Judging Books By Their Covers

To me, when it comes to book covers, less is more. I think book covers often detract from the book itself, rather than adding to it, or adequately reflecting it. I've been known to throw book jackets away (Divergent, most recently) preferring the simple hard back to the flashy outside. (I often have a similar feeling when it comes to people, but that's another discussion.)  If it were up to me, most book covers would look something like this:

No loud colors, no distracting images of angsty teenagers gazing into the distance, nothing to give you false impressions of what's inside.

It's rare that I like any pictures or images at all on books, but if one must be present, something simple and alluring like this would be awesome:

And something like this would be horrendous. Had this been the cover of my first Huck Funn book, I never would have read it, as I would have immediately assumed that Twain's target audience was 6-year-old boys.

Some book covers are awesome, even with an image. This one I think perfectly captures the mystery, terror, and grotesque intrigue of Dracula:And this one is disturbing and fabulous, just like the book:

And this is another one that I really like. Dominoes are an unexpected, yet somehow perfect fit for both the story of The Book Thief and WWII in general. Plus, it reflects a key scene in the novel. Well done.

Sometimes I think one image doesn't quite do the novel justice, but a slew of images might. Here are a bunch of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone covers from around the world. I'm not sure any single image is perfect, but altogether it kind of works...

So what got me thinking about book covers? Well, to be honest, this did:That, my friends, is the newly released cover to Penguin's Deluxe edition of the classic Wuthering Heights. I am torn. I really like Heathcliffe, but I can't get past the nightmare-before-christmas feeling I get when I look at the whole jacket. The gothic thing is cool, I guess... I'm just not sure it's capturing the novel very well. Maybe they're just trying to attract a new young crowd of readers? What do you think?

This got me wondering about what other covers have been attached to Wuthering Heights. Here are a few a quick Google search found, sorted from worst to best:

Worst. Too Nancy Drew for my taste.

Too Twilight.Too boring.Getting better, but this still feels too boring.Okay, getting better...Me likey...Lovely. Strange and hypnotizing and dangerous and irresistible all at the same time.

So anyway, those are my thoughts this Thursday afternoon. What kind of book covers do you like/dislike? Do you like the cover of your favorite book as much as you like what's inside? Why(not)?

(Here are other covers of the newly released Penguin Deluxe editions of classics. I kind of love the Scarlet Letter one, but am not sure Jane Austen would have liked the new Pride and Prejudice cover...)

It's Late and I'm Punchy...

...so you get a post.

I belong to a super exclusive club. It's the kind of club that is so hard to get into, few even attempt it. The kind of club that takes months and months (18 of them) of disciplined training and blood and sweat and tears to enter. The kind of club that completely reinvents your soul before they let you enter. But it is also the kind of club where, once you're in, you're in for life, Sopranos style. And once you're in, every other member of that club will always have your back.

Though this may sound like Hell's Angels, this is actually the club of returned sister missionaries.

Now I know all about the assumptions people have about sister missionaries.

Assumptions:
1. We are all extremely conservative (religiously, politically, grammatically, etc.)
2. We do not have a sense of humor. At all. No laughing. Ever. (Though smiling is critical - it's all a part of the 'sweet sister' thing.)
3. We're a few Marlboros short of a pack, if you know what I mean. (Am I allowed to use that analogy when talking about missionaries?)
4. We're probably ugly.
5. We like rules, and we follow rules religiously. (Ha.)
6. We generally have an unusual helping of self-righteousness. (By the way, did you read your scriptures this morning for at least 800 hours like I did? No? REPENT!)
7. We really need a date. BADLY.

The list goes on, but you get the idea. Don't deny it, you know people who have these kinds of assumptions. I can't tell you how many conversations I've had with people who, when it comes out that I served a mission, start twisting uncomfortably in their seats and avert their eyes, as if they're just not sure what to do with me anymore and are silently planning their escape, lest I try and commit them to read the Standard Works by Friday. (Okay, I'm probably just inventing that last part in my paranoid head, but I am definitely not inventing the awkward silence.)

