#but peter and harriet more than make up for it!!

[leojurand]

Peter: Oy!

Harriet: Hullo!

Peter: I just wanted to ask whether you’d given any further thought to that suggestion about marrying me.

Harriet (sarcastically): I suppose you were thinking how delightful it would be to go through life like this together?

Peter: Well, not quite like this. Hand in hand was more my idea.

Harriet: What is that in your hand?

Peter: A dead starfish.

Harriet: Poor fish!

Peter: No ill-feeling, I trust.

Harriet: Oh, dear no.

Dorothy L. Sayers, Have His Carcase

[harrietvane]

So, in Busman’s Homeymoon, Lord Peter buys Harriet Vane a mink cloak worth 950 pounds (according to the Dowager Duchess’ journal entry), but he buys Tallboys for “only” 650 pounds.

Even bearing in mind that real estate really did used to be cheaper, do you understand how that is possible? Or how to find out more about relative purchasing power? I used an online calculator website which gave me some figures, but it still seems insane that one could buy an entire Elizabethan farmhouse for 2/3 the price of a garment! Very curious to learn from others who understand this better than I do.

Ah, I see my esteemed colleague @oldshrewsburyian has also had some interesting thoughts on this, so I'll link that here as well before I begin.

So, it's a legitmate question, and there's no catch-all simple answer (in the gotcha sense of 'why didn't i know that bit of cultural Truth'), but there are mitigating factors that take it from a ridiculous price comparison, to merely outlandish. Even taking into account that the coat is quoted in guineas, not pounds, and that PW says the bank valued Talboys at £800 via a mortgage (the paid price was a discount, for paying in cash quickly, which is Plot Relevant), it gets us to roughly the same place, value-wise. Or shall we say PRICE-wise, rather than value, as I'll get into below. There's several factors at play here - they mainly relate to class, and spending power:

-The house is Not That Great, in terms of the kind of property that PW would usually be buying. I mean it is still a large-ish house, big enough to have 2 adults and small children in, but it's not what would be on his radar normally. The only reason they know about it, it that it's near a place where HARRIET grew up as a child. It's not getting any high marks in particular Beauty, Convenience, or Quality - the main reason HV's drawn to it is sentiment, rather than anything else. They both know that they will have to significantly add to it, and alter it, in order for it to be a comfortable home. That would usually be out-of-budget for someone in Harriet's position, who would expect to buy something that meets her needs 'as-is'. Most people looking at buying that house would be Harriets not Peters, so it might be a tough sell.

-The house has no power, and limited plumbing: There's dark references to DRAINS by the dowager duchess, it's entirely possible that this house has no modern plumbing at all - they make the comparison that the huge palace the Wimseys grew up in wasn't plumbed until recently, but then again they do have about 800 servants, whereas Talboys is just a regular house: they will have Bunter alone (at first), with an assist from Mrs Ruddle. There's mention of "a cistern" with some basic valves, but the scullery is mentioned as having a copper, from which hot water is "scooped into a large bath-can" - a copper being, simply, a large metal basin over a fire, in effect. No running hot water, maybe no flushable loos - it's a factor. They also talk specifially about having to electrify Talboys themselves - it's candles and lamps until then. It's fancy camping. By the mid-1930s, a lot of middle-class buyers would expect a little more convenience in both water and wiring, unless they had significant support staff, which Talboys would not be expected to house.

-There's probably no farm! It's a farm house - not a wider land purchase. People like PW's brother the Duke are wealthy primarily because they own land, not because of the big palace they have (which eats money, rather than generates it). The land is what gives them spending power, because other people are paying them rent to live on it, farm on it, or both. PW's own personal 'younger sibling' wealth is also mentioned somewhere to be primarily in real estate (assumed to be in London) - sad to say: he's a landlord, and that's why he's rich. Talboys, on the other hand, as a purchase, would not, in almost any way, be expected to generate revenue through either farming, agriculture, or charging rent. Until they invent house flipping in 80 years, or until the motorway goes through in 40 years, there's not much expectation that Talboys would increase all that much in value.

-Lastly, there's a massive disparity in what The Market Will Bear when we compare a basic residence vs a luxury item (like a mink coat) in the mid-1930s. This is not particular to that time, though. Like any first-year economics student will tell you, the price of something is not it's intrinsic value, it's what someone is WILLING to pay for it. If someone is willing to pay such a price, that's the price it will be. So, we're not comapring Objects, we're comparing Buyers: the the main purchasers of a slightly run-down farmhouse located nowhere special are Harriets, and main purchasers of mink coats are Peters. Talboys is priced for Harriets. The mink coat is priced for Peters.

Compare for example, a contemporary parallel: the Hermes Birkin bag. It's a leather handbag with a starting retail price of about USD 11,400. Just for the bag. Then, you have fancier versions of the fancy bag, eg wikipedia tells me one version sold at auction for USD 380,000 in Hong Kong in 2017. Now, the Harriets of today are not buying a Hermes Birkin handbag, but they are probably trying to buy slightly run-down houses outside urban centers for (one hopes) slightly less than 380k. The Wimseys of the worlds are clearly buying Birkin bags. In that way, it's actually pretty easy to get to a place where Person A might buy a single luxury item for X pounds, and Person B might buy a whole residence for X pounds, and neither feel like they'd done something insane. The key here is in a Wimsey/Vane marriage, they run up against this concept immediately, and repeatedly.

There's a good reason the first epistolary section of the novel is almost entirely taken up with money chat - the ring, the purchase of shirts from Burlington Arcade, the marriage settlement, the gift from the bride to the groom, the mink coat, the bitchy exchange between Helen and Harriet about HV being allowed "six free copies of her book" to distribute. These people come from 2 fundamentally different experiences of the world. They might have gotten engaged using the word 'Magistra', specifically to emphasise their fundamental equality (in the context of learning and the mind, to begin with), but it can't be denied: there's gaps that need to be bridged. They both know parts of their married life will be spent in attempting to do that, hopefully to their mutual satisfaction. Mention of a mink coat for 950 guineas is a nice, neat shorthand for illustrating what's still at play between them here.

[purplecherryuwu]

The Hook family (My AU)

James Killian Hook

Taught all his kids to swear

Gave Harry his hook (canon)

Was the one to train Harriet after she lost her eye

Refuses to get a proper prosthetic even now when they're off the island

Named all the kids because he does not trust his husband when it comes to naming both people and animals

Hates phones with all his heart

Still hates Peter Pan and has taught all his kids to hate him too

Struggles to show his kids emotional support but would die for them

Morgie le Fay Hook

The reason James is not dead

Loves all kinds of animals but especially snakes

Now that they're off the island he moved his family into his mother's residence since she's dead

Likes to dress fancy no matter the occasion

Earns money by making potions and selling them

The emotionally stable one in his and James's marriage but if something happens to any of their children he's more scary than James

Very affectionate to all his kids

Teaches them magic whenever they visit

Henrietta Wendy Hook

Will kill you if you call her anything but Harriet if you're not family

Lost her eye when she was 10

The most like James out of all her siblings, not just appearance wise

After the barrier was down she met a fast flying fairy named Iris who she was the spawner to, they're best friends

Moved herself and her entire crew to Neverland, will stay there until CJ reaches her age

Will behead Peter Pan if he ever comes near her ship

Thanks to Iris she uses pixie dust frequently and is respected by the fairies of Neverland

Hurt one of her siblings and you'll suffer a fate worse than death

Harrison Liam Hook

Puts on this crazy persona for everyone around him but is actually very sensitive

Helps his sisters do their hair whenever they ask him

This is what prepared him for helping Uma with her hair

Very much protective over his sisters

Uma and Gil the only ones except his family who knows his name is actually Harrison and that he has two dads (will explain why in a later post)

Terrified of spiders

When he started attending AP he was very pissed they didn't serve alcohol

Tries to hide it but loves using his magic almost as much as swordfighting

Calista Jane Hook

The most chaotic of her siblings and that's saying a lot

The baby

Her and Harriet team up whenever Harry starts a fight with either of them

Steals pixie dust from Harriet whenever she can and has gotten in trouble for flying and crashing into things

Very annoyed over how protective Harry and Harriet are over her

Is awful at puns (canon)

When she was little she tried to dye her hair black to look more like her siblings

Will not hesitate to play dirty when fighting There is loads more to come (hopefully)

[o-uncle-newt]

Random Sayers thought-

I've seen people say that Gaudy Night is when Harriet becomes a co-detective with Wimsey, or even solo detective of her own mystery. I was always surprised by this, and the more I think about it the more I think that's not true. She's a co-detective with Wimsey in Have His Carcase, because she has to* and finds it interesting and (secretly, I think) wants to show Peter what she's made of and collaborate with him on equal terms- and just hang around him in general, just like he wants to hang around her.

