Movie Babble & Reaction to Mary Doria Russell’s The Sparrow
* ![[info]](http://stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
x_los wrote Eighth Doctor/goosnake!Master. And it’s… actually kind of awesome? If you enjoy crackfic, I highly recommend it.
* I. Um. I think I want to see Twilight. I KNOW I KNOW I KNOW. But… it’s just… you know… Robert Pattinson is really really cute!
Apparently somewhere inside me there still lurks a twelve year old girl, whose Pretty!Boy!Vampire! alert has just been triggered. I will have to hide my face in shame and sneak into the theater hoping that no one I know will recognize me. Or at least claim that I’m there only to snark. :P
* I saw the new James Bond this weekend and was disappointed. I’m all for emotional continuity, but it didn’t feel like the movie really went anywhere. Nothing made a big impression, and I was mostly bored. Apparently I’m one of the three human beings on the planet who do not find Daniel Craig attractive, so without a compelling story there just wasn’t much to hold my interest. Casino Royale was so much better. :(
* I just read this book called The Sparrow by Mary Doria Russell, about a Jesuit expedition to Alpha Centauri (seriously). It was brilliantly written, but I didn’t love it.
The core of the novel is an exploration of the role of god in human lives. How directly does god intervene? And if he’s responsible for the good things that happen to us, isn’t he also responsible for the terrible things?
This didn’t work for me for the obvious reason that I’m about as atheist as you can get. And I’m not even an angry atheist who wants to read about faith and build up arguments against it; I’m a bored atheist who really cannot fathom how people can expend so much energy on something imaginary. So, y’know, god god god… bored now.
The book does have its good aspects, though. The characters are wonderful–distinct, fully realized, three-dimensional, and fascinating. But the other problem is that you know from the beginning that it’s a tragedy, and that you’re going to watch these people die one by one. So it’s difficult to get invested, and it infuses the whole experience with a sense of dread. I didn’t enjoy reading this book; I rushed through it this weekend to get it over with as quickly as possible.
It’s also an exploration of the process of “first contact.” These days we tend to look back very critically on the explorers of previous eras, but could we do any better, even with our supposedly “enlightened” modern perspectives? Russell’s answer is a resounding no. This theme was certainly more thought-provoking and interesting to me than the religious one. The book has wonderful explorations of language, culture, anthropology, even a sort of animal-rights theme with the “predator/prey” situation (what if you made first contact with what turned out to be the food source of the dominant species?). I just wish it had been more of a focus compared to all the religious introspection.
In the afterword, Russell credits Dorothy Dunnett’s Lymond series, which doesn’t surprise me at all. Her lead, Emilio Sandoz, is so Lymond-influenced, right down to the migraine headaches. He’s introduced the same way, as someone terribly morally compromised, who is slowly revealed to actually be near-saintly and long-suffering. He’s got a similar charisma and sense of humor, he’s always dropping quotations (from film instead of literature and poetry), he’s delicately-boned and hot, he doesn’t let on when he’s in pain, he’s got an abusive father who’s not really his father and a feud with his brother… oh, and the author loves torturing him. Sheesh. I’m not sure what’s worse, what happens to Sandoz here or what happens to Lymond in Pawn in Frankincense.
So… yeah. I liked Emilio, but not enough to like this book. And I fully admit that it’s written wonderfully. It’s unpredictable (it approaches dozens of cliches and then twists around and avoids them), thoughtful, interesting, well-paced… but the theme was just not interesting, and the good parts didn’t make up for how upsetting the tragic parts were.
I’m debating whether to read the sequel. To be honest, I think I’m just going to re-read the Lymond Chronicles instead. They’ve got everything I liked in The Sparrow (complex characters, interesting moral questions, a compelling lead) plus the actual writing is better and they’re just so much more enjoyable overall.
