Search
Search results
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) created a video about This Common Secret in Books
Sep 6, 2017
Hazel (1853 KP) rated A Spark Of Light in Books
Feb 24, 2019
Jodi Picoult tackles the age-old issue of abortion in her latest novel A Spark of Light. As a controversial topic, abortion is a challenging ethical problem to write about, however, with a mix of characters, Picoult manages to argue from all points of view. Full of secrets and shocking truths, the novel reveals the complexity of balancing the right to life with the right to choose.
The book begins with a horrifying shooting and hostage situation at a centre for women's reproductive health. George, the shooter, is angry with his daughter for having an abortion, but rather than blaming her, he takes it out on the doctors and nurses who perform the operations and the unfortunate women who happen to be in the waiting room. In fact, only one of the female hostages have had an abortion, the others are there for very different reasons.
A Spark of Light is written backwards, beginning with the hostage situation and gradually revealing the previous hours, describing how each character got themselves in this position. The chapters alternate between characters: the doctors and nurses who work at the Centre; the women who have come for treatment - not necessarily an abortion; and an anti-abortion campaigner. The most important storyline, however, is told through the eyes of three people: Wren, a fifteen-year-old trapped in the clinic; the gunman, and the negotiator, who happens to be Wren's father.
What begins as a two-sided debate about abortion - albeit in a deadly scenario - ends in a standoff between two fathers, both of whom only want to do what is best for their daughters. Although Nick, the negotiator, would not walk into a clinic and start shooting, he learns he has much more in common with the terrorist than he thought possible.
The prose is a little confusing to begin with, however, once the "backwards" writing style becomes clear, it is a very enjoyable story. The only problem with this style of writing is that readers are left with so many questions about what happened after the shooting. We become so invested in the lives of the characters, it feels almost mean not to know who they cope after the traumatising event.
The book begins with a horrifying shooting and hostage situation at a centre for women's reproductive health. George, the shooter, is angry with his daughter for having an abortion, but rather than blaming her, he takes it out on the doctors and nurses who perform the operations and the unfortunate women who happen to be in the waiting room. In fact, only one of the female hostages have had an abortion, the others are there for very different reasons.
A Spark of Light is written backwards, beginning with the hostage situation and gradually revealing the previous hours, describing how each character got themselves in this position. The chapters alternate between characters: the doctors and nurses who work at the Centre; the women who have come for treatment - not necessarily an abortion; and an anti-abortion campaigner. The most important storyline, however, is told through the eyes of three people: Wren, a fifteen-year-old trapped in the clinic; the gunman, and the negotiator, who happens to be Wren's father.
What begins as a two-sided debate about abortion - albeit in a deadly scenario - ends in a standoff between two fathers, both of whom only want to do what is best for their daughters. Although Nick, the negotiator, would not walk into a clinic and start shooting, he learns he has much more in common with the terrorist than he thought possible.
The prose is a little confusing to begin with, however, once the "backwards" writing style becomes clear, it is a very enjoyable story. The only problem with this style of writing is that readers are left with so many questions about what happened after the shooting. We become so invested in the lives of the characters, it feels almost mean not to know who they cope after the traumatising event.
Movie Critics (823 KP) rated Obvious Child (2014) in Movies
Oct 5, 2017
Don’t let anyone scare you away from “Obvious Child” on political grounds; ultimately, this is a movie about life and how we live it. And how we sometimes tell embarrassing jokes about our drawers.
Critic- Alonso Duralde
Original Score: 9 out of 10
Read Review: http://www.thewrap.com/obvious-child-review-jenny-slate-abortion-comedy/
Original Score: 9 out of 10
Read Review: http://www.thewrap.com/obvious-child-review-jenny-slate-abortion-comedy/
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated This Common Secret in Books
Sep 6, 2017
An eye-opening first-hand account of being an abortion doctor
Let me begin by saying I am a feminist. I am pro-choice. This was a difficult read because it talks about the lengths people will go to infringe on the rights of women like me to make that choice. Dr. Wicklund goes into detail about the dangers she personally has faced as an abortion provider – from stalking, to assault, to arson and death threats. The murders of Dr. Hill and Dr. Britton are mentioned, and the attempted murder of Dr. Tiller. (An attempt on Dr. Tiller’s life was successful two years after the publication of the book.) She resorted to wildly varying routines, different methods of transportation, elaborate disguises, as well as hiring private security guards, none of it really alleviating her fear that she could be next.
