For tonight’s Friday Night Movie,
For tonight’s Friday Night Movie,
Here’s a poll result which does not surprise me in the least:
World War II police drama Foyle’s War tops list of 21st Century TV shows that Britons want to see back onscreen, ahead of Downton Abbey, Life on Mars, and Spooks
Of all the TV shows I’ve watched over the past decade or so, none has given me as much pleasure as Foyle’s War, and not just because I’m a history buff. I love the glimpse into wartime England, of course, and the gentle, almost leisurely pacing of the plots, but I also love the understated performance of the brilliant Michael Kitchen as DCS Foyle. Compared at least to the other shows listed above — even Life on Mars — it’s in a different league.
And yes, I have the entire series on DVD. There are dozens of worse ways to spend $80.
Finally, when I grow up, I want to dress like DCS Foyle:
…and drive around southern England in his 1936 Wolseley 14/56:
This article got me thinking, because it’s not something I’ve been involved with since the kids finished homeschooling (if such a thing ever happens) and went off to college. Go ahead and read the thing first, as it sets the stage for what follows.
I’ve often been asked what books I steered my own kids towards during their schooling, so here’s the group from which I drew. They are the books that every child should have read before age 18, in alphabetical order by category*. It’s very biased towards Western Civilization, for obvious reasons, and is by no means comprehensive, but enough to provide a good foundation. (The Son&Heir, for example, was so taken by Daphne du Maurier’s Rebecca that he ended up reading everything she ever wrote. Whatever they find interesting, let them run with it.)
Kim’s Recommended Reading List For Homeschoolers
1984 — George Orwell
Animal Farm — George Orwell
Of Civil Government — John Locke
On Liberty — John Stuart Mill
Our Enemy, The State — Albert Jay Nock
The Prince — Niccolo Machiavelli
Basic Economics — Charles Sowell
The Wealth of Nations — Adam Smith
From Dawn To Decadence — Jacques Barzun (this book is required reading; it can serve as a general history work and in a pinch, can be the only history book read before college)
Heroes — Paul Johnson (biographies)
A History Of The American People — Paul Johnson
A History Of The Jews — Paul Johnson
The Iliad, The Odyssey — Homer
The Proud Tower — Barbara Tuchman
United States Declaration of Independence (together with the Articles of Confederation; United States Constitution and the Federalist Papers)
Carnage And Culture — Victor Davis Hanson
The First World War — Martin Gilbert (or John Keegan)
A History Of Warfare — John Keegan
The Second World War — John Keegan
A War Like No Other — Victor Davis Hanson
The Book of Journeyman — Albert Jay Nock
Confessions — St. Augustine
Essays Moral and Political — David Hume
Intellectuals — Paul Johnson
Meditations — Marcus Aurelius
Memoirs of a Superfluous Man — Albert Jay Nock
The Republic — Plato
Summa Theologica — St. Thomas Aquinas
A Midsummer Night’s Dream
Romeo & Juliet
(Shakespeare’s major History Plays — Henry IV etc. — require a concurrent English history lesson, otherwise the characters are meaningless and the dialogue almost incomprehensible.)