*By "she has to," I mean that she needs to be in control of her fate. She's tied up in this case and can't stand by and let other people solve it and suspect her again (and can't let Peter seem to be just being the gallant knight-errant again, either, she's had enough of that). I've read stuff on Harriet and PTSD before but the world can always use more, hint hint...

But in Gaudy Night, not only does she not solve the mystery, she doesn't realize what Peter has until the very end. What she is able to do is be detail oriented, put together the dossier, place it in an order that Peter is able to follow and allow him to solve it. She's a writer; that's what she does. And she's a writer who doesn't want to become subsumed in Peter, who doesn't want him, or being with him, to define her. She doesn't need to solve the case- her association with him shouldn't have to be about solving cases. She just needs to write the book that's in her to write.

In the punt, she and Peter realize that she is almost blinded from being able to solve the case because of her own jaundiced view of the situation, her own personal struggles, and the narrative that she is internally composing. As a writer, her job isn't to interpret situations- it's to create them. She's not meant to be following someone else's clues and plainly observing facts, she's meant to be creating her own narrative. If she could put everything to the side to solve the case, she would be putting to the side the things that make her HER. Peter can solve it because a) that's HIS thing/way of dealing with things and b) he knows she wants it to be solved.

(Incidentally, he also knows that he might be "sawing off [his] own branch" in doing so, but that's fine, because the thing that they both have in common, that unites them despite their different functions in the world and different skill sets, is a dedication to truth.)

By Busman's Honeymoon, the pretense that Harriet is a co-detective is basically gone. She's there to shed her own light on the situation as a novelist and an observer of character, but Peter is the detective. And that's important because the books is so much about what happens when the two of them actually take a stab at the thing they've decided may actually work by the end of Gaudy Night- having Harriet join Peter without being subsumed in him. Having him be able to continue his life's work with her support and despite her growing realization of what it entails, and having him realize that the unique angles that she gives him are complementary but different to what he himself has.

It's also important because it's clear that they're with each other for who they are as people and not what they each do. In Gaudy Night, Peter says that he thinks Harriet hasn't written the book that she could if she tried- not that her current books aren't good but that she's better than them. In Busman's Honeymoon, Harriet fully realizes that Peter's work makes him suspect sympathetic people and ultimately leads to capital punishment (she obviously knew this, but as she notes, it's different when the same delicate hands that... you know... are also the ones that do THAT...). And for each of them, they're able to say "this is who you are and what you do and I believe in your right to, and ability to, do it- and hope that you will accept me as a part of your life as you do so."

[lady-merian]

looooong get-to-know-me tag game

I love forest green, so considering myself tagged by @dimsilver :)

Origin of your blog title: it used to be a Tolkien quote, and I may switch it back again, but for now it’s the Gray Havens song Not Home Yet. It’s still about the journey, but lately I’ve been reminded not to rest in earthly security.

OTPs: Eowyn/Faramir, Katniss/Peeta, everyone else is escaping me at the moment. Edit: okay I’ll add Sam/Rosie, Jacin/Winter, Pierre/Natasha, and Peter/Harriet. Ooh and Ruya/Noah and Apen/Berlyne.

Favorite game: I love Set,

Favorite color: any mix of blue and green, (aquas, teals turquoises, etc.) but lately it’s been trending towards dark greens that are more on the blue side than the yellow.

What song is currently stuck inside your head? Something from Star Wars for some reason

Weirdest habit: pausing mid-sentence to think of the right word and then sometimes just never finishing the sentence. It’s not all the time, and it usually does happen when I think someone’s not paying attention, but it is weird.

Hobbies: knitting, handspinning, writing, reading, drawing, watercolor, and sewing, and embroidery.

What's your profession? retail manager for now.

Dream job? I would like to continue what I’m doing but for something even more fine-tuned to what I’m interested in.

Something you're good at: Customer service, apparently? Also knitting. I’m less sure of this but recently I was told I should sell prints of my watercolors (and this from someone who Knows Art and is not usually free with her praise. I’m still riding that high).

Something you're bad at: going to bed on time <using that because it’s true. Also bad at not making things about me. Often it’s well-meaning (I relate to what you’re going through because [x] happened to me) but I’m aware it doesn’t always come across that way.

Something you love: curling up with a good book and a cup of tea. The sound of rain. Chocolate.

Something you could talk about for hours off the cuff: I can totally talk to people about stories for hours.

Something you hate: when people bring badly trained any dogs (except genuinely trained service dogs) into a store. Especially when the owners are oblivious to how they’re acting or the problems they cause others. Especially ones that are behaving badly, but the lady who brought her two large dogs in today didn’t seem to care if her dogs blocked an aisle. Others did.

Something you forget: frequently.

Something you collect: yarn, fabric, notebooks, and books.

Love language: Still not sure

Favorite movie: LotR trilogy

Favorite food: things involving pasta and/or chicken are nearly always a hit for me

Favorite animal: otters for a wild animal, seconded by penguins in the same category, and cats for domesticated though I do have a fondness for ferrets as well.

What were you like as a child? Oblivious to whatever was going on as long as I had a book.

Favorite subject at school: history

Least favorite subject: math

Best character trait? habitually trying to see the best in people.

Worst character trait: self-centered and not observant. (don’t ask me how my best trait and my worst traits coincide in me. it’s a mystery.)

If you could change any detail of your life right now, what would it be? I would like my store to not be closing. :(

If you could travel in time, who would you meet? SO I like your answer @dimsilver, and genuinely can’t think of anyone else I’d like to meet besides Jesus (though maybe the apostles too?) but my first thought was that I’d like to have been a fly on the wall during the lectures Tolkien gave that Diana Wynn Jones sat in on. They sound fascinating.

Tagging anyone who’s recently forgotten their tea :)

[zahri-melitor]

This is a thought that occurs to me occasionally, but as someone who does read a goodly chunk of period literature: discussions of the word ‘obey’ in wedding vows in contemporaneous literature when it WAS an actual discussion many couples were having about their vows (late 19th through to mid 20th centuries) tend to be far more interesting and nuanced than versions written in the modern era.

The moment that brought this to mind for me at the second is reading Busman’s Honeymoon, where Harriet and Peter wrangle over who gets to say obey and whether it’s said at all: with the discussion including considering whether Peter also gets to promise to obey, and the result being “Peter had consented to be obeyed on the condition he might ‘endow’ and not ‘share’ his worldly goods. Shocking victory of sentiment over principle.” Because the romance of being able to throw yourself at your partner’s feet is brought up here, and the discomfort of there being a line of authority in the marriage.

And you just so rarely see it done well or in a way that feels period in modern-written pieces, because all too often the characters, particularly the woman, are forthrightly protesting their discomfort with the patriarchal implications, whether that makes sense for said character or not.

[fluffypotatey]

Oh FUCK YEAH to them not getting ableism or marriage. Fellow anon, I am smooching your head.

Newt is a perfect example. He was the Keeper of the Runners, and when he got hurt and couldn't anymore, they just found him another job that made good use of his experience and leadership skills, there was never a loss of respect. And YEAH there so has to be others, mental or physical, and they give zero fucks about it, they just find something that works and do that, that's why they have every Greenie try all the jobs to find what works best. Just a very clear "autism be damned, my boy can work a grill" mentality. Like, Adam needs to count the fence posts before he can work and Leo can't help Frypan make bread because he doesn't like how the dough feels, but who cares, it doesn't change anything.