It's gotten to the point where I sort of gloss over that particular part of my personal history and quickly move on to something else when meeting new people. It goes something like:

Person X: "So how come you speak Italian?"
Mel: "IservedamissioninItalydoyouwantsomemorecakeorhowaboutsomeicecreamwehaverockyroad?"

This is not because I am ashamed of being a sister missionary. I'm not. I just don't want the potential friend to write me off because they think I am too righteous/unfunny/dumb/pious/conservative/will-call-them-to-repentance-at-any-moment-ish.

SO. I have decided to debunk these false assumptions ONCE AND FOR ALL. Prepare your minds for explosion.

THE DEBUNK:
1. We are all extremely conservative.

Mormons in general are often conservative. However, just as there are a good chunk of LDS folks who are not conservative, there are also a good chunk of sister missionaries who are not conservative. Don't assume that just because a woman served a mission she won't drink Mountain Dew. Or is pro-life. Or whatever. Sometimes it will be true. Sometimes it won't. But assuming all sister missionaries will vote for Mitt Romney, for example, is a mistake.

2. We do not have a sense of humor.

FALSE. Some of my favorite funny friends I found in my mission companions. The kind of people who make my stomach hurt from laughing with their sharp and wicked observations, and who I still adore for their incredible senses of humor, among other things of course. So this assumption just isn't true.

3. We're not very smart.

FALSE AGAIN. This argument (and the next) usually stems from people thinking that women only serve missions because we have "no other options." As if missionary service was somehow less enticing, less self-building, and less educational than anything else the world has to offer. I do not know a single returned sister missionary who is not smarter because they served a mission. (And, they were all pretty dang smart to begin with, so there.)

4. We're probably ugly.

After announcing that I planned on serving a mission, one well-intentioned woman exclaimed, "But you're too pretty to serve a mission!" I've never been so insulted. Serving a mission has nothing to do with your looks. To imply that God only has use for homely girls in His missionary work is to limit God's value for women and our potential for good. Not every girl will serve a mission. In fact most don't. That's okay. There are a lot of great things young women can choose to do besides serving a mission. But it doesn't mean that missions are the lesser choice between serving and not serving. It is not only an option for those "without prospects." (Oh I hate that phrase.) It is a mighty and holy calling given by God. If you want to argue with God about who he chooses to fulfill His work, take it up with Him. But I'm willing to bet that He cares a LOT less about my acne than he does about my willingness to to what He wants me to do. Grumble grumble.
5. We like rules, and we follow rules religiously.

Sometimes. Sometimes not. Personally, I hate everything that feels confining. But again, this will vary, just like it does with other human beings. (What? Sister missionaries are human beings too, you say? GASP!)

6. We generally have an unusual helping of self-righteousness.

Well, I am amazingly awesometastic. It's not my fault you're not as awesome as I am. Just kidding. (Really.) This is false too. If you get this impression from someone, I'm guessing it's coming from other problems besides the mission. (And [hint] this particular character trait probably made all their mission companions want to strangle them too.)

7. We really need a date. BAD.

Please, please, please, please, whatever else you do, PLEASE do not set us up with your neighbor/friend/brother/cousin/roommate/professor/dog washer/etc. Being married I have now escaped this trap. But I didn't like it when I had it, and I don't know anyone else who likes it either. Just because a woman is 20-something and single, her romantic future will actually survive if you just leave it alone. (That cracking sound you hear is your brain exploding.)

So here's the take-away: To stereotype is to be ignorant.

One last nugget that doesn't really have anything to do with the aforementioned seven points: When referring to a group of missionaries that includes both sexes, please do not ever use the phrase "Missionaries and Sisters." It is extremely insulting. Just don't do it.

Here's the thing. Missionary service is incredibly demanding. It's grueling. It's draining. It's thankless. It's rejection. It's challenging. It's tedious. It's lonely. It's relentless. It's getting hit on by drunk men at bus stops. It's waking up before you're ready every single day. It's getting weird looks at the grocery store. It's getting lost in dangerous parts of town. It's being chased by wild dogs. It's a lot of hard things. (No wonder so many returned missionaries suffer from PTSD.) But it's also liberating, defining, insightful, growth, patience, dedication, confidence, charity, and a lot of other good things. A mission is just a lot of things and is kind of a big deal. So can you see why returned sister missionaries get bugged when this mammoth experience gets boiled down to: "Well, you just didn't have anything else to do, did you honey"?

