Don’t let the titles fool you, most of these books deal with some heavy topics such as drug addiction, weight, death etc… Just because they are labeled “chic lit” does not mean that they are full of fluff and hearts. Sure their endings tend to be more of a feel good nature but the journey the characters take (not to mention the character development) are what makes these books so compelling. The authors are doing their job when the characters and their stories stick with you years after having read the books.

Woman’s Fiction

Marian Keyes – Rachel’s Holiday

Marian Keyes – Anybody Out There

Jennifer Weiner – Good in Bed

Jane Green – Jemima J

Emily Griffin – Something Blue

Judy Blume – Summer Sisters

Kate Jacobs – The Friday Night Knitting Cub

Jacqueline Susann – Valley of the Dolls

VC Andrews – Petals on the Wind

Ariella Papa – Up & Out

Favourite Series

Charlaine Harris - Sookie Stackhouse Series

Fiction – Other

JD Salinger – Catcher in the Rye (Cliche? Yeah sure, but there’s a reason for that, it’s a great book!)

Shakespeare – King Lear

Jean- Paul Sartre – No Exit (Huis Clos) (read both the French and English of this)

Non-Fiction

Anthony Bourdain – Kitchen Confidential (Picture this: Home at 3am from being out with friends and I see Evan Solomon  interviewing this surly guy about his food book on CBC Newsworld. Somehow I managed to remember the name and bought the book. It has opened doors to a whole new world for me. That doesn’t happen very often)

Phoebe Damrosch – Service Included

Michael Ruhlman – The Making of a Chef

Daphne Bramham – The Secret Lives of Saints

Naomi Wolf -  The Beauty Myth

]]> http://popoffculture.com/book-lists/feed/ 0 http://popoffculture.com/my-love-of-books/ http://popoffculture.com/my-love-of-books/#comments Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:19:13 +0000 admin http://popoffculture.com/?p=706 I’ve been meaning to write about this for about a week and just never got around to it. So let’s see if my thoughts are coherent and well formed!

There’s been some press lately about The Baby-sitter’s Club because Ann M. Martin wrote a prequel to it. I have to say I’m tempted to get my hands on it, even if the intended audience is tween girls. I grew up with The Baby-sitter’s Club (TBC from now on). I may not have finished reading the series but I read a lot of those books. Same goes for all of the Sweet Valley Series, which has been getting press lately too because finally!! Francine Pascal’s book about where they are now is coming out this year.

Francine Pascal’s new adult novel, Sweet Valley Confidential, which follows the later-in-life travails of the twin protagonists from the author’s bestselling 1980 YA series, Jessica and Elizabeth Wakefield

I am ecstatic over this news as I have heard about this book for at least a year or two now.

Those books were my childhood, pre-teen and early teen years. They mean a lot to me. Hearing about them took me back. It’s like when I detect a certain amount of spring in the air, it takes me back to a certain time in my life. Anyways, back to the books….

Hearing about them took me back to those pre-teen years. I look on them with fondness because at that time I didn’t have any real responsibilities, I didn’t think and worry about my loved ones’ health and our eventual demise (dark stuff eh? Welcome to my brain circa 2010). I had to go to school, deal with 12yr old girls acting like bitches and I would read and do other things. It’s strange that I look at those times fondly because at the time, I hated them. I had trouble sleeping because I worried about things so much (ok this hasn’t really changed about me, it’s a wonder that I don’t have health issues related to the amount of worrying I do, oh wait, actually I do). I didn’t really like life that much back then because I hated dealing with the girls in school. Bitchy, catty, gossipy etc.. and I was one of them too. There was all this pressure about who is friends with whom and who said what about whom. blah blah blah. Psycho drama you know?

But Sweet Valley and TBC? They took that all away. It was like being in paradise in my mind. My mind had a break from its daily life and my on-going growing list of worries. It was like taking a vacation because I was now in someone else’s mind and as a result my mind got a break. It was glorious.