Yessss to gender and sexuality and marriage. They respect someone having a favourite person, in whatever capacity that might be (the Ivy Trio is a great example) but they don't understand marriage beyond respecting your partner and being up front with what you want out of the relationship. You just do whatever works for you. You want to only be with one person? Go for it. You have more than one person? Sure, that's fine. You don't like anyone that way? No problem. Same with gender. Wear your hair however. Dress in whatever. Use any name. If it's not causing an actual problem, like one that's impacting others/the group, then it is literally Not An Issue.

Once they're a little older and kids start happening in Safe Haven, the same applies to family dynamics. Like, Sarah, James, and Peter are partners. They aren't sure which of them is the biological father of her baby but who cares, they're all the parents. Frieda isn't particularly maternal, so she lets Kevin and Michael be parents instead. Once the kid is old enough to understand, they'll explain if asked, no big deal. Legit the only time they keep track of blood relations is to avoid incest. Other than that, family is whatever you decide it is.

And yeah, I think a lot of the sexism in the books is more author-based than anything, and the movies do a lot better because the actors just Don't. Like, yeah, Thomas worries about Teresa, but that's because they're in a dangerous situation and he cares about her, not because she's a Helpless Girl™ and Newt even says she can take care of herself. No one questions Brenda being a badass. When the Icers get the drop on them, they're just like "aw damn we're busted" not "ew we got beat by girls". They all know Ava Paige is crazy dangerous. They don't question Mary Cooper calling shots in the Right Arm.

Okay, this got away from me a little, but yeah.

I just love these weird little dudes.

YEEEE LIKE HAVING THEIR COMMUNITY IDEAS SUPERSEDING THE ONE THEY CAN NO LONGER REMEMBER AT THE SAFE HAVEN!!!!!

like sure, Jorge and Vince remember a world before the Scorch but ain’t no way would they stop the Gladers and Icers from passing on these ideas of community. like i am sure even the Gladers used this after movie!tst and Vince had to be used to it from Harriet and Sonya when they were in the Right Arm (maybe not used to everything but knew the Icers had a community sort of similar to the Gladers)

[ghostoftonantzin]

Books I have read this year, 2023, roughly in order

I enjoyed doing this last year, so I thought I would do another little write-up of the books I read this year and what I thought.

I've read 52 books this year, hitting a goal I hadn't thought to set. That includes a few graphic novels, but not the audiobooks, which I listened to 15 of this year (I spent a lot of time driving). Same as last year, I've annotated the audiobooks with an asterisk.

I also started listening to Backlisted this year, which significantly influenced my reading choices.

Under a cut, because it got long

Swedish Cults, Anders Fager (1/2) - I saw this was originally published in 2009, and I feel like the first story in this collection somehow really echoes that time. Which is probably a strange thing to say about a horror story.

When Washington was in Vogue, Edward Christopher Williams (1/13) - very sweet, very interesting look at a time and a place I didn't know much about.

The Cement Garden, Ian McEwan (1/19) - I expected to enjoy this a lot more than I did, based on how it's often described as a great "fucked up" book. I think the teenage boy POV just didn't do much for me.

Cold Comfort Farm, Stella Gibbons (1/20) - a reread, for the first time since probably 2014 or so. I enjoyed it (and understood it) a lot better this time around. I got to the back half and couldn't put it down, which is a strange thing to say about a parody of the rural novels of the 1930s.

Nona the Ninth, Tamsyn Muir (2/12) - finally got this from the library. I didn't enjoy it as much as the first two books in the series

Fun Home, Alison Bechdel (2/24) - a reread. The final page always destroys me.

Cassandra at the Wedding, Dorothy Baker (2/25) - Very literary. I think I enjoyed it, though I can't muster up the energy to form a stronger opinion. The scene where Cassandra pulls out the bridesmaid dress she bought was memorable, though.

Are You My Mother?, Alison Bechdel (2/28) - a reread. Scratches the same itch as Fun Home, but doesn't tie the family narrative into the theoretical themes as cohesively.

Surviving the Applewhites, Stephanie S. Tolan (3/12) - another reread, to see if it was as good as I remembered from fourth grade. It held up for the most part.

The Secret to Superhuman Strength, Alison Bechdel (3/13) - finally, not a reread. Fun, erudite, perhaps not as tight as Fun Home, but another excellent Bechdel.

Ravishment, Amanda Quick (3/24) - sometimes you have to read an entire romance novel in an evening. This was fun, though its plot and that of "Mistress" (see below) blur into one another.

Season of Migration to the North, Tayib Saleh (4/7) - I think I would have enjoyed this book more if I had read it in a class where I could discuss it and learn more about the historical context behind it.

The Bloater, Rosemary Tonks (4/9) - of Backlisted fame. I should reread again, more slowly, to get a better taste for Tonk's use of language.

Mistress, Amanda Quick (4/15) - also a fun quick read, though I can't remember much of the plot.

Excellent Women*, Barbara Pym (4/25) - yet another attempt to get into audiobooks, and it semi-worked this time. Mildred sets a high bar for other Pym protagonists to follow, and I thought Pym created an excellent portrait of post-war life for unmarried women and the minor indignities and intimacies that accompany it. Also ridiculously funny, at least to me.

Clouds of Witness*, Dorothy L. Sayers (5/12) - I wanted to read Gaudy Night, but I figured I should read at least a few Peter Wimsey mysteries that came before it. I think my favorite character was Lord Wimsey's mother.

Star, Yukio Mishima (5/16) - an interesting portrait of a disaffected youth and of fame in Japan at the time it was written.

Strong Poison*, Dorothy L. Sayers (5/16) - the first Wimsey mystery to feature Harriet Vane, and my first encounter with Lord Peter's office of overlooked older secretaries, who provides the enjoyable detour of Miss Murchison making an important breakthrough in the case. Not bad, though not super memorable.

Have His Carcase, Dorothy L. Sayers (5/17) - the only Wimsey mystery I read instead of listened to, because neither library app had the audiobook. This one was too reliant on keeping timetables straight for my taste, but I still read it in a day.

Beyond Black, Hilary Mantel (5/22) - possibly the best book I read this year. Bleak, bleak, bleak, and wonderful for it. Yet one of the most cathartic happy endings I've ever read.

Thus was Adonis Murdered, Sarah Caudwell (5/28) - caught my sense of humor by the second or third page. Hilariously dry mystery, and understandable even if you don't know legal jargon.

The Feast, Margaret Kennedy (5/31) - this book is not even remotely a thriller, is in fact sort of an elaborate morality play, and yet I couldn't put it down. The conceit- that a cliff collapses onto a hotel and everyone inside dies, but not all the hotel guests were inside- keeps you guessing at whose sins are bad enough to merit a karmic death.

Starlight, Stella Gibbons (6/4) - a lot grimmer than I expected, and almost ahead of its time in terms of the (I'm going to say) pointlessness of its ending, in a "people come into the main character's lives, stuff happens, but the main two old ladies aren't actually affected" way. Not a book you would expect to find demonic possession in, but it's there and it's played straight!

The Shortest Way to Hades, Sarah Caudwell (6/6) - I find it interesting that all of these mysteries center around details of things like inheritance law and yet all feature murder as the main crime, and also that (spoilers) the villain is disposed of in a manner that does not require the main cast to get involved with the police.

The Sirens Sang of Murder, Sarah Caudwell (6/9) - by the second volume in this series I kept trying to guess who the murderer, and I was never ever able to do it. Not that I've ever been good at that part of mystery novels, but I do appreciate Caudwell keeping me on my toes.

Gaudy Night*, Dorothy L. Sayers (6/11) - finally, the book I read three prior mysteries for. I found this one fascinatingly slow for a mystery and much more focused on the life of women in academia in that era than I had expected. I particularly enjoyed the character of Miss de Vine, who at first seems like the classic absent-minded professor, only to reveal herself to be much wiser in ways of the heart than she appears.