Current Mood: 
tired
10 Responses to “Movie Babble & Reaction to Mary Doria Russell’s The Sparrow”
katesutton on November 19, 2008 5:42 pm | Link
If you didn’t care for The Sparrow, don’t bother with the sequel. It only extends the theme, the meaning of suffering in a theistic worldview. I have to say, I started the first Lymond book and kinda drifted away because it wasn’t grabbing me. The style seemed really affected. Maybe I should have hung in there, as everyone loves them.
[reply to this comment]
rusty-halo on November 19, 2008 5:54 pm | Link
The style of the Lymond books is definitely… unique. I grew to love it, but it took a while to get used to.
What really made me fall in love with the series is the character of Lymond. I’d recommend at least finishing the first book; you learn a lot about Lymond near the end that changes most of the assumptions you’d have about him based on the earlier part of the book. Once I got near the 3/4 point I ended up devouring the whole thing and immediately hunting down the sequels.
[reply to this comment]
a_white_rain on November 19, 2008 8:07 pm | Link
ALL WILL FALL TO RPATTZ. He is awesome.
[reply to this comment]
rusty-halo on November 19, 2008 11:43 pm | Link
I have to say, he’s the only thing that made the first 4/5 of Harry Potter 4 at all enjoyable for me. (Well, and David Tennant, but only in retrospect.) No matter how much they fucked up the plot, I could distract myself with pretty, pretty Cedric.
[reply to this comment]
a_white_rain on November 19, 2008 11:46 pm | Link
Well it’s not just his looks, he brilliantly disses Twilol. Which I adore him for, even if I have no clue why he’s doing it.
[reply to this comment]
rusty-halo on November 19, 2008 11:58 pm | Link
I do enjoy his highly entertaining lack of brain to mouth filter. >:)
[reply to this comment]
beck_liz on November 19, 2008 9:01 pm | Link
Oh, good. I’m not the only person who wants to see Twilight solely for the Pattinson. I own a copy of the book, but I’ve never managed to even start it, and from what I’ve heard about book 4, I don’t want to.
[reply to this comment]
rusty-halo on November 19, 2008 11:36 pm | Link
You couldn’t pay me to read the book, but the movie is only a couple hours of my life, and the snark potential is enormous. (And, yes, the pretty man is pretty.)
[reply to this comment]
Ruth Waterton on November 20, 2008 7:21 am | Link
Here indirectly via Who Daily…
I read that book quite a while ago. It does have a way of staying with you despite all its faults. Very sensual writing and she certainly brought that world to life, both the tribe they run across and the city they visit lately. The horror at the ending is also well done.
It was almost Holocaust meets martyr-complex, wasn’t it? There were some huge plot holes, like the way a relatively trivial accident used up all their fuel and left them stranded, not to mention the improbability of the mission itself and the way it was funded. But certainly it was interesting to read a first-contact scenario from a theistic POV (I’m an athiest myself, but was very Christian earlier in life).
[reply to this comment]
rusty-halo on November 20, 2008 1:41 pm | Link
I do think the book will stick with me, mainly because the characters were so compelling. I loved Emilio, Anne, and Sofia–it’s rare to read a novel with such a well-developed variety of characters.
I definitely got the sense that it was a first novel, though. Most of it was nuanced and written well, but you’re right, there were some gaping plot holes, and I also think some of the secondary characters were pretty one-dimensional (most obviously the way-over-the-top judgmental priest who functions as Emilio’s antagonist when he’s telling his story).
I assume the writer gets better with experience and that these flaws aren’t as apparent in her later books, but, yeah, I’m still not feeling to compelled to pick up the sequel. I think it’s just the overwhelming theist worldview that doesn’t work for me. There’s a line in there where Emilio’s asking “If there is a god, then he did these horrible things to me, but if there isn’t a god, then I’m alone.” And then he goes on and on about how god could let such horrible things happen… but the book never seriously considers the other option. Is it really so bad to be alone? (I mean, I’d rather be alone in the universe than subject to a god who allows such horrors!)
[reply to this comment]