Running throughout the entire book is Dr. Wicklund’s concern for her patients. She is a dedicated, compassionate woman who wants nothing but the best for the women in her care. In many cases, that’s not actually abortion. One of the things that makes her an excellent doctor is ferreting out what is really in her patients’ best interests.
The book is mercifully short; I have no doubt she had many more stories she could have told, but the topic is brutal and hard to read, and keeping it concise and on-message was well done. I still had to set it down and play some mindless video games when I was done, as it was a little overwhelming.
This Common Secret also touches on why people keep it a secret. Why people don’t talk about their abortion. And why people should. If more people realize that the women that get abortions are your neighbor, your sister, your grandmother – not just that “whore that slept around” – although she, too, deserves an abortion if that is the right choice for her. Maybe they would rethink their opposition to it.
I’m honestly probably not giving this book justice – it’s a decade old, but could have been written yesterday. And I am infuriated by anti-choice assholes.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Running throughout the entire book is Dr. Wicklund’s concern for her patients. She is a dedicated, compassionate woman who wants nothing but the best for the women in her care. In many cases, that’s not actually abortion. One of the things that makes her an excellent doctor is ferreting out what is really in her patients’ best interests.
The book is mercifully short; I have no doubt she had many more stories she could have told, but the topic is brutal and hard to read, and keeping it concise and on-message was well done. I still had to set it down and play some mindless video games when I was done, as it was a little overwhelming.
This Common Secret also touches on why people keep it a secret. Why people don’t talk about their abortion. And why people should. If more people realize that the women that get abortions are your neighbor, your sister, your grandmother – not just that “whore that slept around” – although she, too, deserves an abortion if that is the right choice for her. Maybe they would rethink their opposition to it.
I’m honestly probably not giving this book justice – it’s a decade old, but could have been written yesterday. And I am infuriated by anti-choice assholes.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Suswatibasu (1701 KP) rated The Mothers: A Novel in Books
Mar 8, 2018
Tedious love triangle
After reading great reviews about this book, I was mildly disappointed given that much of this book surrounds two women having a relationship with the same man, and less so about mothers.
The main character, Nadia is fatally flawed; she's seen as slightly erratic and irresponsible having had a relationship with the pastor's son and having had an abortion at the age of 17. However, it also focuses on the fact that she is traumatised after her mother's sudden and horrific death, and the man she had a relationship with was far older and helped pay for her abortion - so she should be seen less at fault than suggested.
At the same time, her church-going best friend Aubrey is the total opposite, and yet she ends up almost in the same situation as Nadia. The three end up in a love triangle, and that's where I lose interest in this book. It begins with a great concept but loses steam.
The main character, Nadia is fatally flawed; she's seen as slightly erratic and irresponsible having had a relationship with the pastor's son and having had an abortion at the age of 17. However, it also focuses on the fact that she is traumatised after her mother's sudden and horrific death, and the man she had a relationship with was far older and helped pay for her abortion - so she should be seen less at fault than suggested.
At the same time, her church-going best friend Aubrey is the total opposite, and yet she ends up almost in the same situation as Nadia. The three end up in a love triangle, and that's where I lose interest in this book. It begins with a great concept but loses steam.
Claire Danes recommended Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway in Books (curated)
Ari Augustine (10 KP) rated We Shed Our Skin Like Dynamite in Books
May 4, 2020
The prose of WE SHED OUR SKIN LIKE DYNAMITE is beautiful, thoughtful, and a complicated mess of life.
I fully expected the usual confessional poetry and was pleasantly surprised by the depth of many poems, which touch on subjects such as abortion, sex, and substance abuse. I found the word play interesting and alluring, while occasionally surpassing boundaries I wasn't aware existed. Though it's not my *favorite* collection, it's certainly a cerebral and fluid one, offering up a depth of experience difficult to find in these shallow modern poetic waters.
I fully expected the usual confessional poetry and was pleasantly surprised by the depth of many poems, which touch on subjects such as abortion, sex, and substance abuse. I found the word play interesting and alluring, while occasionally surpassing boundaries I wasn't aware existed. Though it's not my *favorite* collection, it's certainly a cerebral and fluid one, offering up a depth of experience difficult to find in these shallow modern poetic waters.