The Black Maybe, Attila Veres (6/19) - short horror story collection, translated from Hungarian. Not bad, but none of the stories were super memorable.

Lessons in Chemistry, Bonnie Garmus (6/22) - I did not enjoy this and probably would not have finished it if my mom hadn't highly recommended it. The characters felt flat and the plot struggled to build enough tension for the emotional beats to hit. I also feel like the four-year-old character did not act anything like a four-year-old, though I'll admit I don't know a lot of four-year-olds.

Hackenfeller’s Ape, Brigid Brophy (6/26) - I would say this book wasn't that exciting, very dry and academic for its bizarre plot, but one detail near the end (which I won't spoil) knocked me sideways and tbh probably made the book for me.

Less Than Angels*, Barbara Pym (6/27) - I had to go back and add this while writing these reviews because I'd completely forgotten to list it at the time. Not as good as Excellent Women, though I also had to adjust to the multiple perspectives as opposed to just one.

Comemadre, Roque Larraquy (7/2) - a reread. Still one of the strangest books I've ever read. Highly recommend.

The Sky is Blue, With a Single Cloud, Kuniko Tsurita (7/3) - I'd had this collection of manga one-shots for about a year, and decided to finally read it when hanging out at the library when the water was out at my apartment. It's very interesting to see her style develop and to learn more about the alternative manga industry.

Mrs. Caliban, Rachel Ingalls (7/4) - I had been vaguely meaning to read this for a while, then found it on Hoopla. Looking back on it, it rivals In a Lonely Place (the Dorothy Hughes one) with regards to drawing California in the mind's eye, though the mood of their particular Californias are very different.

Black Wings Has My Angel, Elliott Chaze (7/8) - the tension at the end of this book is like pulling teeth, it's incredible.

Scruples, Judith Krantz (7/24) - absolutely frothy and frequently ridiculous, but also fun. Their are main characters named Spider and Valentine, and it's taken completely seriously. It's actually a really interesting look at the values and beliefs of the 1980's as reflected through pop culture.

Days in the Caucasus, Banine (7/28) - I was more interested in the sequel to this memoir, Parisian Days, but figured I should read this volume, about the author's childhood in Azerbaijan in the years leading up to its incorporation into the Soviet Union. It provided a really interesting perspective of the Soviet Union from a resident of one of its subject states.

Frederica, Georgette Heyer (8/6) - my first Heyer. I'm impressed by her ability to write annoying younger siblings and walk the line between "overly cute" and "overly aggravating".

In the Miso Soup, Ryu Murakami (8/17) - good, though not my favorite of the year by far. The violence depicted did manage to turn my stomach a bit.

My Man Jeeves*, P.G. Wodehouse (8/20) - I've realized that I need to listen to audiobooks that are fun if I'm going to survive long drives, so I turned to the Jeeves series (I only listened to the Jeeves stories in this one). An interesting introduction to the character, especially since it starts in America instead of the England of the more well-known tales.

Love in the New Millennium, Can Xue (8/29) - I'm not sure if this book is meant to be very surreal, if I'm missing cultural context, or both, but I will say it does serve me well to be a little befuddled by books sometimes. This book has a strange, flowing sense of perspective, where it moves between perspectives and the stories of its characters, only slowly unveiling where it's emotional weight lies. Very interesting.

The Inimitable Jeeves*, P.G. Wodehouse (9/1) - second collection of Jeeves & Wooster stories. Good, though Bingo isn't my favorite side character.

Flesh, Brigid Brophy (9/1) - the beginning chapters are incredibly sensual in a way I can't describe, but after that it inspired an incredible feeling of dread that something would go terribly wrong. Despite the fact that this is a satire of young adults in 1960s London, I could feel emotional catastrophe creeping around every corner. I don't think this was Brophy's intention.

Ice*, Anna Kavan (9/8) - somehow not anything like I had osmosed it being. The narrative flows between reality and fantasy so fluidly that it's incredibly easy to wonder if you spaced out and missed something important while listening to it. The plot is also fascinatingly simple and surprisingly free of actual conflict: despite impediments, the hero ("hero") rarely actually encounters any opposition that seems like it could truly keep him from his goal. This adds to the feeling that everything occurring in the book is barely-veiled symbolism.

The Glass Pearls, Emeric Pressburger (9/13) - the tension in this might have honestly been too much for me. Good, but I don't know if I can read it again.

The English Understand Wool, Helen DeWitt (9/16) - sometimes you read a book and recognize that it's very good, while also being annoyed that what it is is different from what you want it to be. I understood it worked as a morality tale, but I found it limiting and frustrating. I will also indulge in a bit of cattiness here and say that for a book about luxury and high-quality goods, the book design chosen by New Directions for this series feels like a cheap set of children's books. (I read this on an online checkout from the library, so I only saw the book itself in a bookstore.)

Right Ho, Jeeves*, P.G. Wodehouse (9/18) - The fact that Jeeves and Bertie were on the outs for this one did stress me out, I will admit.

In a Lonely Place, Karl Edward Wagner (9/22) - the stories pick up in quality in the back half, in my opinion, though none of them are true duds. The last story and standout in the collection, yet another twist on a vampire tale, really draws its strength from the grimy-yet-glamorous depiction of an art student's life in London.

Kissing the Witch, Emma Donoghue (9/27) - I enjoyed how each story folded into one another and found this book hard to put down. Also very gay, loved it.

The Drama of Celebrity, Sharon Marcus (9/27) - I was reading this for background for my fic, and it was somewhat helpful. It's really mostly an analysis of Sarah Bernhardt's career, with some light theory of celebrity to contextualize it instead of the other way around like I expected.

Malpertuis, Jean Ray (10/15) - I probably shouldn't have read the summary for this book before the book itself, but I'm not sure I would have fully understood the plot if I hadn't. Not a knock on the book itself.

The Great God Pan and Other Stories*, Arthur Machen (10/16) - I don't read a ton of nineteenth-century literature, so I was surprised by how compelling the title story was, especially when listened to. I also found some of the imagery in "The Novel of the White Powder" horrifying and would not be out of place in a modern horror story. The final story was a bit of a slog, though.

Heartburn*, Nora Ephron (10/20) - a relisten to the version narrated by Meryl Streep. I downloaded it based on a recommendation describing the audiobook as turning it into the one-woman monologue the book was meant to be, and I can't think of any higher recommendation to offer than that.

Casting the Runes and Other Stories*, M.R. James and others (10/30) - I knew about M.R. James from popular culture, but I honestly had not expected "Whistle and I'll Come to You, My Lad" to center so much around golf.

Invitation the the Waltz, Rosamond Lehmann (11/1) - I read most of this in one sitting, playing old music through my headphones, which felt really ideal. Setting most of it during one formal dance allows for a sense of insular-ness while allowing the details of the world to be woven in. If that makes any sense.

Crazy Salad and Scribble Scrabble*, Nora Ephron (11/3) - it's really interesting to listen to these essays written during the second wave feminist movement and realize that we've been having the same arguments for 50 years. It's also interesting to read about the minutiae of Watergate from the perspective of those watching it unfold in real time. So many weird, unmemorable cultural-political things that have gone down the hole of public memory! (I need to note here that the last essay in Crazy Salad is, based on my memory of the first time I read it (I skipped it this time around) very transphobic, so I can only recommend this collection with that heavy caveat.)

BBC Radiophonic Workshop: A Retrospective, William L. Weir (11/7) - I first learned about the BBC radiophonic workshop through the Backlisted episode about Rosemary Tonks, and this was a fascinating look into that period of British history and the origins of electronic music. It's also helped me pinpoint how to find that sort of music I think of as "alien abduction music", which is a bonus.

Joy in the Morning*, P.G. Wodehouse (11/10) - I didn't realize this wasn't in the 3-book arc that starts with Right Ho, Jeeves until I was partway through. Still, quality Wodehouse.

