Shannon Hale and Austenland

 

On February 18, 2012, I attended a book signing by Shannon Hale, of the Princess Academy, Honorary Newbery fame.  A book I honestly haven't read.  On this day the only book I had read of hers was The Actor and the Housewife.  The book is about a Mormon housewife who becomes friends with her favorite  movie actor.  I found the book at Costco, started reading it on the spot, and knew I was doomed to buy it and bring it home with me.  The book is kinda controversial due to the subject mater, one of the reasons I had to finish the story, and you either love it or hate.  Personally I enjoyed the read.

Shannon was promoting her newest book, Midnight in Austenland, the second book in her Austenland series.  The first book is going to be a movie, currently in post-production, and according to its IMDb website, it is slated for a December 4, 2012 release.  The movie date is subject to change and it may be a limited release.  I was surprised to find that Keri Russell, of Felicity and August Rush fame, is staring in the movie.  Jennifer Coolidge and Jane Seymour are co-starring.  You can find more information about the movie here.    

Mrs. Hale was delightful and wonderfully down to Earth.  She shared writing tips, which I soaked up, and related what it was like having a book turn into a movie.

This whole event got me thinking: What is the future of book signings?  With Borders closing, I hope Barnes & Noble will thrive.  I downloaded both Austenland books to my Kindle, and if more people continue to do this, the book industry will continue to change.   You can't go and get an ebook signed.  And is it wise to get a Kindle autographed in a Barnes and Nobel?  Don't get me wrong, I still love good old fashioned hard covers, and I hope they wont go away.  After all, You can still buy CD's even with the widespread popularity of the iPod.

   

Austenland is a Jane Austen fan girls dream. It's 19th century larping in its grandest form.  This fictional place, though I wish it was real, is a manor filled with paid actors, maids, and servants.  You leave the 21 century behind for Regency England, complete with authentic costumes, meals, party games, and other period endeavors.  And you may find romance along the way, the problem is, is it real?  Is the man, who is paying you attention, scripted or genuine?  And what of the other players?  What and who can you trust?  That's the main issue in both books.

The first was a cute romance, and as lead characters go I prefer the heroine, Jane Hayes, in the first book.  The plot got a little silly in the love story, but it was a fun, and I can't wait to see the movie adaptation.

The second book was more engrossing, because there is a murder/ghost story that those in Austenland are playing through, though, like the first book, you don't know what is real and not real.  And Charlotte Kinder must sort through the fact from the fiction.  I was annoyed with Charlotte, honestly, with her thought process, though I enjoyed the cast of characters in the second book more then the first.  And the second book, Midnight in Austenland, was more laugh out loud funny.  It is a little more Adult then the first, only because there are marriage like things mentioned in accordance to Charlotte's failed marriage.       

          (Public Domain.  Source information can be found here.)

When reading the two books, it was fun trying to imagine myself in Austenland.  (Come on!  A girl can dream!)  Though I don't think I'd like a man pretending to dote on me.  The whole "is his admiration real or not?" would get annoying fast.  

But in Austenland you're in 1816, and as an American that is a very interesting time period in history, and role-playing as an American in England would be fascinating and devilishly fun.

America was in the throws of the Second Great Awaking, which lasted roughly between 1800-1840, so religion was a heavy topic on many minds.  The American Revolution ended 33 years before 1816.  The French Revolution was still fresh on everyone's minds.  James Madison, father of the Constitution, was President.  And the War of 1812, another war against the British, had just ended, lasting between 1812-1815.  William Wilberforce, in Britain, led to the end of the Slave Trade in 1807, though slavery was thriving in America during that time.  The Brits would have that on me in 1816, because I'm 100% Yankee.  The Regency was an interesting period in History.

And for the record, I'd rather a Gilbert Blythe over a Mr. Darcy any day!  Should I admit that?

Hope you had a good day,

Sarah         

Edit:  I should note that I probably shouldn't claim I'm 100% Yankee, in that I'm still doing my genealogical research, and I have a lot of lost ancestors who seem to want to remain lost.  Only, I relate to my ancestors in the North.  (No offense, southern ancestors.) 

My Review of The Hunger Games

(Day 19 of the 365 day photo challenge) 

A little over a week ago I finished the Hunger Games Trilogy.  It took me 9 days to do it, and was fully consumed the whole time.  I've known about the book series for a couple years, and was about to purchase it when a friend said she didn't like the last book, and that the series would have been better without it.  This discouraged me.  Who wants to read a book and feel at the end that it was a waste of time?  Books are a bigger commitment then a movie.

So the final verdit?  I loved it.  Of course I had to get past the theme of the book, kids killing other kids, and the Mutts, I hate the Mutts, but it was interesting.  And even now I can't get the characters out of my head.  Reading the last book I can see why so many people didn't like it.  The ending isn't a fantasy ending, it's a realistic ending, and I appreciate it.    

Through the process of reading these books two things came to mind:  The Uglies book series by Scott Westerfeld and the Romans.  The first is a series of four books, another look at a post apocalyptic America, only a completely different take.  Think of the Capital in The Hunger Games on steroids.  These books are quite exciting; another page turner.  I don't want to give anything away. 

And the Romans.  Roman history is both interesting and depressing at the same time.  Suzanne Collins, who wrote the Hunger Games, has mentioned the Gladiators, which wasn't the first thing that came to my mind, but I can see it.  Men sent to their deaths as a form of entertainment.  What did come to mind was something I learned about in a college theater civilization class.  There was another form of entertainment Romans used slaves for. Slaves were used as actors in stage shows, and if there was a death scene, there was a literal death scene where one slave was expected to kill the other on stage.  And I learned that off the coast the Romans would fill two battle ship with slaves, and watch them battle each other, once again, to the death.  It's been many years since I've taken this class, and I would love to find my course book, but these two facts have stayed with me.

Would I recommend the Hunger Games?  I don't know, because there is such mixed reaction to what happened to some of the characters in the end.  Personally I'm glad I took the plunge and gave the books a chance, and they will go down as one of my favorite series of all time.

Happy Reading!

Sarah