StoryreaderStardust
April 16th 2008 07:37
Today’s post will be on Stardust by Neil Gaiman. Did I read it because I saw the movie? Surprisingly, no. I am reading it because it is set for a subject I am studying, and I haven’t actually seen the film yet.
Stardust as a novel is very visual. The book was originally an illustrated novel (illustrated by Charles Vess), but that’s not the copy that I read, so I felt like I was missing something much of the time. I couldn’t help but wonder, as I read along, whether certain scenes are in the movie and how they would look. Scenes tend to be set up, for the reader to construct in their own heads, and from that perspective to appreciate the beauty or the humour of it, it’s not just described to you like in many other novels. It is a novel which is suited to being adapted to film, so I’m not surprised that it has been. I would prefer to have those original illustrations to look at, or for the author to put me, the reader, into the scene more than Gaiman actually does in some parts.
I teetered between enjoying the book, and finding it irritating. Parts of the story come off as very much a fairytale, supporting already well-established notions of true love, wicked witches, finding yourself, etc. But then parts of the story set out to destroy the features of fairytales. What happens to the unicorn would never, ever, EVER happen to a unicorn in a Disney fairytale, that’s for sure. And it seems a little mean, like Gaiman thought as he was writing that passage “no, actually I think fairytales are a bit too sweet, and annoying. I’m going to do this to the beautiful unicorn.” I see Gaiman’s point on either side, but taking it all together, the whole concept seemed a little awkward, as though the story wasn’t sure what direction it was moving in.
There are also, more palatable parts, which were a bit humorously cynical, which I enjoyed- the falling star breaking her leg and swearing foully, for example. The book takes something magical, admires it, laughs at it, and then makes the point that, if stars were beautiful women and they did fall from the sky, they would probably, realistically, swear foully. I find Gaiman’s tack, in this respect, to be extremely amusing, because though I love fantasy, I realise that a lot of it is silly, and sometimes it’s fun when someone pokes fun at it.
What I really didn’t enjoy about the novel is just a couple of passages which I found distasteful. I have a list, you see. This list is entitled “Petty Reasons Why I Will Throw This Book Out The Window”, and it concerns all the thing that really, really annoy me when I am reading. And I am such a crotchety reader, that even one slight infringement may cause me to give up on a book. I’m trying to quit this unreasonable behaviour, but one of the items that remains on my list is smuttiness.
You may call me a prude if you want, I don’t really care. It’s just that (as I am not a hormone-crazed teenage boy) I don’t find bedroom scenes or references to female body parts particularly interesting. I am yet to read a book where a dirty scene is necessary, or complementary, to the storyline. I always find that innuendo works much better than crude scenes, especially in a book like this which is quite humorous. Some of the trysts here were relevant to the plot, but there are other ways of going about it. Putting the reader in the front row as the main character is conceived is just a bit much, in my opinion.
Overall, I think that Stardust ran hot and cold for me; some parts I found amusing and entertaining, though I must say I wasn’t quite as taken in by the storyline or the concept of the village of Wall, and the neighbouring land of Faerie, as I thought I was going to be. My objections to the book are relatively minor (compared to other books I have complained about for weeks on end, this is really quite good). But I wouldn’t pick it up to read again, and I wouldn’t recommend it to someone who was desperate to read a good book. I am curious to see the film, though, because according to a summary of the plot I read, it is quite a bit different, and less, perhaps, cynical of the fairytale genre.
Stardust as a novel is very visual. The book was originally an illustrated novel (illustrated by Charles Vess), but that’s not the copy that I read, so I felt like I was missing something much of the time. I couldn’t help but wonder, as I read along, whether certain scenes are in the movie and how they would look. Scenes tend to be set up, for the reader to construct in their own heads, and from that perspective to appreciate the beauty or the humour of it, it’s not just described to you like in many other novels. It is a novel which is suited to being adapted to film, so I’m not surprised that it has been. I would prefer to have those original illustrations to look at, or for the author to put me, the reader, into the scene more than Gaiman actually does in some parts.
I teetered between enjoying the book, and finding it irritating. Parts of the story come off as very much a fairytale, supporting already well-established notions of true love, wicked witches, finding yourself, etc. But then parts of the story set out to destroy the features of fairytales. What happens to the unicorn would never, ever, EVER happen to a unicorn in a Disney fairytale, that’s for sure. And it seems a little mean, like Gaiman thought as he was writing that passage “no, actually I think fairytales are a bit too sweet, and annoying. I’m going to do this to the beautiful unicorn.” I see Gaiman’s point on either side, but taking it all together, the whole concept seemed a little awkward, as though the story wasn’t sure what direction it was moving in.
There are also, more palatable parts, which were a bit humorously cynical, which I enjoyed- the falling star breaking her leg and swearing foully, for example. The book takes something magical, admires it, laughs at it, and then makes the point that, if stars were beautiful women and they did fall from the sky, they would probably, realistically, swear foully. I find Gaiman’s tack, in this respect, to be extremely amusing, because though I love fantasy, I realise that a lot of it is silly, and sometimes it’s fun when someone pokes fun at it.
What I really didn’t enjoy about the novel is just a couple of passages which I found distasteful. I have a list, you see. This list is entitled “Petty Reasons Why I Will Throw This Book Out The Window”, and it concerns all the thing that really, really annoy me when I am reading. And I am such a crotchety reader, that even one slight infringement may cause me to give up on a book. I’m trying to quit this unreasonable behaviour, but one of the items that remains on my list is smuttiness.
You may call me a prude if you want, I don’t really care. It’s just that (as I am not a hormone-crazed teenage boy) I don’t find bedroom scenes or references to female body parts particularly interesting. I am yet to read a book where a dirty scene is necessary, or complementary, to the storyline. I always find that innuendo works much better than crude scenes, especially in a book like this which is quite humorous. Some of the trysts here were relevant to the plot, but there are other ways of going about it. Putting the reader in the front row as the main character is conceived is just a bit much, in my opinion.
Overall, I think that Stardust ran hot and cold for me; some parts I found amusing and entertaining, though I must say I wasn’t quite as taken in by the storyline or the concept of the village of Wall, and the neighbouring land of Faerie, as I thought I was going to be. My objections to the book are relatively minor (compared to other books I have complained about for weeks on end, this is really quite good). But I wouldn’t pick it up to read again, and I wouldn’t recommend it to someone who was desperate to read a good book. I am curious to see the film, though, because according to a summary of the plot I read, it is quite a bit different, and less, perhaps, cynical of the fairytale genre.
| 76 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by AmyHuang
Sydney Table
Project Job Search
Travel Debate
Travel String
Love Adventures
I agree you on this one - I find this especially in movies as well. What is with the bedroom scenes? Totally unnecessary.
I havent read the book but saw the movie, I did like it, but more because I like these kind of fantasy stories, not for its plot or cinematography merit.