I still seek refuge in books, lately I’ve been doing this a lot more than in recent years. When I was in University and grad school I didn’t get to read as a form of escaping very much but at the same time I didn’t need it. Life was pretty good then, in terms of not having many responsibilities or thinking about “grown up” issues.

People like to laugh at me and be shocked over my choice of books, since I’m so politically-minded and have a love of academia. See, I tread mainly in the chic lit areas with a tendency to read some biographies and sociological or food related books. I tell them it’s because in University it took my mind off of things but that’s not the complete truth. The complete truth is that not only do I seriously enjoy these books but it allows me to escape. I can get to know some other characters, and deal with their life and its associated problems. It takes me away from my own problems and responsibilities. It helps my mind and body to relax and trust me that is not an easy thing for me to do (it’s entirely possible that if I were to take a meditation course, that my brain would fight it).

I actually have a pile of new books to read and haven’t really touched them because I go to the library constantly. Having a new book to read is an obsession of mine, I always have to have a few in the wings ready to go. I read on average 2 books a week and would probably read more if I a) didn’t watch television at night and b)would allow myself to relax during the day.

So while I may wish to go back to Sweet Valley High or go hang out in Claudia’s bedroom, I have new books to read and new places to escape to. With that in mind, yes I will be buying that TBC book and the new Sweet Valley one and will be relishing every moment, every page and every word in them!

So now he’s at the vet and we wait for them to do the xrays and to find out what’s going on with him. I mean they could find nothing or well…something.

It just all sucks. A.Lot.

You know you’re reading too much True Blood when…:

1) You are out in public and smell other people’s perfumes, scents etc… and call it tracking
2) It’s a dark, dreary day and you say to your dog “ooh the vampires would be out early today”
3) You know you’re a true blood fan when you are “doing it” with your bf and you call him ERIC!
4) You now think that shifters are normal
5) Your hatred for Debbie Pelt feels real
6) You think you see actual bottles of True Blood at the grocery store
7) You expect Vin Diesel to turn into a tiger
8) You will sit in a cold bath because you just can’t stop reading
9) You googled Bon Temps, Louisiana to see if it was a real place
10) You get excited over casting news for the TV show

Here goes nothing!
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
An example, last year before Harper prorogued gov’t the first time, he made a big fuss that the leaders from the other parties did not have a Canadian flag behind them during a press conference (he was wrong, it was there).
A current talking point for CRAPpers is that you do not support the troops if you want an investigation into the Afghan detainee scandal.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society… It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff. - Stephen Harper
He has also banned certain words from being used in the Foreign Affairs dept. Examples include: child soldier,
human security, international humanitarian law.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
He’s known to try and make the other parties fight each other in order to prevail. If you watch Question Period everyone is their enemy. He’s big on fighting other countries and at using fear to remain in power. Last year, he used the concept of “do you want separatists running this country?” when talk of a coalition was on the table. He turned ROC against Quebec.

4. Supremacy of the Military
I believe he has put more money towards the military than any other (recent) PM. He wanted us to fight in Iraq just because the US was. Case in point: “I don’t know all the facts o-n Iraq, but I think we should work closely with the Americans.” Harper

5. Rampant Sexism
This is harder to prove BUT he does use women as tokens. He is against abortion and has cut funding to women’s programs. He has called woman’s rights groups “left wing fringe groups”. He is against a National ChildCare program. I believe REAL women also are a group he listens to. Scary.

6. Controlled Mass Media
Rarely gives interviews to the media. During press conferences only allows certain questions asked. Controls what the press can ask him during Q/A (if he even does them). Speaks more on the US news channels than he does to Canadian ones.

7. Obsession with National Security
Definitely uses fear to keep people in line. The airport body scanners were ordered before this current Xmas day attempted attack. He claims there have been ‘terrorist talk’ as of late but it’s hard to tell if it’s true or not. It could just be their way of making it look like they are working.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
He doesn’t really do this but he has been quoted (I can’t find the quote) saying something about God is the only to judge him. He is also against same sex marriage and abortion.