Let's change the perception. Sister missionaries are cool. Next time you meet one, don't assume her spirit is too sweet for you. Give her a shot. You might like her. And if she's anything like the sisters I served with, you are in for a treat.

I am sister missionary. Hear me roar.

Aaaaaaand It's Not Summer Anymore.

Oh, hey. Well, it's been about a month since I've posted, which I guess means I should give another life update...

-Mike just finished an out-of-state clerkship which occupied him for a good chunk of the Summer. (Read: we have become really good at Skype.) My work was here, so unfortunately I couldn't go with him. It was a long Summer, and I'm glad it's finally over. The rudest trick was played by Mike's car when it decided to break down 3 hours from home, delaying his homecoming for 24 more hours. (Sidenote: Anyone want a buy a car?)

-Did you see IT? You know, IT? The most anticipated movie EVER? Of course I am referring to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2. It took me a long time to accept that the movies were never going to live up the expectations I had for them, but once I started accepting the movies as different but plausible interpretations of the books, I started liking them more. And more. I'll give this last movie a solid score of 93%. It was grand. (Although, WHY do they INSIST on getting all the eye colors wrong?? Harry's eyes are GREEN, not blue. Voldemort's eyes are RED, not blue. And young Lily's eyes are GREEN, not brown. How many times did the books and movies say that Harry had Lily's eyes? If you're going to get it wrong, at least get it consistently wrong. With all the editing technology available now days, this is an inexcusable error, as I'm sure any true fan would agree.)

-School is starting next week for both of us, and I'm a little nervous. I just got my husband back, and I'm afraid I'm just going to have to say goodbye again once the crazy demands of work/school pile up, occupying every spare minute of our lives.

-I am a little obsessed with Adele's song "Fire to the Rain." It. Is. Awesome.

-Also obsessed with yellow curry. Seriously delish.

-I recently bought a huge bottle of shower gel that was advertised to be lavender scented. This bottle is big enough to last me 6 months, and I like the smell of lavender, so it was guaranteed to be a win-win, right? Turns out, it actually smells like cleaning chemicals. Think Clorox mixed with Windex with a little vinegar thrown in. It's going to be an interesting 6 months.

-Mike asked if we could limit the number of times I forcibly expose him to Shakespeare this year. I may have gone overkill last year... Sorry Hot Buns. :)

-Want a laugh? Check out these language crimes. (It might only be funny to English nerds like me, but I think it's hilarious.)

-Apparently Stephen Colbert is going to be the next Mormon convert.

-Have you seen these promotional photos of Peeta and Gale for the upcoming Hunger Games films? I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

So, apparently this post went from a life update to random links. Oh well. See you next month. :)

In which I depart from the recent travelogues and other meaningless dribble and talk about something that I really care about and you should to.

In case you haven't noticed, I have become a boring blogger. I used to post my inner musings and funny stories, full of wit, humor, and a healthy dose of sarcasm... but alas. No longer. The reason for this is two fold:

1) We began getting hit with an obscene amount of asian spam every time we posted.

2) I realized people were actually reading what I wrote. (Gasp!)

The second reason might not seem like a big deal to you, but I am (and always have been) fiercely private and fiercely protective of my personal space. Therefore, the realization that my thoughts were being so widely accessed made me uncomfortable. (I don't think our blog is famous or anything, but come on, we all know how much blog stalking goes on over the Internet. I do it myself. Check your traffic feeds - you might be [un]pleasantly surprised.)

HOWEVER. I decided to break my self-imposed silence and talk about something that I really care about.

Ahem.