Good Morning, Midnight, Jean Rhys (11/17) - despite listening to the Backlisted episode before reading this, I didn't quite grasp what "modernist novel" meant, which meant I was surprised by the stream-of-consciousness flow of this novel. It's such gorgeous writing, though. Depressing as hell.

Winter Love*, Han Suyin (11/18) - beautiful and sad. The main character, Red, is frustrating, even though everything she does is perfectly understandable within the context she lives in.

The Girls, John Bowen (11/21) - the blurbs for this book ("Barbara Pym meets Stephen King") made it seem like this would be both lighter and more horrifying than it actually was. I found it to actually be very melancholy in parts, and surprisingly focused on the emotional aftereffects of murder. The ending, the final paragraph, is gorgeous.

Black Orchids, Rex Stout (11/30) - I'm now trying to find Nero Wolfe books in secondhand bookstores, though I'm limited by the lack of secondhand bookstores in my area (that may be a good thing). I enjoy how Nero Wolfe and Archie play off each other.

The Hearing Trumpet*, Leonara Carrington (12/1) - so, so good, and I'm glad I listened to it as an audiobook, because the narrator, Sian Phillips, is an elderly woman herself and therefore able to conjure up a whole range of different voices for the old women who populate this book.

Mistletoe Malice, Kathleen Farrell (12/6) - I was actually disappointed by this, which might have been a matter of mismatched expectations. However, the Christmas tree never caught fire, and I swore a review I read said it would, so I spent the whole book waiting in vain.

Venetia, Georgette Heyer (12/16) - A delight. Aubrey is a great character, and I enjoy how Heyer has the different characters play on each other.

Great Granny Webster, Caroline Blackwood (12/18) - did not expect this book to have a large section on "decaying old Anglo-Irish homes and their horrors", but I guess that's a richer vein in literary fiction than I realized (see: Good Behaviour by Molly Keane).

Sylvester, Georgette Heyer (12/21) - not quite as enjoyable as Frederica or Venetia, in my opinion, though that may be partly because I waited for almost 2/3 of the book for Phoebe's book to actually be published.

Providence, Anita Brookner (12/28) - beautiful prose, of the sort that makes me realize my own inadequacies in both my writing and my critical capabilities, because I can neither replicate it or describe what makes it so compelling. This book is also so tightly crafted for a story where almost nothing happens. It ends up exactly where it's been leading all along.

[hannahhook7744]

Hook Siblings Incorrect Quotes Part 1;

Peter, Hookling/Baby Hook, Hope, and Ally have been added.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Hannah: Harry, I swear to God, if you call me Short stuff one more time I will take that hook and shove it so far up your ass—

Harriet: HANNAH!

Hannah: Sorry 'Ettie.

Hannah: up your Arse—

Harriet: Hannah!

Hannah *running away* sorry not sorry!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Hannah: Okay, that's it! I'm stabbing and snitching on the next person who tries to kill me!

Harry:...

CJ:....

Ginny:....

Hannah: yes, even you three! I will snitch straight to dad! And Grandma! And Harriet!

Harry: Dang, that's cold Vato...

Hannah: and trying to kill me isn't?!

CJ: It was an accident!

Ginny: Okay, fair.

Harry: I was just trying to blind you!

Hannah: That's not better, Harry!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harry: I'm taller than you!

Hannah: I'm smarter!

Harry: I'm funnier than you!

Hannah: Debatable.

Harry: I'm better at flirting than you!

Hannah: Alright. I'll let you have that one.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

*GAME NIGHT*

Harriet: Everyone is to try and answer a question about each teammate. If you get it wrong, you take a shot.

Harriet: Now... Guess my first word!

Ginny: Dagger!

Harry: Hook!

Cj: Bayonet!

Hannah: Treasure!

Harriet:...

Harriet: Guys, I was a baby. My first word was mama.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Ginny: That's it, we're gonna go out and find what we need!

Cj: To the city?

Ginny: Yeah, no matter what!

Hannah: Well-How exactly do you propose we do that, exactly?

Ginny: I... I don't know!

Harriet: Oh come off it, be serious!

Ginny: I am serious!

Harriet: You're insane!

Harry: Why, if only we were all wiener dogs, our problems would be solved!

Everyone:...

Ginny: What???

Harry: Or maybe it was a basset hound!

Harriet, panicked: YOU'RE ALL INSANE!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Hannah, watching tv: NO NO NO! BABY, NO! YOU'RE ONLY 21! YOU SHOULD NOT BE DATING SOMEONE A YEAR YOUNGER THAN YOUR MAMA!

Harry: ESPECIALLY AFTER SHE TALKED TO YOUR MAMA LIKE THAT!

Cj: DUMP HER ASS!

Ginny *just sitting on the couch*

( Harriet in the hallway)

Harriet: WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU 4 WATCHING?!

Ginny: Reddit stories.

Harriet: That's it! No more YouTube! *unplugs the tv*

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

*Harry, Cj, and Hannah trying to make cookies*

Cj *holding a bowl of butter* Maybe we can just put the whole thing in the microwave? Just for a second?

Hannah *sitting on the counter, kicking her legs* Great idea, Cj!

Harry *eyeing the bowl* We are not putting a metal bowl in the microwave, guys. That's how burning the house down happens. And I am not getting in trouble with Harriet and Ginny for that again!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harriet: You are now one day closer to eating your next plate of nachos.

Harry: That's the most hopeful thing I've ever heard.

Cj: But what if I die tomorrow and never eat any nachos?

Hannah: Then tomorrow is nacho lucky day.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harriet *Gently taps table*

Harry *Taps back*

Cj: What are they doing?

Hannah: Morse code.

Harriet *Aggressively taps table*

Harry *Slams hands down* YOU TAKE THAT BACK-

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harriet: Have you seen Harry around the isle lately?

Cj: Ugh, yes. He made a horrible mess of the blood fountain.

Hannah: It looks fine to me?

Cj: IT USED TO BE WATER!!!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harriet age 6, about Hannah: Apparently we're getting someone new in the family.

Harry age 3: Are we stealing them?

Cj age 1: New or used?

Harriet: Wonderful responses, both of you.

Ginny, also 6: And Harry's right.

Harriet: GINNY!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Cj: Why are you on the floor?

Harry: I'm depressed.

Harry: Also I was stabbed, can you get Harriet, please.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harriet: Tell Hannah about the birds and the bees.

Harry: They're disappearing at an alarming rate.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harry: If I accidentally sat on a voodoo doll of myself, would I be trapped forever in that position, doomed to starve to death?

Cj: How am I supposed to know?

Hannah: You say, as if we don’t use you as a source of knowledge of the occult.

Cj *sighs*

Cj: You wouldn't be trapped.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harriet: If you had to choose between Hannah and all the money I have in my wallet, which would you choose?

Cj: That depends, how much money are we taking about?

Hannah: Cj!

Harriet: 63 cents.

Cj: I'll take the money.

Hannah: CJ!!!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Cj: Please bring home PURIFIED water with NO minerals added for taste

Harry: We got spring water.

Cj: NO.

Hannah: with EXTRA minerals.

Harry: it's like licking a stalagmite.

Cj: DON'T COME HOME.

Hannah: Mmmmm cave water.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Cj: Naturally, we are on the cutting edge of technology.

Harry, amazed: Wow...

Hannah, to Harry: Well what does that mean?

Harry: I don't know.

Harry, to Cj: What does that mean?

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Ginny: I told Harry their ears flush when they lie.

Harriet: Why?

Ginny: Look.

Ginny: Hey Harry! Do you love us?

Harry, covering their ears: No.

Harriet:...

Hannah: Hey Harry do you love Uma-

Harry *runs off still covering his ears* No!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harriet: Care for another sundae, weenie?

Cj: I am not a weenie!

Hannah: Relax, you’re among friends. *raises their drink*

Cj: My friends don’t hang out at Weenie Hut Jr’s.

Ginny: You tell ‘em, Cj! *sips their drink*

Cj: Ginny, what’re you doing here?

Ginny: I’m always here on Double Weenie Wednesdays.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Hannah: Top 30 reasons why Hannah is sorry... Number 5 will surprise you!