ClareR (5566 KP) rated A Spark Of Light in Books
Feb 21, 2019
A thought-provoking, emotional novel
My first Jodi Picoult book, and what a way to start. This has had some extreme reviews - people who really enjoyed it, and others who hated it and considered it to be too 'preachy'. I didn't feel that way about it. I felt that it gave a measured representation to all sides of abortion: pro-choice and anti-abortion/ pro-life.
It showed that those who have abortions don't see it as a lifestyle choice, but as a last resort. That those who are pro-life believe that they are fighting for what they strongly believe in. And both of those views are valid. There will always be people who will not have abortions for religious reasons, and there will be those who have abortions because they believe it's the only option open to them - and this is well described in this book.
We also see the desperation of fathers who will do anything to protect their daughters - whether it's taking hostages in an abortion clinic, or trying to talk that same man down.
This book hasn't changed my stance on the subject, but I can see that both sides of the story have people who believe that they are right in what they do (even if that means killing people to save a life not yet begun) and Picoult represents them both well. The Authors Note at the end of the book is really interesting as well, and I would urge the reader to read this part. It goes in to her research, the people she talked to: she spoke to a lot of people, watched abortions and made sure that she spoke to those who represented all sides of the story.
I can see why Jodi Picoult has so many fans, her writing is so good - this is well worth reading and is very thought provoking.
Many thanks to Smashbomb for providing me with a copy of this book in their giveaway competition. It was a prize well worth winning!!
It showed that those who have abortions don't see it as a lifestyle choice, but as a last resort. That those who are pro-life believe that they are fighting for what they strongly believe in. And both of those views are valid. There will always be people who will not have abortions for religious reasons, and there will be those who have abortions because they believe it's the only option open to them - and this is well described in this book.
We also see the desperation of fathers who will do anything to protect their daughters - whether it's taking hostages in an abortion clinic, or trying to talk that same man down.
This book hasn't changed my stance on the subject, but I can see that both sides of the story have people who believe that they are right in what they do (even if that means killing people to save a life not yet begun) and Picoult represents them both well. The Authors Note at the end of the book is really interesting as well, and I would urge the reader to read this part. It goes in to her research, the people she talked to: she spoke to a lot of people, watched abortions and made sure that she spoke to those who represented all sides of the story.
I can see why Jodi Picoult has so many fans, her writing is so good - this is well worth reading and is very thought provoking.
Many thanks to Smashbomb for providing me with a copy of this book in their giveaway competition. It was a prize well worth winning!!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Roe v. Wade (2021) in Movies
Mar 24, 2021
Tough subject matter taken head on (1 more)
'Old-pros' Voight, Davi and Guttenberg turn up
The script is clunky and unconvincing (1 more)
Some of the supporting acting roles are ropey
A controversial look at the Supreme Court legalisation of abortion in 1973
Roe v Wade was a controversial vote by the US Supreme Court in 1973 over whether abortion should be legalized across the US, following its earlier legalization in New York state.
Following an early personal tragedy, Dr. Bernard Nathanson (Nick Loeb) is a leading abortion advocate, making a tidy living by performing abortions in New York. Together with writer and journalist Larry Lader (Jamie Kennedy) the pair lobby for the "Right to Choose": to legalize abortion across the country. They 'recruit' Norma McCorvey (Summer Joy Campbell), under the pseudonym of Jane Roe, to headline their case.
Against them are the 'Pro-Life' lobby headed by Dr. Mildred Jefferson (Stacey Nash) with Henry Wade (James DuMont), the district attorney for Dallas County, being the opposing plaintiff.
Positives:
- It's a brave team that put a movie together about such an emotionally charged subject, and Nick Loeb and crew should be congratulated for being brave enough to do so.
- As in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", this was subject matter from the era from the US 1960/1970's that I was completely unaware of, so I didn't know where the movie might go (no spoilers here).
- The movie plays its cards pretty close to its chest for most of the running time as regards whose 'side' it is on: pro-Life or pro-Choice. You see each team working their own corner, and the facts for and against are provided to the viewer (which Nick Loeb asserts have been thoroughly fact checked).
