I am not that easily influenced.

Just thought I'd put that out there first. With books anyway, I'm pretty set in what I think, although the best part of discussion is seeing something in a different light.

Gathering my thoughts...I read the first two chapters on Monday and forced myself to stop so I wouldn't spoil anything unintentionally.

It is one of the strangest structures for a novel I've encountered. I'm most curious at who the narrator is. Because the way she (assuming it is a 'she', it is after all Jane Austen books) talks about everyone's Jane Austen, "six of us," but never says who she is, well, it's just very mysterious. And the first two people she details for us in the chapters she speaks about distantly. Maybe she's each of the members, a sort of universal all-knowing second person point of view. Kinda weird, but it works as far as I can tell.

I'm not offended terribly by the sexual encounters that were more or less detailed about Jocelyn or Allegra. I think for the most part it was tastefully done. I actually had to read it twice to make sure I assumed what happened correctly. And in the description of each member, I find myself intrigued to know each one's story, even if I have nothing in common with them (which at this point is how I feel). Maybe I'm dense (a possibility), but I haven't really attached any of them with Austen's characters yet. Maybe it'll hit me later.

I get annoyed with sexual encounters being the 'life-changing' experiences when people give us characters' pasts. It's just so cliche, so that bugs me. Although, I like the take on Allegra and her ex and how her ex used her for story material. I thought that was not so typical, at least not the way Fowler presented it. I won't do that to you guys, not without your permission. :)

What kid cries over the colour white????? This is what annoyed me about this book. The self-awareness of the members as young people. Not that we can't be self-aware at a young age. But the idiosyncrasies seem very unrealistic. Very artsy and writerly/literary. Does that make sense? I don't care if the character's artistic or whatever, that just seemed a bit over the top for me. Maybe I'm being unfair.

I agree with sarahbear's comment about the Austen-bashing by Grigg. The women are so snooty about Austen, and heaven forbid if you call her Jane. I think she'd like that. If her readers felt so close to her that they could call her by her first name.

I dig Jocelyn, I must say. The feeling of power about the boys and not meaning to lead them on, while I can't directly relate, I get it. And I do think that these women are real in a lot of ways. Maybe a little too quirky in the way that independent movies have their quirky damaged characters that are great, but get on your nerves.

But I like the characters, despite my issues. I do want to know their stories.

That's it for now, I guess. So, should we figure out what Austen characters we each are? :)

An Interesting First book

First of all I think that it is highly appropriate that we are reading a book about a book club as our first book, especially since the fictional one has only one male in it as well! Second, I have read this book before, but don't remember much so you shouldn't have to worry about me accidentally giving spoilers.

I can't say that I love this book, though I am certainly intrigued by it. Right away I began looking for comparisons between each character and the book that was being read in each chapter. I think I'm finding that characters have some character traits with a modern twist on the Austen characters. I find the personal histories interesting, though somewhat perverted in many instances. I am very glad to be reading this book with a group of Christians so that if I express my disgust at moral filth, I won't be berated for narrow-mindedness.

My natural tendency when reading almost any story is to find the character I am most like and relate to the person. Thus far I haven't found someone I am like per say. I think perhaps Sylvia is the one I feel most akin to, but that could easily change. Part of the difficulty in having only six, very long chapters, each devoted mainly to the personality of one person, is that we won't really get to know the last character until the final chapter...at least this is what I presume. I suppose we do learn bits and pieces about each person through the other's eyes.

As far as voice goes, I find it a bit out of the ordinary, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work for this book.. I actually enjoyed the part in chapter one where suddenly the story was being told from the point of view of the dog, very clever and an interesting perspective. I suppose the benefit of having the book written this way is that we get a more intimate look at each character from his or her own point of view. This book is all about the characters in my opinion, so for me, this works well as a narrative technique.

No entry on any book would be complete without my favorite quotes so here are the ones that have stood out for me in the first two chapters, though apparently they are all out of the second one only:

"What a waste those eyelashes were on a man who watched sitcoms."

"A madonna with fire-bright cheeks, eyes like mirrors."

"Sylvia had uncorked a nice Petit Syrah, something that went well with cheese and crackers, the rain and the fire."

"Another woman was writing a fantasy novel, and it had a good plot, ticked right along, except everyone in it had amber eyes, or emerald or amethyst or sapphire. Nothing the other members said could persuade her to substitute brown or blue..."

Confession about the last quote, it made me think of Eden! Chris apparently though the same thing! Anyone else think of her when they read that? :)