Cj: Top 30 anime deaths. Number One: YOUR FUCKING ASS RIGHT NOW!!!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harriet: Okay, truth or dare?

Hannah: Truth

Harriet: How many hours have you slept this week?

Hannah:

Hannah: ...Dare

Harriet: Go to bed.

Hannah: I don’t like this game.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Cj: Here's some advice.

Harriet: I didn't ask for any.

Cj: Too bad. I'm stuck here with my thoughts and you're the only one who talks to me.

Hannah: She's got you there. This is your fault-

Harriet: I thought I told you to go to bed?

Hannah: Don't tell me how to live my life!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Ginny: I can explain.

Harriet: Can you?

Ginny: If you give me thiry minutes to think of a lie, I can.

Hannah: it would take you longer than that *snorts*

Ginny: WHY YOU LITTLE-

Harriet: GINNY!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harry: *Stubs their toe* FUCK!

Harriet: Mind your language!

Harry: What else am I supposed to say, “Woe is I”???

Harriet:

Harry: You have to accept that swear words are necessary sometimes.

Hannah: or you could swear in a language she doesn't know.

Harriet: HANNAH!

Hannah: I'm the baby you can't get mad at me.

Harry: You know what? I think I'll do that-

Harriet: HARRY!

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Hannah: So what do you do?

Harry: I work in genetic research, and I'm currently trying to eliminate all Cancers.

Hannah: Wow, impressive.

Harry: Then I'll move on to Leos.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Cj *blowing stuff up with Zevon, Freddie, and Ally in the bathroom*

Ginny and Clay Clayton *off somewhere traumatizing some poor wedding guest*

Anthony and Luke *arguing over who looks better*

Stormbringer crew *causing choas*

Peter *fighting with Hook while Mama Hook, Qurrin, and Captain try to stop them*

Little Hope and Baby Hook-Hook *eating the flowers*

(And so on for the guests).

Hannah *stuffing her face with spicy chicken sandwiches *

Harriet *leans over to Haul* are you really sure this is the one you want to marry?

Haul *mesmerized * yep.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Harry: YOU'RE A TRAITOR AND JUST LIKE ACTING LIKE YOU'RE BETTER THAN US. AS IF YOU'RE SOME KIND OF PRINCESS! WELL, YOU'RE NOT! YOU'RE JUST A FREAKIKG POSER! A DISGRACE! MUCKING AROUND WITH THOSE BORE-A-DON BRATS! YOU AREN'T MY SISTER!

Hannah: YEAH, WELL FRICK YOU! I DON'T NEED YOU! AS LONG AS I HAVE MY CREW I'M FINE! THOSE BORE-A-DON BRATS ARE COOLER THAN YOU ANYWAY!

Harry, offended: THEY ARE NOT, TAKE THAT BACK!

Hannah: I'LL TAKE IT BACK WHEN YOU GET SOME SENSE AND YOU'RE OWN PERSONALITY!

Harry: WHY YOU LITTLE—

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

*After Hannah ran away*

*Peter is comforting Ally*

Peter: Stop crying because it’s over. Start smiling because Hannah is someone else’s problem now.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Hannah: How do Ally and CJ usually get out of these messes?

Peter: They don't. They just make a bigger mess that cancels the first one out.

Hannah: Damn.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

*the Squad at Disneyland, in the teacups*

Hannah, Little Hope, and Hookling *spinning a little and talking*

CJ, Ally, and Peter *flying past them, spinning as fast as they can, screaming*

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Hannah: A mouse!

Hookling, pulling out a knife: Go back to where you came from or I'll stab you.

Ally, pulling out a frying pan: It'll make a nice meal!

Little Hope, giving the mouse cheese: You deserve a treat, little guy.

Peter, gasping: It's Ratatouille!

CJ: His name is Remi, dumbass.

Hannah: ...I was going to say to just trap it and throw it out the window... what is wrong with you people.

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Hannah: Which way did Hookling go?

Little Hope: Well, based on the direction of the wind, the broken sticks in the corner, and the slight disturbance in the dirt, I'd guess they went left.

Hannah: You could really figure it out from that?

Little Hope: No, you idiot, Hookling sent me a text. See?

Hannah *grumbling* kids these days. When I was your age-

Little Hope: What? Like a million years ago?

Hannah: I'm only 16 years older than you!

[raincitygirl76]

“Have His Carcase” is my second favourite Dorothy L. Sayers mystery novel. It’s also the first book in the Wimseyverse which is told primarily from Harriet Vane’s own point of view. It turns out Harriet the narrator is a snarky bitch, and I love her for it.

Harriet first appears as a character in the book before it, “Strong Poison”, but she spends the entire book in pre-trial detention for a murder she didn’t commit. The murder, incidentally, of the man she had been living with while not married to, proof of grave sin in 1930 when the book was written.

Peter Wimsey is convinced she’s innocent, and works his ass off to prove it. But Harriet herself is at the absolute low point in her life, and she’s a bit subdued whenever she meets Wimsey in the interview room of a women’s prison.

In “Have His Carcase”, Harriet is about two years removed from that trauma, and sales of her detective novels and stories have taken off like wildfire ever since she was exonerated, so she’s doing well financially. Before she was a working author who could make a living by her pen. Now she’s wealthy. Not as wealthy as Peter Wimsey, but the playing field between them is much more equal than it was in “Strong Poison”.

And in “Have His Carcase” we discover that Harriet is funny, whip-smart, doesn’t take herself too seriously, and has girded herself in a metaphorical suit of armour to avoid being hurt again. And we find all that out in the first few pages of the book. Even before the dead man turns up on the beach Harriet is on, a body which is about to be washed out to sea by the rising tide.

I have to go back and reread this book again, clearly! It’s both an excellent mystery novel and an excellent portrayal of a complicated person who’s finally starting to get a little daylight between herself and the worst thing that’s ever happened to her (being on trial for a capital crime she didn’t commit). And even though she is grateful to Peter, and even likes him as a person, being around him reminds her of that horrible time in her life.

Still can’t believe this novel is almost 95 years old.

This really ought to top every, “Best Opening Lines,” list. The 21st century reading public is sleeping on Dorothy L Sayers.

[leojurand]

top 10 8 books of the year

i ended up reading 63 books this year, but since about 17 of them were rereads, this is top 8 out of 46.

i usually don't do top 10s or anything similar because choosing is hard, but i wanted to "force" myself to do it this year, and here are the results!

8. the secret lives of country gentlemen, kj charles

kj charles is my absolute favourite romance author, and i think her formula was perfected with the doomsday duology, even though they're not necessarily my fave books by her. out of the two, i chose secret lives because it was so perfect to me! absolutely adored both mcs, individually and together. i always enjoy the kjc novels that have higher stakes, and i was super invested in this story, and the characters, and everything that happened to them. very beautiful romance scenes. can't wait to read whatever she comes up with next!!

7. the mask of apollo, mary renault

it's still crazy to be that i've only read two mary renault books this year, because i am completely in love with every aspect of her writing. the prose is so gorgeous, and this book was so atmospheric and immersive. i love the slow pace in her novels, and there's always moments of introspection that tug at my heartstrings. and that ending!!