- The film comes to life most in some of the legal debates between Professor Robert Byrn (Joey Lawrence) and his students. These were the scenes which I enjoyed most, and Lawrence delivers one of the better acting performances in the movie.
- There's fun in seeing a lot of 'old pros' appearing in cameos as the supreme court judges: Jon Voight ("Mission Impossible"); Bond villain Robert Davi ("Licence to Kill"); Corbin Bernsen ("LA Law") and Steve Guttenberg ("3 Men and a Baby").
Negatives:
- There's no polite way to say this, but as a relatively low-budget movie, some of the supporting performances are on the decidedly ropy side.
- I wanted to see more of the legal debate between the members of the Supreme court.... but I suspect the shooting time available with these 'big name' actors was limited. That's a shame.
- This is not a "Trial of the Chicago 7", and the script is NOT by Aaron Sorkin. It generally lacks polish. And there is way too much "Oh, hello <<Insert full title and name of character here>>" which is distractingly unnatural (just use sub-titles!).
- Those familiar with my blog will know of my UTTER HATRED of voiceovers in movies! This is deployed throughout (by Nick Loeb) and irritated me enormously. More "Show".... less "Tell"!
- The movie doesn't know when to quit. There is a natural and dramatic "end point" to the story. But the movie tacks on multiple 'epilogue' scenes. Some of these are interesting and informative, showing broadcasts of the 'real-life' participants. Others are superfluous, and lessen the overall impact of the message. IMHO, it would have been better to end at the natural end-point of the story, then 'do a "Sully"' by dropping the real life photos and interviews as insets into the end-titles.
I'll sometimes put 'warnings' for sensitive viewers into my reviews. As the subject matter is abortion, then this may naturally self-deselect certain viewers. But to be clear, the movie does 'go there' in two short, almost subliminal, scenes that will almost certainly upset any parents that have been through any form of pre-natal loss. Watcher beware.
(For my full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/03/24/roe-v-wade-theres-a-fortune-in-abortion/. Thanks.)
Following an early personal tragedy, Dr. Bernard Nathanson (Nick Loeb) is a leading abortion advocate, making a tidy living by performing abortions in New York. Together with writer and journalist Larry Lader (Jamie Kennedy) the pair lobby for the "Right to Choose": to legalize abortion across the country. They 'recruit' Norma McCorvey (Summer Joy Campbell), under the pseudonym of Jane Roe, to headline their case.
Against them are the 'Pro-Life' lobby headed by Dr. Mildred Jefferson (Stacey Nash) with Henry Wade (James DuMont), the district attorney for Dallas County, being the opposing plaintiff.
Positives:
- It's a brave team that put a movie together about such an emotionally charged subject, and Nick Loeb and crew should be congratulated for being brave enough to do so.
- As in "The Trial of the Chicago 7", this was subject matter from the era from the US 1960/1970's that I was completely unaware of, so I didn't know where the movie might go (no spoilers here).
- The movie plays its cards pretty close to its chest for most of the running time as regards whose 'side' it is on: pro-Life or pro-Choice. You see each team working their own corner, and the facts for and against are provided to the viewer (which Nick Loeb asserts have been thoroughly fact checked).
- The film comes to life most in some of the legal debates between Professor Robert Byrn (Joey Lawrence) and his students. These were the scenes which I enjoyed most, and Lawrence delivers one of the better acting performances in the movie.
- There's fun in seeing a lot of 'old pros' appearing in cameos as the supreme court judges: Jon Voight ("Mission Impossible"); Bond villain Robert Davi ("Licence to Kill"); Corbin Bernsen ("LA Law") and Steve Guttenberg ("3 Men and a Baby").
Negatives:
- There's no polite way to say this, but as a relatively low-budget movie, some of the supporting performances are on the decidedly ropy side.
- I wanted to see more of the legal debate between the members of the Supreme court.... but I suspect the shooting time available with these 'big name' actors was limited. That's a shame.
- This is not a "Trial of the Chicago 7", and the script is NOT by Aaron Sorkin. It generally lacks polish. And there is way too much "Oh, hello <<Insert full title and name of character here>>" which is distractingly unnatural (just use sub-titles!).
- Those familiar with my blog will know of my UTTER HATRED of voiceovers in movies! This is deployed throughout (by Nick Loeb) and irritated me enormously. More "Show".... less "Tell"!