Billy Liar — Keith Waterhouse (the novel is good too, but the play is the thing)
Faust — Goethe
The Importance of Being Earnest — Oscar Wilde
Lysistrata — Aristophanes
‘Tis A Pity She’s A Whore — John Ford
Waiting For Godot — Samuel Becket
Poetry: (all their works, with recommendations)
Alfred, Lord Tennyson — The Eagle, Charge Of The Light Brigade
Matthew Arnold — Dover Beach
Rupert Brook — The Soldier
Samuel Taylor Coleridge — The Rime Of The Ancient Mariner
John Donne — The Good Morrow and A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning
John Keats — Ode To A Nightingale
Rudyard Kipling — The Gods Of The Copybook Headings
Richard Lovelace — To Althea, From Prison
Shakespeare — all the Sonnets (as many as can be digested)
Percy Shelley — Ozymandias
Walt Whitman — Leaves of Grass
William Wordsworth — Tintern Abbey, The Solitary Reaper
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn — Mark Twain
Alice In Wonderland — Lewis Carroll
The Grapes of Wrath — John Steinbeck
The American — Henry James
Anna Karenina — Leo Tolstoy
As I Lay Dying — William Faulkner
Fahrenheit 451 — Ray Bradbury
A Handful of Dust — Evelyn Waugh
The Chronicles of Narnia — C.S. Lewis
The Count Of Monte Cristo — Alexandre Dumas
Don Quixote — Cervantes
A Farewell To Arms — Ernest Hemingway
Emma — Jane Austen
To Kill a Mockingbird — Harper Lee
The Invisible Man — H.G. Wells
Zorba the Greek — Nikos Kazantzakis
Gulliver’s Travels — Jonathan Swift
The Mayor Of Casterbridge — Thomas Hardy
The Sound and the Fury — William Faulkner
Fathers and Sons — Ivan Turgenev
Stranger in a Strange Land — Robert A. Heinlein
Les Misérables — Victor Hugo
Carry On, Jeeves — P. G. Wodehouse
Lord Of The Flies — William Golding
Crime and Punishment — Feodor Dostoyevsky
Madame Bovary — Gustave Flaubert
The Harry Potter Stories — J.K Rowling
Women In Love — D.H. Lawrence
The Complete Sherlock Holmes — Arthur Conan Doyle
Catch-22 — Joseph Heller
The Portrait Of A Lady — Henry James
The Wind In The Willows — Kenneth Grahame
Rebecca — Daphne du Maurier
Robinson Crusoe — Daniel Defoe
Sons And Lovers — D.H. Lawrence
Uhuru — Robert Ruark
Short Fiction (Authors, with recommendations):
Daphne du Maurier (The Birds, Don’t Look Now)
Ernest Hemingway (The Snows of Kilimanjaro, The Killers)
Edgar Allan Poe (The Pit And The Pendulum)
Herman Melville (Bartleby the Scrivener)
Ambrose Bierce (An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge)
Rudyard Kipling (The Jungle Book)
Flannery O’Connor (A Good Man Is Hard to Find, Good Country People)
Guy de Maupassant (Boule de Suif, The Necklace)
James Thurber (The Secret Life Of Walter Mitty, The Unicorn in the Garden)
O. Henry (The Gift Of The Magi, The Cop And The Anthem)
Raymond Carver (Where I’m Calling From, Little Things)
Saki (Sredni Vashtar, The East Wing)
William Faulkner (Mountain Victory, A Rose For Emily)
Ars Amatoria — Ovid
Delta Of Venus — Anaïs Nin
Lady Chatterley’s Lover — D.H. Lawrence
Memoirs Of A Woman Of Pleasure (or Fanny Hill) — John Cleland
The School of Whoredom — Pietro Aretino
*Please note that your opinions may vary — and indeed they should — depending on what direction you’re setting your kids along. (For example: if your bent is more to the religious, then obviously the Bible and / or St. Augustine will require more time and dedication, and so on.)
Comment from Reader Frognot about my dismissive post on the end of the awful Game of Thrones TV movie:
Given your historical distaste for any kind of fantasy, Kim, I’m not sure why anyone would give much credence to your opinion of a fantasy TV series. That’d be like getting a folk-rock fan’s opinion of, well, non-folk rock. Which I’d perfectly valid for folk-rock fans and of little use for anyone else. I know you’re only presenting your own opinion, but by this standard, wouldn’t practically any movie that ended with the hero’s death be a bad movie if the bad guys survived? Braveheart had any number of flaws, but since it ended the same as the 1st of 8 seasons of GoT did, did that make it awful on that basis alone? It seems to me that whether or not your favorite character survives the first ~10 hours of GoT (7 more seasons adding up to a whole lot more time)? Hint: the worst of the bad guys got deaded, some of the better ones survived. If that’s different from realistic storytelling, I’m curious as to how?
And if you’re opposed to realistic storytelling (within the limitations of human experience plus the milieu the story is set in), then I truly don’t understand your visceral dislike for fantasy (and possibly SF, but those posts were long ago, well before you went dark due to Connie’s illness).
I understand people who dislike swords and sorcery (as you once did, IIRC) and prefer past-to-current murder mystery (as my wife does), SF (as a friend does), or historical fiction as others do (but that’s an oxymoron if there ever was one), but I have trouble imaging why you’d have ever watched any of GoT, and why you’d think your hero would survive the first 1/8?
