My dad and I delve into our first Lost podcast, discussing 'sploded teachers, DHARMA beer, Hugo Relief, and pre-season predictions.
The Boy In The Stripes Pajamas is a horror novel. The thing is, it's not your typical throat-slash-box-cutter-serial killer horror. It's a type of horror that only has a few proponents left, a dying breed, if you will. It's the kind of horror that, instead of relying on quick shocks of panic, leaves an ever-growing mass of worry in the pit of your stomach. It's the kind of horror that isn't horrible in a physical fashion, but one that festers on the brain like a faint memory. This sense of quiet dread is what propels The Boy in The Striped Pajamas from good to great.
It's this unique perspective, of a naive six year old in what possibly is the most scary environment Earth has ever had, that sets The Boy in the Striped Pajamas apart from other stories covering the same topic. There's no anvil-level preachiness, because he's so blissfully unaware of what's happening to him. That, I believe, is where John Boyne shines in the novel. He never breaks from the perspective he's chosen solely to toss a laser-guided moral at us, the way other writers, myself included, often do. He merely expects us to realize the absurd sadness of the situation, and he knows never to tell directly.
Engaging, frightening, and tragicly heartwarming, John Boyne's The Boy in the Striped Pajamas gets four and a half pages out of five. I'll see you in two weeks as we dig into a soulful and sincere story of Vietnam, Frances O'Roark Dowell's Shooting The Moon.
Feel free to leave feedback and vote on my punishment in the comments.
Tomato
On this episode of Juiced!....
We ramble about racism, gab about gays, sulk over Spidey, and pay tribute to Haiti.
Feel free to respond in comments!
Thanks,
Tomato
This is going to be one of these posts that's about exactly what it says in the title, isn't it?Now, let me be clear here: although I have a few quibbles with the media, by no means is it their direct fault that I sat on this porcelain soapbox and was biased towards a guilty verdict. They have a residual effect on it, sure, but it isn't born from ignorant or malicious intent. You see, solely by doing their jobs, they contributed towards this bias.
How? Well, when kidnappings, murders, rapes, extortions, and other incidents happen, which they seem to do increasingly, the media's job is to report on it. And, more often than not, the case ends with the defense being guilty.In fact,combing through my (admittedly small) backlog of high-profile court cases, I can't think of a single case where the defense was declared innocent (excluding a single case that I won't talk about here involving a person named after a certain drink derived from citrus fruits. I think, along with several other people, that that case is as valid as what kind of conditioner my great aunt's second cousin used on the second day in January, 1987.).
As such, we are pre-conditioned by example to assume a guilty verdict in a case.
2. People Who Sue Over Video Games, French Fries, Coffee, and Apendages in Mexican Dishes Are Stupid, Usually.
It's hard to take people who sue seriously any more, after all of the above. Even people who do sue for legitimate reasons, such as this guy, are clumped with the loonies and the money-hungry vultures of society.
As such, even though our justice system is fair on paper, and certainly fairer than other countries', it's still flawed by the human element. So, here's my non-rhetorical question of the day: If the flaws in our justice system are real, how do we fix them?
Well, I'm feeling a little flushed. I hope you felt moved by this post, and not bowled over by it. Seat-er, see, you later.
SIDENOTE: 1st official Pedal-With-Pete board meeting in 3-ish hours! Woot!
Tomato
Posts
All Comments