- The movie doesn't know when to quit. There is a natural and dramatic "end point" to the story. But the movie tacks on multiple 'epilogue' scenes. Some of these are interesting and informative, showing broadcasts of the 'real-life' participants. Others are superfluous, and lessen the overall impact of the message. IMHO, it would have been better to end at the natural end-point of the story, then 'do a "Sully"' by dropping the real life photos and interviews as insets into the end-titles.
I'll sometimes put 'warnings' for sensitive viewers into my reviews. As the subject matter is abortion, then this may naturally self-deselect certain viewers. But to be clear, the movie does 'go there' in two short, almost subliminal, scenes that will almost certainly upset any parents that have been through any form of pre-natal loss. Watcher beware.
(For my full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/03/24/roe-v-wade-theres-a-fortune-in-abortion/. Thanks.)
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Red Clocks in Books
Jul 31, 2018
Red Clocks first caught my attention because it's set in a small fishing town in Oregon, my home state. After that, learning that it's a dystopia where abortion and in vitro fertilization have both been banned outright meant I HAD to read it. Of course, I got it from the library some weeks ago and had so many other books to read that I didn't get to it until the day it was due back to the library! Luckily, I read fast!
I think the cover description oversells the book a little. I wouldn't call Gin's trial "frenzied" nor the drama exactly "riveting" but it did keep my attention throughout the book. I really enjoyed the relationships between the characters, and the point that none of them really know what is going on in each other's personal lives. One moment I particularly liked is slightly spoilery, but I loved how Ro was able to put her personal feelings aside to help Mattie, her student. That was really, really hard for her, but she recognized how much damage it would do to Mattie to not help her.
I think I found Gin the most interesting - given all the reading I've been doing lately about autism, her entire personality screams autism to me, but she was never labeled as autistic. So I'm marking her as a possibly autistic character. (I'd love if any of my autistic readers could weigh in on that, if you've read the book!) Between preferring to live in the woods with animals and NOT around people, specifically, and the way she reacts to the textures and smells in the jail when she's arrested (shoving the bleach-scented blankets as far away in the cell as possible, and refusing to eat the food), and how she stumbles over her answers in the courtroom when she's interrogated - it seems likely.
My only actual complaint about this book had nothing to do with the writing or plot! But it refers to the ghost pepper as "the hottest pepper known to man" which the Carolina Reaper growing in my backyard would have an issue with!
Other than that very minor quibble, I thought this dystopia was pretty good. I'm always interested in Reproductive Rights-related dystopias. This isn't as good as The Handmaid's Tale, but it's MILES better than Future Home of the Living God. It's good at showing the lengths women will go to, to ensure their own reproductive freedom. Outlawing abortion doesn't eliminate abortion. It just makes it less safe.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
I think the cover description oversells the book a little. I wouldn't call Gin's trial "frenzied" nor the drama exactly "riveting" but it did keep my attention throughout the book. I really enjoyed the relationships between the characters, and the point that none of them really know what is going on in each other's personal lives. One moment I particularly liked is slightly spoilery, but I loved how Ro was able to put her personal feelings aside to help Mattie, her student. That was really, really hard for her, but she recognized how much damage it would do to Mattie to not help her.
I think I found Gin the most interesting - given all the reading I've been doing lately about autism, her entire personality screams autism to me, but she was never labeled as autistic. So I'm marking her as a possibly autistic character. (I'd love if any of my autistic readers could weigh in on that, if you've read the book!) Between preferring to live in the woods with animals and NOT around people, specifically, and the way she reacts to the textures and smells in the jail when she's arrested (shoving the bleach-scented blankets as far away in the cell as possible, and refusing to eat the food), and how she stumbles over her answers in the courtroom when she's interrogated - it seems likely.
My only actual complaint about this book had nothing to do with the writing or plot! But it refers to the ghost pepper as "the hottest pepper known to man" which the Carolina Reaper growing in my backyard would have an issue with!
Other than that very minor quibble, I thought this dystopia was pretty good. I'm always interested in Reproductive Rights-related dystopias. This isn't as good as The Handmaid's Tale, but it's MILES better than Future Home of the Living God. It's good at showing the lengths women will go to, to ensure their own reproductive freedom. Outlawing abortion doesn't eliminate abortion. It just makes it less safe.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com