Dracula next? :]
While reading the first 300 pages of The Stand by Stephen King, I found the book to be quite fascinating. Personally I feel that the super flu, code name Project Blue, created by the government was interesting. One question that I have while reading is more of an opinion, do you believe that Champion should have left the army base before the lockdown or do you think that he should have stayed? I mean he knew that he was sick.
Also, what do you think of General William Starkey? What do you think of his containment efforts? I mean he had two journalists who tried to tell the truth killed. Don't you think the people should have been told?
After reading the first 40 chapters of The Stand, I thought the book was a little boring.
I didn't think Campion should have ran away, but in the situation he was in, I could see why he ran.
Sometimes I think Stephen King puts in too many characters. In each chapter he switches to various characters. I barely remembered who Larry was.
However, I do like the connections King makes. All the people are connected by the spread of the infection/sickness. Somehow a sickness that started with Campion gets to Larry in the move theater.
It's a little scary to know that the sickness could spread so quickly.
Overall, I think I'll give the book a chance. Maybe the next seven hundred pages will change my mind.
I agree with Debbie on how it seemed boring at first. Yet, as I continued reading it actually had me feeling a bit suspenseful. The book had me thinking that this can really actually happen. In fact, it really is a scary thought in my opinion. As they were talking about how the disease can spread throughout each other very easily, it reminded me of the movie Quarantine. Especially how there was a lock down , in the movie they locked the building down so that the invested people would not contaminate others. Relating back to Ravi’s question I do believe that Champion should have left the army base before the lockdown. If he didn’t then he would of spread his sickness to others, so in the end it is better off him leaving now while others can have a chance of staying healthy.
We'll I found the beginning boring too. When the panic for the super flu began it didnt really catch my interest as much as I thought it should. Its not that suspenseful yet.
Theres just too many names! I totally agree with Debbie. I was confused half the time on who was talking and who they were. *angry page flipping back and forth*
The second portion that we are suppose to read still is a little bland. I don't like how King keeps on introducing more and more characters, I am not interested enough in the book to remember all the characters. The characters also aren't very interesting. King does not clear up who is the protagonist or even the antagonist yet. The recurring dreams is also something that I think is very strange. Further along the book, I think the dreams will reveal a bigger meaning, because more than one person is or has been dreaming about the same person/thing.
I found that the beginning of the book was more interesting than the part we just finished reading. At first it caught a bit of my attention yet; as I continued reading I lost some of my interest. I do agree with the fact that there are too many characters to keep up who is saying what. I don’t know if it is only me but every time I figure out who is saying what, I want to keep reading to see what happens next. My grandmother always told me when people have the same dreams it means they are connecting telepathically. Not really sure it that is true or not. But considering that, I don’t only think the dream is important, yet; the people having the same dream are significant to each other. Their connection might be revealed later on.
Well, i kind of do have to agree with Debbie here that the introduction of so many new characters does make you lose track of whats going on and what are the role of these characters, but the concept so far in he book has been pretty good with the stories being told of these survivors of the epidemic. One question i have is what do you think that Abigail Freemantle and Randall Flag represent? I see Abigail as being a leader and Randall as being true evil. What do you guys think?
Randall is a plain out jerk. Treats everyone badly so I agree with Ravi that Randall is not the best of characters. Anyways I feel that the book has been going kind of slow. Lost interest in it already.
By finishing the book I now see why the title is the Stand. Since everyone is basically fighting for survival they must take “Stand” on what’s the right thing to do. For instance, when the two of the different camps knew each other was existing they both saw it a threat. Was it really a threat? I do not believe it was yet a sign that there are people going through the same thing. Almost as if it was a sign of hope in my opinion. One of my favorite quote in this book is the part where it says, "No one can tell what goes on in between the person you were and the person you become. No one can chart that blue and lonely section of hell. There are no maps of change. You just...come out the other side...Or don't. " I just love this quote. Also I seen a lot of reference of God that I think it is has a lot of religious allusions and references.
I highly disliked the book. I don't think Stephen King could have dragged and beat down the material any more than than he did already. He throws in so much unnecessary information that the reader is left rolling his or her eyes when he starts on a tangent.
I don't like how Stephen King incorporates sex into the novel. I get it that the characters are having sex. King adds in too many just random sex scenes in the novel. The scene between Stu and Frannie was necessary; the scene between Nadine and Randall was necessary; but the scene between Larry and Rita? Okay, they are lonely and literally the last people alive, so of course they have to sleep with each other...
I get it that Nadine must keep her virginity. Yet it is ironic, why must an evil character keep something so pure for the devil/antagonist? I would think that since Nadine has already gone to the "dark side" she would take part in one of the seven deadly sins -- lust.
I felt that King did not elaborate more on how the society in California worked. He briefly explained that these people were mechanics, pilots, etc.. and eventually stated that there were no medical professionals in the city. What happened to the people who got hurt? Is this the way of life under Randall Flagg? Survival of the fittest? In a way, the regime under Flagg resembles the way the government is run today. As Nietzsche would philosophise about, people are in a constant ring of sameness or the eternal return.
Overall, I would not recommend this book to anyone. I did not enjoy reading it one bit.
After finishing the book, I agree with Portia that it is obvious why this book is called The Stand. It is the camps of survivors of the superflu making their "stand" against each other and trying to survive the final nuclear explosion in Las Vegas.
The question that I have is what are your thoughts on the last line of the book that asks if Humanity and learn from their mistakes and the response being "I don't know". Do you think that this is significant? Do you think that humanity ever does learn from their mistakes?
Well I finally finished the book and couldnt help but notice the biblical allusion at the end when Fran's baby was born. The baby was able to magically resist the virus that was killing everyone and Tom, Kojak and Stu were the three kings. The birth of Jesus is usually scene as the beginning of a new era in life. Fran's baby could be compared to Jesus in the sense that they were born in diffuclt times. Could mean life will start over again.
As for the "I dont know" that Ravi brought up, seeing how the book ended it looks like this will happen all over again. The virus brought humanity back to its primative state. Also back to monarchy and etc. Its like time starting over so the meaning to the ending is that humans will never learn from their mistakes.
I give the book 1 1/2 stars out of 5. The novel dragged on pointless info. Way too many characters to follow. And the text was dull. Didnt grab my attention and I often found myself lost after reading. Dont read this book.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Post a Comment
<< Home