I picked up this book at a library “garage” sale. I was intrigued by the storyline that positioned a human in the role of “God”. While I would not call this book particularly well written (at least not to my taste) or entertaining, it certainly did have some thought provoking questions to offer. If you are one who is interested in the concept of creator-creation relations, you may in fact enjoy this book.

“Consider this from an American humorist:
‘Strange that you should not have suspected, years ago, centuries, ages, aeons ago! for you have existed, companionless, through all the eternities. Strange, indeed, that you should not have suspected that your universe and its contents were only dreams, visions, fictions! Strange, because thay are so frankly and hysterically insane – like all dreams: a God who could make good children as easily as bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave his angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice and invented hell – mouths mercy, and invented hell – mouths golden rules, and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man’s acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with althogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor abused slave to worship him! . . .
‘You perceive, now, that these things are all impossible, except in a dream. You perceive that they are pure and puerile insanities, the silly creations of an imagination that is not conscious of its freaks – in a word, that they are a dream, and you the maker of it. The dream marks are all present – you should have recognized them earlier . . .
‘It is true, that which I have revealed to you: there is no God, no universe, no human race, no earthly life, no heaven, no hell. It is all Dream, a grotesque and foolish dream. Nothing exists but You. And you are but a Thought – a vagrant, Thought, a useless Thought, a homeless Thought, wandering forlorn among the empty eternities!’
See what I mean by humorist? Laugh, I thought I’d die.
Presumably Mark Twain felt quite pleased with himself when he thus ended his last story “The Mysterious Stranger.” But even the narrator of this tale, who is no philosophical sophisticate as the reader doubtless perceives by now, would point out that you can’t have a dream without a dreamer, a thought without a thinker, a story without a storyteller. Nor can you tell a story without a purpose, even if as in the case of the elderly and bitter Twain, the purpose is to insist that there is no purpose.”
- Andrew M. Greeley, God Game, Century Hutchinson, 1986, quoting Mark Twain, No. 44, The Mysterious Stranger, ed. John Tuckey and Robert Hirst, University of California Press, 1983.

I was fortunate enough to see this play on Broadway last Thursday, and while I had already seen the film, I was very impressed by the beauty, acting, and artistic direction displayed in the theater. While I did enjoy the film, I think however this play is in fact meant for the stage. It was fabulous and very worth the time and money to see it several times more.

Being an avid Jane Austen fan, I was very excited to see this film. I was it would seem however, very naive in terms of its content. Without reason, I expected something in the likeness of her own works, which was undoubtedly NOT the case. The film was certainly geared toward the irony of her own circumstances and their influence on her writing. The performances of both Anne Hathaway and James McAvoy were intense and capturing. It was difficult as a viewer however to sympathize with McAvoy’s character, which led the viewer to be torn, much I imagine as Jane Austen herself was. The cinematography was beautiful and the language witty. Overall, it was a very moving film.

Obviously, one is motivated to attend a Josh Groban concert because of his strong, smooth, and beautiful voice. In those terms the concert was as to be expected… Fabulous! Less expected however was Groban’s entertaining sense of humor, which was tastefully showcased throughout the concert itself. In such a large arena, his personal quips and humorous antidotes made the entire show more personal and familiar, lending itself to a warm and almost intimate evening.

Unfortunately for Groban, his audience seemed to be less pop culture and therefore, with myself as an exception, did not get the entertaining reference to “One, put a whole in the box”... He is charming!

I just wanted to add that the deleted scenes should really be viewed as they actually add a lot to the characters, especially that of Jackson. Additionally, there is a cute little flashback between Ricci and Timberlake’s characters. It is an enjoyable addition.

This film originally caught my interest after I had seen a trailer for it on myspace. Admittedly, it was Justin Timberlake’s appearance in what seemed a very odd film that was the true source of my interest. Later however, I read several very encouraging reviews that shed better light on the very strange subject matter and which also praised Timberlake’s performance. I had been eagerly anticipating the film which I finally viewed tonight. I am even more pleased than I had expected. The trailer really did little justice to the small film which essentially turned out to be a love story. Christina Ricci was enjoyable and as strange as usual, Samuel L. Jackson was as commanding and charming as usual, but Timberlake was absolutely unusually vulnerable in his role. Perhaps Timberlake’s lack of acting experience adds to my surprise, but I was very pleased to see Timberlake successfully attack a role that was real, dirty, and emotionally charged. He was utterly beautiful. Perhaps my only real complaint as to the performance of Timberlake was his weak accent, which seemed to fluctuate in and out, especially when accompanied by the very smooth and strong accent of Ricci’s character. Additionally, his voice was as usual slightly distracting. While his smooth and sensual voice is pure gold for his music career, it can be quite distracting as a character attribute. Overall, however, I wouldn’t have had it any other way.

I read this book because it is so often talked about in literature circles and is on most of the top 100 novels lists available. Unfortunately, I was utterly annoyed by the book. The character, Holden Caulfield is exceedingly intolerable, especially considering the book was written in his first-person perspective. While I understand that the book is primarily dealing with teenage angst, the entire point seems to be lost behind the character of Holden who at the same time is supposed to epitomize this “angst”. His entire character, his figures of speech, and his tone of voice were all very hard to deal with as a reader. I constantly found myself wanting to give up on the book. Even the last few chapters, particularly that of his story of Mr Antolini (who seemed ironically to be the single likable character), that were even slightly acceptable did not make the book worth its entirety. At the last page I found myself saying, “What the hell?” I almost feel stupider for having read it. The greatest benefit in reading this book was the ability to check it off my list.

This is an excellent CD with nearly every song having something to offer. Other than their obvious hits, other fantastic songs include Heaven Forbid, Vienna, and Hundred.

1. She Is
2. Over My Head (Cable Car)
3. How To Save a Life
4. All At Once
5. Fall Away
6. Heaven Forbid
7. Look After You
8. Hundred
9. Vienna
10. Dead Wrong
11. Little House
12. Trust Me

I marked this worth consuming because I still don’t know that I fully grasp the meaning of the film. While the score and cinematography were undeniably beautiful, the dialogue and storyline were very unclear and confusing. Furthermore, while the film drew primarily from Mayan legend it tried to incorporate biblical references which ultimately did little more than have me question the competency of the writer (the garden of Eden and consequently the beginning of civilization was in Mesopotamia between the Tigris and Euphrates NOT Guatemala). When the film ended, my husband and I were both dumbfounded. Neither of us could understand the motivating factor behind the film. Obviously there was concern for life and death, but what exactly was the point being made? And how many times will I have to watch it to get that point?

This was a very beautiful film. While perhaps less conventional in its storyline, with rather choppy transitions between the present and past, it nonetheless managed to create a very emotionally moving story. It was not particularly entertaining nor was it educational, but it nonetheless painted a beautiful portrait of a woman’s heart, and the truth that so few of us grasp. Told through the delicate lives of Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave/Claire Danes) and Lila Wittenborn (Meryl Streep/Mamie Gummer), Evening explores the depths of women’s hearts and the dreams that live within them.

“We are mysterious creatures, aren’t we? And at the end, so much of it turns out not to matter.” – Lila Wittenborn (Meryl Streep)