6. gaudy night, dorothy l. sayers

pretty sure the fact that i spent like half an hour talking to a classmate about how amazing the sayers's writing is makes her my author of the year. and it couldn't be any other way! of the lord peter wimsey novels, i think gaudy night is her magnum opus. it was a very personal novel for her, and it shows in the care she put into it. i love harriet vane so much, and i adore peter, and i'm so happy that the peak of their romance and their feelings for each other was reached in such a wonderful book.

i only wanted to choose one book per series, but my other two faves are unnatural death and murder must advertise (i have yet to read busman's honeymoon)

5. the ruins, scott smith

and the award for biggest surprise of the year goes to this book! its adaptation is a very nostalgic movie for me, and last month me and my girlfriend decided to watch it together. i decided that was the perfect time to finally pick up the book, since i'd heard so much about it being so much better, as is usually the case. and god, it is much, much better. fantastic writing, and the characters feel so much more human and real than their movie counterparts. great atmosphere, and the gore? oof. one of those novels that makes me stop in the middle of whatever i'm doing and i think "man, the ruins was so good"

4. the winter prince, elizabeth wein

now, this book truly never left my brain since i read it. i picked it up on a whim and it hit me like a truck, which i didn't expect at all from such a short story. it has one of my favourite styles of prose: simple but so, so pretty. it was so easy for me to connect with the characters, especially medraut, and with the messed up dynamics that are shown here. such a wonderful book, i can't explain

so, do i have any excuse for not having read its sequel yet? no! and i'm planning to do that next month

3. the heaven tree, edith pargeter

this is a trilogy but i think of it as one story, so this includes all three books. the heaven tree gave me everything i wanted it to give me: breathtaking prose, drama, fucked up dynamics, beautiful dynamics, characters that are complex and messed up and that i don't agree with so many times, but i could always understand (well, almost always. the romance in the first book is nonsensical and stupid, but i love these books enough to forgive it). such a beautiful story, with a villain who was as easy to hate and to admire simply by how layered he was.

2. the sparrow, mary doria russell

this is the only book on this list that i've already reread, that's how serious this is. also the most "staring at a wall for an hour after finishing it unable to move" book of the year. made me feel so many emotions i can't even begin to explain. the amount of love and pain in this book can't be measured. emilio sandoz character of all time.

1. fire from heaven, mary renault

second mary renault on the list, and one i've read! also one of my earliest books of the year, because i read this in january. and it has stayed with all these months; my love for it didn't falter for even a second. you know when you consumed a piece of media and think "this was made for me"? well, that's how i felt reading fire from heaven. everything about it was perfect to me, from the prose to the pacing to the dynamic between alexander and hephaistion. you can really tell alexander's story was very important to mary renault (she was pretty much obsessed with the guy, and how very relatable), and now it's important to me too.

so, again, how come i haven't read the sequels yet? well, i tried to the persian boy soon after finishing this one, but 50 pages in and i couldn't get into it, which is sad so i decided to leave it for another time. i think i love fire from heaven too much to fully embrace the change in perspective in the second book. maybe i'm petty because the persian boy is considered the best of the trilogy, and maybe renault's best along with the charioteer. and i just don't think i'll feel the same way! it's hard to believe that it will make me feel the way fire from heaven did. and that's why it has to be number 1 on this list, i'm so incredibly attached to it, 11 months after reading it.

and there it is! it's hard to rank books when they're completely different from each other, but i tried. i would say overall it was a pretty good year... hard to compete with last year because well. i did read 15 dorothy dunnett novels almost back to back then. but still! i'm pretty happy

[purplecherryuwu]

The Black Pearl's crew

Captain- Harriet Hook

First mate- Sammy Smee

Anthony Tremaine

Mad Maddy

Yzla

Ginny Gothel

(In canon she has the kids of her father's old pirate crew on hers but... there's a limit to have many OC's I can make- These are the most important with how much they interact)

Harriet got one of her father's ships after challenging him, and beating him in a duel when she was 16

Whether or not James let her win is unknown to this day

As one of her closest allies Sammy was chosen as her first mate directly

The two worked together to clean up the ship as best they could before they started recruiting others to the crew

Anthony was recruited after he danced with Harriet at Hell hall, he originally had a crush on her and joined the crew to get closer but she rejected him and now he's trapped

Pretends to hate it but he does like being part of the crew, an excuse to get away from his grandmother and all his siblings

Maddy also wanted to get away from her big family, and also wanted to have more to her name then just being a witch

She loves to get on Anthony's nerves about how he's technically not a "Lord" no matter how many times he introduces himself as "Lord Tremaine"

Yzla always felt like she was living in her brothers shadow, like for gods sake he got to escape and managed to get to Auradon, also as any villain her mother was no ideal parent.

And joining Harriet's crew gave her an escape and when sailing out she could catch glimses of Auradon and fantasize what she would do if she ever got there

Ginny would get tired of hearing her mother ranting all day about how her first daughter Cassandra was so much better than her and Molly

She wasn't sent to the island and was now serving at Queen Rapunzel's side in Corona

I have heavy doubts on Gothel's credentials as a teacher but since she is a teacher she was never home much, leaving Molly and Ginny to their own devices

Ginny decided to join when she heard of Harriet forming a crew because

1. Like everyone else it was an escape 2. A part of her wanted to prove that she was capable of something special despite not being "beautiful enough"

After the barrier goes down the crew goes on a ton of different trips, sometimes they take on small jobs from the different kingdoms transporting cargo for them

Their "Homebase" however is in Neverland, Harriet has a mission to finish what her father started one way or another (as of now she just wants to capture Peter Pan and not kill him)

The rest of the crew likes it in Neverland, Anthony tries to get the sewing fairies to make new clothes for him where as the rest are enjoying all the fresh food in Neverland thanks to the fairies

[o-uncle-newt]

Dorothy L Sayers books at the Grolier Club

On my lunch break, I wandered over to the Grolier Club, an institution of and for books and bibliophiles conveniently located about 300 yards from my office lobby. I was intrigued by their current exhibition (closing in a week or so): Imaginary Books: Lost, Unfinished, and Fictive Works Found Only in Other Books. While I found the concept interesting in itself (a guy working with a team of craftspeople created physical editions of books that currently do not exist), the thing that really drew me was the fact that there was a fuckton of Sayers in there.

In fact, as noted on the case's label, while Sayers is not the only writer with more than one book in the exhibit, she is the only one with more than 2-3 and certainly the only one with a full display case of her own.

All books exhibited assume, in the context of the label, that the book exists. So let's take a look at these totally real books and the backstories they're given and see what we think!* (The alt text contains the label text.)

*Well, what I think, fueled partly by the vague few memories I have from the History of the Book class I took in college... but please let me know what you think as well in comments/reblogs!

First up- two books by our own Lord Peter, both mentioned in Clouds of Witness according to the labels- which as far as I can tell is only kind of true. They're not mentioned in the story text, but in the front matter- the fake Debrett's entry (though The Murderer's Vade-Mecum IS mentioned in-text in Unnatural Death!). As such, we don't actually know anything about their contents or contexts. The incunabula book makes a lot of sense, but I must admit- unless it is based on a Sayers text that has escaped me, I find the description of The Murderer's Vade-Mecum to be a bit much as a descriptive leap.

Another minor quibble- it's unclear, was The Murderer's Vade-Mecum printed for public purchase? It says that it's privately printed like the incunabula book, but implies enough of a circulation that murderers might own it. If it was printed for purchase then you can ignore this next bit, BUT- I'm surprised that Wimsey, as a collector of incunabula, doesn't have his own bookbinder who binds his books in a house style. I'd have expected his privately printed books to look coordinated, if not identical exactly, to allow for harmonious shelf displays.

It's History of Prosody, and it looks exactly as big, scary, and toe-breaking as I expected it to, especially with what I assume are a whole second book's worth of footnotes! Nice job.

The Death in the Pot slipcover looks great... but I'm confused by a few things here. Why is the publication date 1922, when (as mentioned on the label) Death in the Pot was published after the events of Strong Poison, which were in 1930? And where does "MG" come from as the name of her publisher- is it referred to somewhere?

I can't decide what I think about the poison cover. Would Lord Saint-George find this funny if he encountered it? Yeah, sure. Would he have the imagination to dream it up? I don't think so.

Another great looking cover and baffling description. Once again, date is weird (publication date would be 1936, most likely, given that they got married in October and during their engagement Harriet was still writing/doing research). Also, the description of Wilfred is a bit odd but I guess can be congruent with the book rendition... but he's not the detective! Where's good ol' Robert Templeton the untidy dresser?

But I do want to emphasize again, excellent cover. No notes.

