smeddley: (Default)
Friday, May 20th, 2011 10:39 am
I started (trying to) read a book I got at the library book sale this week, and I'm having a really hard time with it. Here is a synopsis and a good review of the book, it appears to be out of print, and that's all I could find in a quick Google.

The name of the book is Monkey Puzzle, and it's not the kids book by the same name. It's a murder mystery centered around a university. So far, so good. Yes, the book is a little dated (it was written in 1986) but I've read older mysteries and enjoyed them, you just kinda go with the flow. Now, insert some cheesy imagery about whirpools and hydraulic jumps (coolest phenomenon ever, by the way) and you have where I'm going with my feelings about this book.

The first flag was the use of 'gay' as an explanation/excuse for the murder. Of course some crazy gay lover he picked up killed him. The gays, you know how they are! Okay, it was 1986, tolerance was not really even talked about. And, hey, maybe the homophobic jerk isn't a good character! You can have homophobic or racist or misogynist characters in a story, as long as they're not supposed to be the good guys (I mean, crime stories feature all sorts of deranged characters, that's kinda the point). Except... these are the main detectives. I have a feeling the reader is supposed to be on their side. Oooookay.

Enter the main female character, another professor, but a millitant, establishment-hating 'feminist' who has a deep-seated hatred for cops... but inexplicably finds herself attracted to the detective, despite his dismissive 'you're just a woman' attitude (I don't actually know that's his attitude, I've only gotten so far into the book that I know that's her assesment of what he feels.

Then we get to the part where they're going around the table and talking about all the other professors, and they describe one of them as... hang on to your hats... "a Negro". 1986. I was alive then, albeit living on Guam, but was that expression really still prevalent in 1986? Really?

I... don't know if I can go on. It's not that compelling of a story, all the characters irritate me, I don't think the writing is that good, but it could just be me. I'm willing to send the book to anyone who wants to tackle it, though!
smeddley: (Default)
Saturday, October 16th, 2010 11:58 am
I've been very into cleaning with natural products every since I saw that I could get my copper-bottom pots clean with just vinegar and salt on How Clean is Your House. No more caustic – and expensive! – chemicals, and beautiful pots. It's 'cheap and cheerful', as Aggie and Kim would say. So I was excited to find this little book that's chock-full of natural cleaning tips.

I'm not going to argue about chemical cleaners being toxic or harmful to your health. I don't like them, but even if you don't think they're *bad* for you, they are expensive and tend to smell atrocious. Those are two reasons right there to go the natural route, when you can.

This book has sections on each of the main cleaners (borax, baking soda, lemon, vinegar, and salt) and a recipe section at the end for combining them. Sure, a lot of us already know that baking soda deodorizes a 'fridge and lemons can perk up your disposal, but there are many, many, many other great tips that you probably wouldn't have thought of (I, for one, thought Borax was only good for killing ants, freshening laundry, and making a really cool gooey putty to play with. Boy was I wrong!).

The very best part of this book? Unlike a lot of cleaning books, where you spend hours reading and not doing anything, this book inspires you to clean. You read a tip, think "Really? No, it can't be… I gotta try this!" and before you know it, you’re up cleaning something just to see if it really works (and all the ones I've tried have, remarkably well).

I would highly recommend this book. It's fun, clever, and most of all – actually helpful.
smeddley: (Default)
Saturday, October 16th, 2010 10:05 am
I'm truly torn on rating this book, because it has some excellent advice (especially the justification about not making the bed!) and he does stress that having the right tool for the job makes things a lot easier (and they're not tools he's selling, which is a change). On the down side, the push of disposable products really bothers me. He tries to justify it by saying that you don't have to use energy and resources to clean disposable products, and in the case of, say, paper plates (which will biodegrade), sure. But diapers and plastic cutlery? I don't think it's particularly good to push that. And that uncomfortable message pushing this book down to a three-star rating.

I can't bring myself to push it down to a two-star rating (the disposable thing really rankles, can you tell?) because it does present a very important message: "Keep the kind of home you are happy with." It's not about impressing the neighbors or being as neat as your mother, it's about making *you* happy. Always remember that it's your house. If you're okay with a bit of dog hair on the floor, you really shouldn't try to make yourself vacuum every day because your Great-Aunt Martha might sniff at it. That's a recipe for frustration and stress.

Overall, there's not a whole lot the book will tell you that you didn't already know (except the justification for not making the bed, which I will use and cherish, thank you!) but it is an entertaining read.

That was the end of the Amazon review, click here for more details, including why I will stubbornly continue to alphabetize my CDs )
smeddley: (Default)
Friday, October 15th, 2010 05:03 pm
"No self-respecting businesswoman would go to her office devoid of make-up"

If that line makes your blood boil as much as it made mine, I would suggest staying far, far, far away from this book. I picked it up because I heard it was the jumping-off point FlyLady used for her system, and I am doing some research/blogging about cleaning/organizational systems. What I found here was a book written in the late 70s that's so sexist it feels like it was written in the 50s.

The basis of the system - a home 'tickler file' for chores - is sound enough and is what many executives use in their offices. The problem is that they spend very few pages even talking about the system, and give very little guidance on setting it up. Frankly, a tweet that said 'set up a tickler file for your chores' would have been just as helpful. And a lot less aggravating to read.

And, yes, obviously the book is written for housewives, and not so much for people working outside the home, though the tickler file system can work for anyone - you just set up your times different. For instance, their rule "Never leave the house before you've done all of the duties in the everyday card file" is a bit unrealistic for someone who has to be at work at 7 am (or earlier!). Unless you enjoy getting up at 3 in the morning, in which case... okay. Otherwise, modifications are certainly in order.

Ah, but they don't seem too keen on you making any tweaks to their system, as they say "It is important you make up the cards exactly like the examples we have for you." Why? Why shouldn't I make them the way it makes sense for me? Is the entire system going to collapse if I like to write the time I estimate it'll take me in the upper *left* corner of the card under the frequency? Really? Of maybe I want to put the description on the *back* of the card so I have more room? Is this going to render the whole thing moot?

I would not read this book to really get organizational tips. I also wouldn't read this book if you're the type who doesn't like the 1950s housewife schtick and might be offended that someone would expect you to get yourself up before your family, make yourself *all puuuuurdy* for the day, and them putter about with your feather duster being the 'perfect wife'.

That's my Amazon review, if you want to read a more detailed review (and I understand if you'd rather poke yourself in the eye with a sharp stick than read more of this tripe) click here )
smeddley: (Books)
Friday, March 12th, 2010 07:35 pm
I wanted to like this book. I really did. I absolutely adore the television show. Unfortunately, the book was... a sad, two-dimensional affair that I actually set down for several months right in the middle. And I'm the kind of person who usually reads a book in one sitting, so... yeah.

It wasn't all bad, there were times when you could see a glimmer of the characters, some really good one-liners and a bit of zing, but overall it felt like someone trying way too hard (Including the names... Rook, really?). It might have worked as an episode of the show, because there was a decent enough mystery (though that's not what makes the show great, I think the way the characters work together is what makes that show click) ...but then there was also an eye-roll inducing gratuitous sex scene.

Overall, I wouldn't really recommend it to anyone, unlike the show, which I recommend to anyone and everyone who will listen to me!