9. Corporate Power is Protected
Tax cuts for his buddies while the economy tanks and we need big corporations to pay more taxes to help us. He supports big business.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed
He would love nothing more than to get rid of unions so that his buddies can screw over their employees.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Let us see, he cut funding to the arts and then recently decided to sing some Beatles song at a NAC gala. He claims that ordinary people don’t care about the arts and yet his wife is an Honourary Gala Chair for the NAC. Just recently one of his cabinet minister, Tony Clement had this to say about intellectuals:

“I know it’s a big issue with the Ottawa media elite and some of the elites in our country, but I got to tell you if reaction in my constituency is any indication, I’ve had maybe three dozen emails,” he said…”It may not be what the chattering classes want, but we’re not here to govern on behalf of the chattering classes,” he said.

Last but not least, the Conservatives like to pretend that Dion and Ignatieff are out of touch with Canadians because they are academics. That’s one of their fall back tools. They see it as, how can an academic understand Canadians? We’re real Canadians, we understand the people because we go to Tim Horton’s. So they play up academia as a bad thing in order to look better. If I’m not mistaken, the Cons have the least amount MPs who have graduated from University/College.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Oh yes, lots of crime bills were going to be passed but have now died on the table due to the prorogation. The Cons like to say that they are tough on crime, unlike those “dirty socialists”. But the fact is, their bills do nothing and are more talk. When they do have something in it, it’s about taking away the freedom of the normal citizen who has a joint on them, instead of getting to the root of the problem.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Senate Reform… where did that go Stevie? Instead he appoints his friends to the open Senate positions because he knows they will do what he says. The same works for who he puts into Cabinet (although his picking are slim!)

14. Fraudulent Elections
He has not done this… yet. But he has broken his own election law in order to call an election when he wanted it, claiming that the other parties wouldn’t work with him (not true, no one but him wanted an election in fall 2008).

So there you have it. His actions/words fit the characteristics, maybe not to a T but they fit nonetheless.

First let’s begin with the list of reasons Stevie Harper has chosen to prorogue our parliament again. This list is by no means definitive as every day the Cons or MSM come up with new reasons. Who knows if these reasons are legit or not but it’s what is being floated around:

1) So he can stack the senate with CRAP supporters once the current Lib appointed senators retire

2) To run from the Afghan detainee scandal

3) According to him: to help the economy (not sure how them not working and being paid helps the economy)

4) According to him: so that he doesn’t have to deal with the peskiness of being accountable and working with other parties

5)To focus on the budget

6) So that his government doesn’t face any heat during the Olympics (like a true Dictator!)

Here’s my opinion:

He thought he could get away with this but he was wrong. He does want to run from the Afghan detainee issue because they did screw this one up and the Opposition was not going to let him get away with it this time. He also wants to start selling this upcoming budget, which I am sure will have plenty of poison pills. At which point, the House could fall and we’d have an election, just as he wants (or should he?).

He realizes that whoever causes an election this spring will take the fall for it from the voters. He could be right on this or he could be wrong, I think it will depend on the mood of the country (currently angry at him) and how bad this budget is.

Let’s not forget the last reason: to look good during the Olympics. Didn’t the Chinese restrict the press during their Olympics? Aren’t the Chinese a communist country? Isn’t proroguing a democratically elected parliament during the Olympics in order to run and hide from an Afghan detainee scandal, similar to what the Chinese did?  Just wondering. Either way, it points to him being very controlling and in my opinion, acting like a dictator.

Most importantly he does want to stack the senate with his CRAPpers because that way he can pass WHATEVER HE WANTS. Scary, very scary.

This quote alone should scare any sane Canadian who has more than 1/2 a brain cell:

In an interview on BNN yesterday, the Prime Minister suggested that prorogation gives him the opportunity to do the serious business of the nation without the distractions of democracy – Commons committees and having to answer those pesky questions from opposition MPs in Question Period.