Take a look at the War of the Roses, or the reign and aftermath of Henry VIII, or most any contentious period of human history. Just because it offends your sense of stories doesn’t mean it’s not a good story. The Peloponnesian War had the best of both sides die before it was over, often pointlessly. Even if modern audiences weren’t historically illiterate, that hardly means a long multi-season series covering it would be automatically bad. That’s just a romantic idea of how stories should go, which in many cases, is just a lie in a better costume.
I’m disappointed, all in all. At least disclose your dislike of (much) fantasy right off the bat, while disclosing your preference for a different kind of fantasy (Hays Code good always wins, evil never prospers). Though evil didn’t prosper by the end of GoT, and some who turned to evil redeemed themselves before the end. Oh well. Didn’t happen by the first 1/8 of the tale, therefore … awful. I’ll be the first to admit the writing slipped badly in seasons 7 & 8. It was hasty, cut short, and not well laid out. It was explicable with much discussion with the wife, but when 3 and then 4 episodes are slashed from the last 2 seasons (almost 1/3), it’s damned hard to tie all the loose ends up, let alone adequately explain some actions of characters. Whatever.
As heartfelt a comment deserves an answer all to itself.
I remember once being dragged to a Ronnie Millsap concert — dragged because I’ve never really been a big country music fan — but despite my dislike of the music, I came away in total awe of Millsap as a pianist: he was one of the greatest percussive pianists I’ve ever heard, and I’m not sure that I’ve heard his equal since. My “ignorance” of the music couldn’t stop me appreciating the musician’s virtuosity — just as my dislike of the fantasy genre can’t stop me from calling out terrible writing when I see it.
My dislike for GoT had therefore little to do with the genre, and a lot to to with the storytelling itself. (Contrast my distaste for GoT with my outright admiration of the Harry Potter fantasy movies, and you’ll see where I’m going with this.)
Comparing fiction with history is dangerous, because history is written in stone — King X died in the opening campaign, what he might have achieved belongs to speculation, and that’s the end of it. Braveheart was a crap movie not because of its ending but because its ending was the only actual historical event in the movie which actually happened: prima nocte was never enforced by Edward I, William Wallace’s wife wasn’t murdered by the English, the battle of Stirling Bridge wasn’t fought on an open field but on, as the name suggests, around a bridge, Wallace never bonked the future Edward II’s wife… and I can list about half a dozen more examples of the movie’s ahistoricity. Braveheart wasn’t historical: it just acted as though it was. (Frankly, if Mel Gibson had ended up fighting a duel with Edward I and his wussy heir, killed them both and married Longshanks’s daughter-in-law, that would have been more like a decent action movie with a Hollywood ending. I bet the studio brass would have signed off on it, too.)
Fiction, however, is a different thing altogether, not just for the author, but for the relationship with his audience. And like it or not, fiction readers are looking for an acceptable outcome — much as the author may wish it otherwise. (My own first novel, Vienna Days, was rejected by a host of publishers because it ends with the suicide of the principal character — despite my telegraphing of the likely outcome in the very first sentence of the book.)
Readers want to form a relationship with a fictional work’s characters — like it or not — and when there is no reason to do so, they switch off. Unsympathetic characters are the death of any fictional work; dead ones equally so.
Which is what happened to me with GoT. Without any bond with the characters (because they were all being killed off), I was left with only the fantasy aspect of the story; and as you correctly pointed out, that isn’t my favorite genre (to put it mildly — dragons and such are not my preferred plot device). And my distaste for Martin’s writing was reinforced after the Red Wedding episode, where the only remaining identifiable principal characters were slaughtered. The shocked response of GoT fans to Red Wedding was well documented: I was just amused, because what that meant was that the writers were going to have to start at Square One to rebuild the audience’s bond — only this time, there would be a well-founded skepticism because… well, why form a bond with a character when Martin’s going to kill him or her off at any time? (As he did, time and time again — and I howled with laughter when I heard that the Jon Snow character had been resurrected after a brutal death — that was A Death Too Far for the audience, and the writers’ scramble to bring him back to life was risible. (It ranked right up there with the equally-silly resurrection of Patrick Duffy’s dead character in Dallas.)