I was standing in the checkout line of the supermarket yesterday, trying to remember last-minute what it was on my grocery list that I was undoubtedly forgetting, when my eyes skipped over the magazine stand on my left. Each cover presented glossy images of hyper-thin young women demurely smiling/attractively pouting/seductively gazing back at me. One image in particular stood out: it was of a girl with rail thin arms and protruding ribs leaning her bony behind against a headline that read "Lose 5 lbs by Friday!" For some reason, I couldn't take my eyes off that woman. She was so freaking thin. My eyes glanced back to my shopping cart, and I mentally calculated that I would have to throw away 97% of the food in there and settle on meals of lettuce and tomatoes for the next few months before I would look half as thin as her. It was unsettling. I've seen these kinds of unrealistic and unhealthy messages before in magazines, on billboards, in movies, in music videos, in advertisements. This is not new to me. Women are bombarded with garbage like this every day. But for some reason, yesterday it just made me sick. And I am still thinking about it.

(Side note: Do not Google "models" unless you want to be greeted with copious amount of soft p0rn.) (Related side note: The messages sent by the media regarding women and sexuality is also a topic worthy of discussion, but this post will focus only on the Skinny factor.)

Now I know some thin women, of which many are truly beautiful. But I do not know ANYONE (who is healthy) who looks like that. Why is it, that when we see a girl who is either horribly sick or suffering from an eating disorder (which is, of course, the same thing, as my favorite author pointed out) our reaction is not to help the poor girl but to slap her on a magazine cover? Instead of driving the girl straight to a hospital, we use this unhealthy woman's manipulated image (and all those images you see are very much manipulated - see the video below as a demonstration) to convince consumers that:

1)You do not look like this (manipulated photograph of an unhealthy) woman
2)You should look like this (manipulated photograph of an unhealthy) woman
3)You need to get PRODUCT X in order to look more like this (manipulated photograph of an unhealthy) woman

No wonder our views of beauty are distorted. That kind of logic feeds off of insecurity and produces reduced self-confidence and even self-loathing. These industries, and others, are manipulating women’s insecurities about their bodies for profit. This is terribly wrong.

The message being sent is that there is a direct correlation between your size and your worth: the thinner your ankles, the lovelier you are. But being beautiful and being skinny are not the same thing. They are two different things entirely. But the line between the two is blurred for many, many women, and this needs to stop.

Needless to say, I have been thinking about beauty and what it means to be beautiful. When I think of beauty, the first thing I think of is my three sisters. They are each exquisitely, spectacularly, breathtakingly beautiful women. Truly. They are attractive, yes, but that is not what makes them beautiful. Do you know why they are beautiful? It is because they are smart, brave, loyal, funny, unique, driven, honest, hard working, kind, giving, and a thousand other things that I value and admire. This is not a result of throwing up. This is a result of their choices and their character. This is what true beauty looks like: If you don't think they are stunningly gorgeous I will punch you in the face. (Kidding... sort of...)

So while I was thinking about all this, and disturbed by the discrepancy between true beauty and what is being presented (and widely accepted) as beauty, I received an email from my friend, Liz (holla!), telling me about a non-profit organization based in Salt Lake City called Beauty Redefined. They fight against these negative and incorrect conceptions of beauty. Their website states:

We have a passion for helping girls and women recognize and reject harmful messages about their bodies and what “beauty” means and looks like. Beauty Redefined represents our work to take back beauty for girls and women everywhere through continuing the discussion about body image, women’s potential and media influence.

Needless to say, this was exactly what I needed in order to regain my faith in mankind. Check out the billboards that will soon be popping up in Utah, courtesy of BR:

That's more like it.

Mead said, “A small group of thoughtful people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

I realize it will be an uphill battle, but the concept of beauty needs to be changed. It needs to be righted. And we can change it. Don't buy into the messages that tell you that you aren't good enough if your nose isn't straight or your fingernail polish is chipped. It isn't true. Our choices make us who we are, not our earlobe size. We are more than our reflections. If we truly believe that, the belief will spread. And, maybe one day, we can stand in checkout lines at the supermarket and turn to see only positive images of healthy, poised, and confident women smiling genuinely back at us.

If you've read this far, rock on. I will congratulate you by promising to revert back to posting nothing but mindless dribble and the occasional book review for at least six months.

Ah, one last nugget: Check out the below video produced by Dove's Campaign for Real Beauty (another great cause joining the fight to change the perception of beauty) for a glimpse into the process it takes before a woman gets put on a billboard.