Book looks good (though I'd have hoped more for a fancy presentation copy bound by Peter as a gift for Harriet or something), though one thing it gets wrong that the label gets right is that no way would it be titled "Harriet Vane Wimsey." It would be Harriet Vane, Lady Peter Wimsey, or both. The date discrepancy is odd- we know Harriet didn't complete her Le Fanu study during the events of Gaudy Night, and she of course left in a bit of a hurry, so the 40s makes sense, but between the two dates I'd assume the right one is 1947- much more likely that she'd have managed to finish it when the war was over and the kids were older.

This looks awesome, though the font/printing is maybe a bit more modern-looking than I expected (but I'm not super knowledgeable). Tiny quibble- it would be Cantab., not Camb. (just as with Harriet's Le Fanu book it said Oxon.). Such an early date as 1901 is slightly surprising, but I suppose there's no real reason why not...? Separately, interesting that they placed the book be at Duke's Denver- Wimsey doesn't live there! Maybe because that's where he used to take part in change-ringing as a kid?

All in all, a great exhibit (and it had a bunch of other fun books as well, like On the Care of the Pig from PG Wodehouse's Blandings Castle stories and a deep-black copy of Memories by DEATH of the Discworld). I think that the worldbuilding around the Sayers books in the labels could possibly have been a bit tighter but quite frankly, merely doing this, and to the high standard that they did when creating the books, and specifically highlighting the vividness of Sayers's world and the worlds within it that she creates (in choosing to specifically spotlight multiple books from Sayers's oeuvre), is already more than we (or at least I) deserve.

Final day of the exhibit is next Saturday- if you're in the NY area, highly recommend!

[skitterchomp]

Renowned mystery writer Dorothy Sayers fell in love with her most famous detective, Lord Peter Wimsey. So she added a self-insert, Harriet Vane, to meet and eventually marry him.

Vane was obviously, overtly based on Sayers. Vane was a mystery writer whose former lover -- a man who exactly resembled Sayers' ex -- was murdered using a method described in one of her books. Vane had angrily broken up with this man for exactly the same reason Sayers angrily broke up with her own longtime partner. After he died, Vane was accused of his murder, but Lord Peter Wimsey showed up and found the real killer.

Wimsey immediately fell in love with Vane, but she resisted. After working together for a few books she changed her mind and married him. The Harriet Vane books are widely considered some of Sayers' best.

It absolutely is ok if it's obvious, or if it's a self-indulgent fantasy. Making art you can be passionate about is much more important than whether people think you are cringe for breaking made up rules.

The stigma of self-inserts is so harmful to the creative process. Relax. Admit it. Everything you make is derivative of yourself, always, no exceptions. You can turn the mirror into tinier and tinier shards or you can make it as big as you want to reflect as much as you want. At the end of the day it's always going to show you inside of it. Pretending otherwise is stupid.

[mmt1983]

Dreams are renewable. No matter what our age or condition, there are still untapped possibilities within us and new beauty waiting to be born.--Dale E. Turner

Dreams are the touchstones of our character.--Henry David Thoreau

Dreams get you into the future and add excitement to the present.-Robert Conklin

Dreams come in a size too big so that we may grow into them.--Josie Bisset

Dreams do come true, if we only wish hard enough, You can have anything in life if you will sacrifice everything else for it.--Sir James M. Barrie

Courage, contrary to popular belief, is not the absence of fear. Courage is the wisdom to act in spite of fear.--John-Roger and Peter McWilliams (Do It! Let's Get Off our Buts)

Courage doesn't always roar. Sometimes courage is the little voice at the end of the day that says I'll try again tomorrow.--Mary Anne Radmacher

Courage is a special kind of knowledge: the knowledge of how to fear what ought to be feared and how not to fear what ought no to be feared.--David Ben-Gurion

Courage is contagious. When a brave man takes a stand, the spines of others are stiffened.--Billy Graham

Courage is doing what you're afraid to do. There can be no courage unless you're scared.--Eddie Rickenbacker

Courage is not a virtue or value among other personal values like love or fidelity. It is the foundations that underlies and gives reality to all other virtue and personal values.--Rollo May (The Courage to Create)

Courage is not simply another virtue, it is the true form each and every virtue takes when put into practice.--Michael Rawls (from Friday's Inspiration: The Foundation of Integrity - 6/1/2001)

Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear.--Ambrose Redmoon

Dreams, ideas, and plans not only are an escape, they give me purpose, a reason to hang on.--Steven Callahan

Either you let your life slip away by not doing the things you want to do, or you get up and do them.--Roger Von Oech

Empower your dreams with deadlines.--H. Jackson Brown (?) (Life's Little Instruction Calendar, 1999)

Enough! It's time to grow up. If we want to play adult games--living our Dream--we must play by adult rules. One of the primary adult rules: We are individually responsible for our own lives.--John-Roger and Peter McWilliams (Do It! Let's Get Off our Buts)

Even if you can't just snap your fingers and make a dream come true, you can travel in the direction of your dream, every single day and you can shorten the distance between the two of you.--Douglas Pagels

Every dreamer works in violent disagreement with their times.--Conway Stone

Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.--Harriet Tubman

The excitement, the true excitement, was always in starting again. Nothing's worse than an accomplished task, a realized dream.--Marilyn Harris

[fancoloredglasses]

[RERUN] Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends (I'm not sure how "Amazing" they are, but...)

[All images are owned by Marvel Disney. Please don’t sue me.]

(Thanks to Reza the Riddler)

(If you want to see the wall of text that was the original review, here it is)

Spider-Man seems to be Marvel’s go-to in televised animated series, with 11 different series centered on the web-head since the ‘60s, more than anything DC has done with any single character (even Batman!).

Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends aired alongside a solo series that, despite a similar voice cast, did not share the same continuity (which I’m sure confused the hell out of the kids!)

The series follows Spidey and his friends (duh!) Iceman (of the X-Men) and Firestar (a character created for the series due to the Human Torch of the Fantastic Four being stuck in creative/legal limbo; this is also why the Torch was replaced by H.E.R.B.I.E. the robot (no clue what the acronym stood for) in The New Fantastic Four animated series that aired around this time)

While the writing and plot cohesiveness was leagues better than Superfriends or Adam West’s Batman, it suffered from some of the same hangups/tropes the aforementioned series had:

Let’s start with the fact that the alter-egos of the heroes (Peter Parker, Bobby Drake, and Angelica Jones) live with Peter’s Aunt May. Without May’s knowledge, they have turned their study (with the pull of a statue/lever) into a crime lab.

Additionally, May (much like Batman’s Aunt Harriet) doesn’t know any of their super-powered antics. It was okay when it was just Peter and May in the 60s series, but this is a bit much.

(I should also note that Aunt May has a dog of unknown breed known as Ms. Lion. Unlike Aunt May, she knows the Spider Friends’ secret)

Additionally, the show suffered from the government-mandated lack of violence Superfriends suffered from. There is an episode that has a villain who has Iceman, Firestar, and 4 major heroes dead to rights and rather than killing them, he captures them with the intent on blowing them all up once he’s captured Spider-Man. However, the writers don’t have quite the resistance to violence (though, much like G.I.Joe, the accuracy of everyone’s punches and beams would cause an Imperial stormtrooper to laugh his ass off)

There is also the fact that the two heroes helping Spider-Man have opposing powers and are easily neutralized as such (Iceman is constantly confronted with heat-based attacks and Firestar with cold-based ones. Both almost always seem to stun them, if not knock them out)

All that being said, the stories do not rely as much deus ex supershit as DC’s shows at the time do. Instead, the heroes usually suffer some sort of early setback that they learn from and make a plan to better their chances next time, usually with success (or they suffer a second setback that they quickly bounce back from to Save The Day; I mean, they only have half an hour (minus commercials and credits) to work with)

I do think the 60s version was a better show. I know they added Bobby and Angelica so Peter has someone to banter (and playfully trade insults) with, but they really don’t add much to the mix. I think the team-ups that happened in Ultimate Spider-Man were better written and a bit less forced (I mean, how many cold-based insults can there be?)

Once again, I’m happy to review episodes featuring anyone’s favorite Spider-Man villain.