The audience’s bond with a character is critical, in fiction. From a writing perspective, there is a reason why Star Trek remained as popular as it was: Spock wasn’t killed off in episode 24, and Kirk didn’t die halfway through the series either. Nobody cared about the appalling death rate of the red-shirted crew members — somebody had to die or else the stories would have contained no drama — but sacrificing nonentities runs no risk of alienating the audience. Imagine what would have happened to Firefly‘s audience if Nathan Fillion had been snuffed out after the first season. There would have been no second season. It’s also a good thing that J.K. Rowling wrote the Harry Potter books, or else Hermione and Ron Weasley would never have made it past The Half-Blood Prince.
Had Martin stuck to killing off Third Knight From The Left, Lord Nobody or Whore With The Big Tits (the GoT red-shirt equivalent), the whole series would have been an epic, rather than a series of “start-again” plot arcs.
When an author doesn’t care about his audience, I think it’s a major fault. (Annie Proulx, by the way, stands similarly condemned, as do a number of other modern writers.) That contempt is very much a post-modern construct in literature, when the writers, bereft of plot, use the rejection of accepted form to make their writing different, in the name of “realistic” writing. There’s nothing realistic about fiction, by definition. But the forms and structures of fiction are important — in fact, they’re essential. Ignoring them is a sign of immaturity, and willful disregard is contemptuous and arrogant. You have to be an extraordinary writer to pull it off — ever wonder why Finnegan’s Wake has never been repeated? — and Martin isn’t an extraordinary writer, despite his volume of work.
And that, as I said, is my major beef with George R.R. Martin: he’s contemptuous of his main characters and therefore of his audience. That’s fine, it’s his work after all. I just don’t have to put up with his shit storytelling. And the genre has nothing to do with it, either.
I’m sorry you were disappointed. But I write them as I see them.
So the interminably-horrible Game Of Thrones TV show has ended. Hoo-fucking-ray.
Watched the very first few episodes because the Son&Heir (who had read all the books) said I should, then walked away when Sean Bean was killed — I knew even back then that a writer who slaughters the main characters in his story has only contempt for his readers, and so it proved.
Good riddance. But hey, don’t take my word for it; try this bloke’s take on the final episode (if you care):
This whole pitiful spectacle couldn’t have been more stultifying if it had opened with the words, ‘This is a party political broadcast on behalf of the Liberal Democrats of Westeros’. The problem was that Game of Thrones, once so irreverent and mercurial, started to believe its own press releases. After winning more Emmys than any series in history, it imagined it was Great Art. Since its first episode in 2011, which stunned viewers with two electrifying shocks in the final scene, the show has killed off more than 100 characters, not to mention countless thousands of serfs and nameless soldiers – and never paused to regret a single one of them. But that psychopathic streak was forgotten yesterday, as the handful of survivors moped around the city of King’s Landing to a soundtrack of sad cello music.
Sometimes when one has seen an especially-bad movie (e.g. Lord Of The Rings trilogy), one demands a return of those hours of wasted life. Imagine what one would feel after eight seasons of this shit…
Which reminds me: I need to call the Son&Heir and mock him.
I was idly looking at the graphic below, which depicts Britain’s new royal line of succession:
Now like for most people, the succession thing is about as interesting to me as which rain droplet will reach the bottom of the windowpane first, but it does bring to mind a question which has bothered me since high school, and has never been satisfactorily answered.
It’s Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Now as any fule kno, the plot is that Hamlet’s eeeevil uncle Claudius poisoned Hamlet’s father the king, then married Hamlet’s mother Gertrude to become the new king.
Given that Hamlet was alive when his father was murdered and was therefore first in the line of succession, why did Hamlet not become king? If I understand the rules properly, when the king dies, his wife becomes irrelevant to the whole thing, and anyone she marries afterwards even less relevant. Claudius, therefore, had absolutely no claim to the throne (despite being Hamlet’s father’s brother) and could never have become king, unless he’d had Hamlet killed beforehand.
Or does / did Denmark have a different succession plan? I don’t think so.
So the entire plot of Hamlet, then, is a load of old bollocks: the uncle’s accession to the throne being simply what Alfred Hitchcock called the “mcguffin” (a device upon which to hang a plot line, requiring the suspension of disbelief from the audience, e.g. John Huston’s stolen Maltese falcon, or Casablanca‘s “letters of transit signed by General de Gaulle”).
Not that I care, mind you; without that Shakespearean mcguffin, we’d never have been given the deathless “To be, or not to be” speech, or seen that old busybody Polonius get a rapier through his arras.