Source

DC

Over Memorial Weekend, Mike and I traveled through miles and miles of back country like this:
And through Lima, Ohio (proof below... fellow Gleeks unite!)
And through Pittsburgh (where we got to visit for a bit with our favorite Pittsburgh-ites) until we got to Washington DC! It was fab. We stayed with Mike's sister and fam for a few days, played lots of games, ate lots of really good food, and did a lot of fun touring downtown.

Jefferson Memorial

Lincoln MemorialTickling breakReading breakThere were a LOT of motorcycles in DC. It was pretty entertaining to see the different things written on their leather vests (Masonic symbols, Vietnam/Iraq veterans, "bikers for Jesus," etc.)
Our niece and nephew were good sports as we walked all over the city, always smiling and laughing despite the heat, and always up for a good knock-knock joke.The Supreme Court! So freaking cool.

I love the subway. I know it's weird, considering how dirty and gross it is, but I just have a thing for subways.

On Memorial Day itself we went to Arlington Cemetery. It was really neat to be there on the day we honor those who died for our freedom. We even got to see the 21 gun salute!

Mike ate the Washington Memorial.

The Capitol!

My one request was to go to the Library of Congress. I didn't know Mike took this picture, but I think it pretty well captures my joy/awe. Did you know they have a statue of Shakespeare there?

Not pictured:
--The nasty smell of the lake in the Constitution Gardens
-Our sweat drenched clothes
-Bang!
-The most awesome used bookstore. Of. All. Time.
-Ecuadorian (or was it Salvadorian?) and Thai food
-Potomac River
-Union Station
-Our corny gifts

We had a great time and loved being there. We wish we could have stayed longer! Thanks for letting us come take over your weekend!

Book Reviews

School's Out! I have time to read again. It's great. Here's the latest...




Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen: The best part of this book was the setting. You gotta admit, a depression-era circus train is great fodder for story telling. My favorite character was Rosie, the Polish elephant, although the human characters also managed to draw me in with their dreams and their flaws. I also really liked the ending. There were unfortunately a few too-graphic parts, which make me hesitate to recommend it to anyone though. B-



The Housekeeper and the Professor by Yoko Ogawa: I was nervous going into this book, since it was originally written in Japanese. Translated novels feel more impersonal to me, due to the additional step placed between the reader and the author. However, this book still managed to win me over. It's a short (only 164 pages) and simple story of friendship. This is a feel-good book the way feel-good books were meant to be written; not fluffy and hollow, but warm and life-affirming. Definitely a worthy read. A-




The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova: Oy vey. The more time goes by, the more I realize how much I really dislike The Historian. This book is, in a word, disappointing. It had all the ingredients (suspense, intrigue, romantic tension, secrets, etc.) but it just didn't work for the following reasons: 1)Length. It should have been half as long as it was. 2)Character development. The characters all resembled each other way too much, and most of the characters served no real purpose. 3)Plot. Oh man, I cannot tell you how incredibly disappointing the finale was. You plod through page after page just to find out what the big secret is, and then the big secret reveals itself to be... something spectacularly stupid. I think I laughed (guffawed?) out loud out of frustration. Not worth the 600+ pages it took to get there. There are plenty of well-written, perfectly chilling gothic novels out there. This is not one of them. D



The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie by Alan Bradley: I started reading this book because of its title. You have to admit, that is an awesome title. The main character, Flavia, is pretty awesome herself. She is as clever as she is cunning, and drew me in with her sharp wit and wicked observations. I think I was so taken with Flavia that I felt let down by everything else. It was a good story, just not as good as it could have been. Flavia herself is freakin bomb. But nothing else in the story lived up to her. I liked it well enough, I just think Flavia deserves the extraordinary. B+




Outlander by Diana Gabaldon: Confession. I have not actually finished this novel. I'm not sure I want to though. I'm only about 50 pages in, but from what I can gather so far, this book seems to be about justifying affairs. And that's it. No deeper message, no social commentary, no nothing. I don't like any of the characters (they can all go jump off a cliff for all I care) and I'm not really interested in reading about their inner angst. Is there a reason I should finish reading this?



Next on my list:
Well-Manered Assassin by Countess Aline Romananos
The Eye of the World by Robert Jordan (don't judge.)