Monday, Monday

[katydidinoz]

• Read Girl with a Dragon Tattoo. Found it immensely disturbing, and critically compelling. K and I were putting up a bookshelf, and I was holding the shelf with one hand and the book with the other. Incidentally, this annoyed K to a certain degree.

Like I said, horribly, almost vindictively compelling, but it sort of reminded me why I shy away from

Comments

[sauced_again]

Are there any really good crime novels where the crime isn't horrific serial murder?

I'm a fan of Kathy Reichs, although you should avoid the one that starts with a plane crash if you don't want horrifying images stuck in your head. Most of the other crime writers I've read, though, I find irritating: Mary Sue characters, bad first person, piling on atrocities, and the like.

[katydidinoz]

My Mum likes Kathy Reichs as well, but she (Mom) says she (KR) has gone downhill in her last couple of books.

I read a Lee Childs once - and the crime was forgery. It was brilliant (and not insomnia-inducing). So bonus points all around!

[aphephobia]

I loved Christopher Rice's Light Before Dawn (I think that was the title) because it was twisty and compelling and awesome and not disturbingly graphic in terms of what's mentioned.

But you do have murder-- as well as drug production, child prostitution and a whole host of other fucked up issues, but I prefer his writing to his mother's.

(And I loved GWtDT. Interestingly enough, my mother has the issue you had with it about Patricia Cornwell's books.)

[katydidinoz]

I thought GWtDT was really good - and really well done - but as all the pieces came out, I just got to the point where I was all 'come on already!'. It definitely got to the point where enough was enough, and yes, I got the point, it was bad, they were bad, everything was bad, and is there any point in living?

[tezmillertm]

Had to ask Matriarch why people were saying how the ANZACS "fought for our freedom". Was Australia ever under attack? Was told that Darwin was bombed, and the Kakoda Trail was something about fighting in Papua New Guinea so the war wouldn't come to Oz. So had Australia not participated in the war, "we could've been speaking Japanese".

Speaking Japanese wouldn't have been so bad. I might've actually seemed cultured ;-)

So ANZAC Day isn't worth celebrating for me, either. But I'm anti-war.

[narrelle]

Don't worry, some of us Australians find ANZAC Day a bit problematic as well. We mark Rememberance Day too, but ANZAC Day was always about commemorating the loss of Australian and New Zealand soldiers in the Great War, with particular reference to the horrific slaughterhouse that was Gallipoli. When I was a kid, it was all about reflecting on the horror and loss of war, honouring the dead and the sacrifices made while marking that war was a mad and terrible thing

Canadian Jen says

[anonymous]

The conversation about a memorial for a battle that ended with massive casualties is interesting. We take time to remember Vimy Ridge, Paschendaele, Dieppe, and even the Battle of the Somme, which was worse than Vimy because the battle plan stunk. These days are in addition to Remembrance Day. I am always fascinated by other countries' memorials, especially since Australia and Canada were both part of the Dominion.

For Vimy Ridge and Dieppe in particular, the remembrance is about national identity as much as the actual battle. In the Great War we still had those same strong ties to Britain and Vimy Ridge is inextricably linked with our national identity - there was an innovative Canadian battle plan, it was the first time the Canadian regiments fought together, and the hill was taken. It's a point of pride, but it's about much more than the war. It's a day for sadness, gratitude, and reflection. As you said, a very personal question about remembrance.