Try to be optimistic

             Wow, schools been literally been killing me. Since midterms are almost over things should be slowing down for me. I may have nothing to write about, but things are slowing down.
              I have just been rereading Regina Doman's books. They are surprisingly well written. Highly improable, but considering the fact she straight out admits they are fairy tale stories I have nothing against it. The characters are well drawn and likeable. Rose may have been a little too perfect and focused in on by everyone within the world of the novel Waking Rose, but still it was not to bad. Another problem was that in the first book the writer starts to develop the mom's personality, which was interesting, but she really faded into the background so much that the girls almost seemed to have been orphans. Other than that I found the series concerned with the Briers and Dennstons as the main characters interesting (those would be Shadow of the Bear, Black as Night, and  Waking Rose.
              My favorite character is easily Fish. Although Blanche started out as my favorite character. I think Fish and Blanche are proably the most well drawn characters in the books, with Rose as a close third.
            Although I liked the Midnight Dancers it lacks some of the charm of the original characters, although it definetly kept the fairy tale like charm of everything. One of my friends complained how Rachel, the heroine of the book, did an extremely stupid thing to expose her sisters to what she did. My problem was not in that. It was a really stupid thing to do, yes. But it was handled in such a way that between it's being a fairytale story I did not mind it.
                The problem I had was the fact that the hero, Paul, did not tell thier father right off. Those girls could have ended up in very serious trouble if he had in some way failed to take on a large group of young men. Another problem was that Paul was just to perfect. Rose had faults and people pointed out that she was doing some things wrong. Paul did not seem to have any faults, nor was he (if I remember correctly, which I may not since it's been a long time) a very well drawn character in this one.
                Still overall I enjoyed all of her books that I have read and I hope she continues to write, which is high praise from me since I hate the majority of Romance stories and I hate an even greater majority of modern literature (and Lord spare us from most American writing). Warning for those of you with sensitive paleates the books are very romantic, but in a fairy tale way, so she can get away with it somehow.

I was really hoping

that my blogs title would not be a self fulfilling prophecy. I have precisely 15mins before I have to go to class. So this shall be a brief post.
            Sorry I have not written much in a long while, but I have been trying not to get behind in my school. Even my novel has suffered neglect lately. So has my room now that I think about it. Although I have just finished a bizarre alien story a few days ago. It was fun writing it and I gave it a little bit of an O'Henry ending. I think more authors should work harder on the ending's. Not necessarily have them always be surprise endings but they should make a person feel a little accomplishment having read it. Or make people think or flipp'in anything except make a person question why they finished the book. There are some books that make me think that I should have stopped a chapter short of finishing the work because for such a good beginning and middle of the story the ending  is disappointing and too predictable.
          Sometimes there is the problem of making the story's ending unpredictable in a predictable way. I mean yes the person tried to make it unpredictable but failed because too many people made thier story unpredictable in the exact same manner as this author. And I really have to go now,

Lovely day

             The sun is shining (above the covering of clouds), the grass is green (when I say green I mean it has the potentiality of becoming green) what little of it is left. the trees reach out  like bare skeletons to the uppermost parts of the sky hoping to pierce the clouds, and miserably failing. Everyone is red, cheery and ready to strangle you (that could be my imagination). Wind is gently blowing past people and knocking them off their feet, or the ice. Such a day makes one feel as if it is good to be alive. 
                Yes in fact I am rambling and yes I am serious as to its being a good day. Some days one doubts if the sun is shining behind the dazzling curtain of evaporated water.
                By the way deconstructionism is dead. I am Nieztche and it is dead.

I hate the deconstructist theory

                The Deconstructist theory is the theory that says of language that language is fluid and we can never really know what the meaning of a text (this is a literary theory for those of you fortunate to never come across it). They deny that there is an objective and correct meaning to any text. They say words change from era to era (that is true). They say that there are many ways to interpret a sentence (that is also true, but we can usually figure out what the intention of the author or speaker, by the context, by the inflection, by the social understanding and by the person themselves). Is it an exact science, no. Can you understand to a certain extent, yes. Are you going to make mistakes, yes.
       Furthermore  I am not sure what the reason for deconstructive theory‘s deconstructing a text. If meaning is fluid than dosen't this deconstructionist writing need to be deconstructed? Then that other deconstruction needs to be deconstructed. It is just a theory that you can go on and on, because there is really no starting point.
            You cannot make a good argument without a basis that there is no proof of. They are trying to undermine that basis.
         If you want to say there is no at least somewhat objective truth of a text, then what is the use of any criticism, if you throw out logic, how can one be expected to argue? If language is so fluid then what is the use of talking?

Charicutures

         I have found that like most people I have a fascination for caricatures. Not the ones done in artwork because those are usually really ugly. I am talking about characters in stories. That might be why Dickens is still being read. I mean do we read his works for realism? Not really. For some historical value, yes that is one reason we still read stuff like Dickens. His characters may not be particularly realistic, but they are interesting.
          One of my goals in what I am writing is to make some characters like Dickens. I do not want to copy them, but I want to use the method that he used for that particular subject. Insofar as the rest of my writing is concerned, I doubt it will be anything like his. But someone told me that the best way to learn how to write well is too read good literature.
         Now there is too mistakes people make about the classics's. One is too assume they are boring. Dickens can be hilarious, and for those of you who like dramatic literature, their is always the Bronte sisters. Although the passion that they portray in their books, makes me laugh. Jane Austen and Elizabeth Gaskell, as of yet, seem to be the only romance writers that I can thoroughly enjoy. Then there are some other exciting books that are dramatic and adventurous books like Zorro, Captain Blood (yes his last name seriously is blood, isn't that brilliant?) and the Scarlet Pimpernel. The Scarlet Pimpernel also makes me laugh.
              The other problem is just because they are old and are called classics does not make them great literature. I hate Robinson Crusoe. Although, I am glad it exists, if you ever read the Moonstone you'll understand why. There other books that are just not well done, that although as an English major I am glad I have read, I would not necessarily recommend them to the public at large.

I have this very difficult class

The sad thing is that it is an intro level class. Just reading through a chapter that is a little under a hundred pages of technology related things is hard fot me. I have a disturbing feeling that many of the people in the class are doing it for an easy A. Whereas I am thinking that it will be harder than my 400 level classes. Se le vi. Which is French for I can't spell (no not seriously).
         I have a word of advise to all of those concerened with your own welfare to
               Never tell a masochist 'do unto other's as you would have them do unto you'. No I am not being randomn.

It's been awhile

        Hello, between being busy for awhile and not very consistent access to a computer (I think I've fixed that) has slowed down my blogging. Still here I am. Actually, I am taking an interesting class this semester on Victorian Literature. More specifically on Dickens's. I love Dickens and I hate Dickens. There are so many problems and mistakes in his books, but they are brilliant mistakes. Besides he was just beginging to explore the serialization method of writing novels.
          I have also been studying the Victorian time period (well hello,  it is a class on Dickens). I have a somewhat similar regard to that time period as I do for Dickens. It was about the 'triumphing' of puritans and meateralism. At the same time there was so much good. And they had a few brilliant writers. It was also the time that education became more accesible to the masses. But then the Utiltarian philosphy that came out and we are still struggling with to this day also appeared.
                   So, yes I hate it and love it.