Oh wow, I’m so sorry Harper, that as an elected MP and leader of the Cons (i.e.PM), you must deal with accountability and transparency. May I remind you, that you have campaigned on those 2 characteristics in the past 2 elections (2005/2006 and 2008, in case you need a reminder Stevie). I am so sorry that you feel our democracy and parliament distracts you from getting work done. If that is the case why you are an MP? Or worse, PM? If you can’t handle the job, get out.

Again Stevie, I’d like to bring up some quotes from your past, in case you have forgotten what your job and our democracy is all about:

If you want to be a government in a minority Parliament, you have to work with other people.
Stephen Harper

It’s the government’s obligation to look really to the third parties to get the support to govern.
Stephen Harper

And I think the real problem that we’re facing already is that the government doesn’t accept that it got a minority.
Stephen Harper

Maybe you should remember those quotes Mr.Harper. Maybe it will help you to govern as an elected official. Need I remind you, that as a Canadian citizen, I am one of your employers, and most of us are not happy that you have chosen to prorogue government yet again.

I can only hope that this leads to your downfall. Make no mistake, the day you are no longer PM I will do a dance like no other in the streets of this country, for it will mark the return of our country returning to its progressive roots and no longer being regressive and seen negatively across the world.

First issue: the detainee issue

It seems to me that we need more information on this before we can truly understand what happened. With that bipartisan statement said 2 things make me believe Colvin’s testimony.

1) He wouldn’t blow the whistle on this if he didn’t have proof nor would he blow the whistle on this if he were wrong.

2) The Cons must have something to hide if they refuse an inquiry and are tarnishing Colvin’s image (a very CRAP thing to do).

Second issue: NS MP who called unemployed people “lazy bastards”

Who is he to generalize that? I’m sure there are SOME unemployed people who are ‘lazy bastards’ but I am sure that most want to work and they want to work at a job that is a challenge to them and at a job where they can afford to live off of the money they make. What a generalization to make!

I cannot believe that an MP would say this, and in his own province! This is precisely why Sleazy Stevie muzzles his MPs.

Third issue: Harper and freedom of speech.

Here let me just put in this headline. It speaks volumes:

PM lauds press freedom in speech, avoids reporters

What else can one say to that? Moving on…

Fourth issue: Conservative leaflets

Political parties are given a certain amount of money to send out pamphlets to Canadians, these are called ‘ten-percenters’ and are paid for by Canadians. The MPs do not have to send them to Canadians in their riding but have the privilege to send them anywhere across the country.

The latest CON partisan leaflets were send to Liberal ridings that were predominately Jewish and called the Liberals anti-Semitics.  The Cons lied:

Montreal Liberal MP Irwin Cotler said on Power Play that the leaflets are “false on the facts.”

He said the Liberals spoke out against the anti-Semitism at the first Durban conference and noted it was the Liberals that banned funding for Hamas and Hezbollah.

“What the Conservatives have done is political identity theft,” he said. ‘This is astonishing.”

Fifth issue: The Cons in and out scam

After 3 yrs, the Cons finally had a lawyer go to court on their in and out scam. After 3 years of using avoidance tactics and a change of lawyers (I think their previous one(s) quit?), this is what their lawyer came up with:

Michel Decary told the court Tuesday that even though the radio and television ads promoted the party’s slogan for the election and Prime Minister Stephen Harper, it was legal under federal election law for local candidates to claim the expenses.

For those who do not know the story, Elections Canada says that the Cons broke election laws:

The question of whether the contested ads should have been claimed as expenses by the party or local candidates is one of several key issues in the two-year-old battle between Chief Electoral Marc Mayrand and the Tories.
An adverse ruling in Federal Court could put the party more than $1-million over its legal expense limit for the election.
Mr. Mayrand ruled in April, 2007, that 67 Conservative candidates would not get reimbursements for the expenses. The elections agency argues the expenses were incurred by the party and the advertising was produced for its national campaign, which has a separate accounting system under the Canada Elections Act…
…Whether the party attempted to skirt its legal limit of $18.3-million by diverting the expenses to candidates is at the heart of the dispute. Nearly all the candidates who took part in the scheme stood little or no chance of winning their contests. Low levels of donor support gave those candidates ample room for campaign expenses.

It’s crazy stuff and the Cons keep trying to avoid going to court, which basically tells me (and most rational people) that they have something to hide.

Sixth Issue: Stephane Dion’s wife and Facebook

I am all for freedom of speech. 100% behind but I have to disagree with what Janine Krieber did. She has every right to state her opinion, but on Facebook? She claims it was just for friends to see but did she really think it wouldn’t leak? I mean come on!
Her husband is a public figure (and she is a bit of one too) and she goes and spouts her mouth on Facebook? I know 5yrs old that know better than to give away too much information on Facebook or the internet for that matter.
She is only hurting herself, her husband and the Liberal party by doing this. If she really wants to share her opinions, she should get a blog and use that as a medium to express herself on a daily basis instead of just doing a general rant. The Liberals are already hurting (I still can’t figure that out when you compare them to the Cons) and her actions just aren’t helping the matter.

I have to stop myself from reading comments on news stories, it’s just too draining, too maddening…too much hatred.  I read a comment on a story about the Cons near majority territory where the guy (I’m assuming) said something to the effect of ” if the Cons get a majority than our country can finally go back into God’s hands”. WHAT? WHAT?

I assume a male said this, because, I also assume that most people who want to live in a God-fearing nation, are men who hate women and love to control them… you know a very common, yet accurate stereotype found amongst the religious fundamentals.

Back to the main point, that line of thought scares me. That is not Canada. First of all, whose God is he referring to? The Christian one? The Pagan one? The Muslim one? The Jewish one? And what about the Goddess? Who’s to say that his “god” is the one that needs to rule Canada? Who is he to say that his “god” speaks through Sleazy Stevie and his Cons? Who is he to imply that his “god” is the only one that matters and the one we must all be afraid of and let rule us? Does he not know that this is Canada?

Under Sleazy Stevie and his Cons I do worry about us regressing even more; I see this every day on the comments from people. As a nation we have regressed under the Cons. People are angry, say mean things to each other, jump the queue to get a freakin’ shot of poison in their bodies (yeah I’ll probably still get it). Under the Cons healthy people made it harder for unhealthy people to get a shot that they need more.Why is that? Because the Cons and the media made a mockery of hype over a somewhat serious situation, one that the Cons were ill equipped to handle (shock! I have a feeling Sleazy Stevie planned this because he wants to get rid of our health act).  Under the Cons our country has become more selfish and just plain regressive (see Gun Registry or the upcoming bill whereby the Cons will now have ammunition to make abortion illegal).
So yeah, ca va faire alright. It’s enough. We need to progress, not regress.

• why do anti-choice people KILL abortion doctors?
• why do anti-choice people believe in violence for living humans but think that a zygote is too precious to harm?
• if these anti-choices love kids so much, why aren’t they adopting them in droves instead of yelling outside of clinics and meddling in other people’s business?
• why do anti-choice people use children as a propaganda weapon in their fight to take away choices that affect women’s health?
• will sleazy stevie work towards removing our women’s health choices here?
• why do the ultra “religious” and right-wing conservative men hate women? WHY?
• why are the ultra religious always the most hypocritical and hateful?
• will Canada go blue?
• when will I stop being able to sleep at night for fear of Canada going blue?
• if I ever met sleazy stevie, would I do something that could land me in jail?
• what would I do or say to sleazy stevie if i ever met him, besides possibly spitting on his shoes?
• can we start a petition to oust Jane Taber from the Globe and Mail?
• can we get a big batch of pork rinds and dump them on Duffy and sleazy stevie?
• when will sleazy stevie GO AWAY?

Yeah there’s more floating around in there but you know… those are the ones I’m sharing.