The Prancing Pony

The Prancing Pony is an inn, far, far away, to the west from de Last Home, it is dedicated to talk about books, songs, films, plays, and every little thing you can consider as art.
Definitely, my little hobbits, the Prancing Pony is a window opened to the world, to the art and to the Soul...

viernes, 6 de abril de 2012

Catching Fire (book) / En llamas (libro)

"The biggest hit of the trilogy consists in joining the essence from 1984, the intensity from the Clockwork Orange, the fantasy from Chronicles of Narnia and the inventive from Harry Potter" says the New York Times. Well, I desagree, absolutely.
First of all, the only thing that this bool shares with 1984 is the kind of world: futuristic, with a central governament that controls and watches everything and a lot of little people around that are tiranized, wishing to rebel themselves but  but without have done it yet until now because the few people that tried have been murdered and everyone is scared. And stop talking. Nothing else has anything to do with this and this isn´t just from these two books; it is true that 1984 -wich I am casually reading right now, because I use to read several books at a time to have time to do everything i have to do- started the idea of these future worlds, but since then there are a lot more -and not only books- that  had got it to use it for their stories. In fact, this book is much more like Battle Royal than like 1984, as I already mencioned in my first critic.
Secondly, I hate the Clockwork Orange and I like this book very mucho so I´ll abstein myself from comparing them.
In the third place, I don´t see anywhere the fantasy from Chronicles of Narnia, not even in the inventions of animals -the only diferent thing from the rest of futuristic books- all of them following the idea of the Capitol controlling over everything else, even the life. 
Finally... ¿the inventive from Harry Potter? no... not at all. In fact, I can´t compare them: they have totally diferent themes. Each of the autors has had a lot of inventive within her theme, yes, but their books haven´t got anything to do one another, nobody can compare them because, in my opinion, it is like saying who onvented candies has the same inventive that who invented pizza, both are eaten, yes, and that´s all. In the same way, these two books have one thing in common: they are books, yes, and that´s all.

Why, however, can´t a book shine but within the shadows from another one in today´s world? Why can´t we forget the rest of the books that existe around the mundial literature, wich are a lot, and analize the book itself, with its hits and its fails, instead of compare them with the rest...? it is as if a teacher suddenly decides to forget the evaluation criteria for an exam and oick up a well made one and write the notes for the others comparing them with that one, instead of evaluating every of them; it is probable that not even the autor of that exam feels comfortable.

That´s the reason why I refuse comparing. So, after this little critic to the NYT critic, I´m going to tell you my own opinion
As I said, I don´t like that eternal present at all, however, I have been noticing along this second book that, as I am within the story, I have been used to it a bit. However  -I don´t know if this is the autor or the traductor ´s fault- i have seen some concordance time fail, same as the first book: I have found moments when suddenly a past narrative tense broke into the lines, instead of her eternal and recognizable present.
Another thing I want to tell is the fact that this second book has been totally and completely predictible to me, since the most general part, to the most little detalis inside it; I won´t say anything in particular because I don´t want to risk and tell any spoiler in case someone is looking for critics before reading to know if they are good or not, however, I have to say that yesterday in the morning, before starting it, I told my friend Pilar -who had already read it- something in my mind that could happen and she -very skilled, I must admit- changed the theme of the conversation whithout me noticing it. Last night, when I got into it, I realised and understood why she had changed the conversation so fast: I hit a full. Since then, all my day has been a long list of hits around predicting the book. There has just been one little thing I have to recognise I was caught by surprise, but not in the rest of it. 
I don´t like this, I prefer a book thar surprise me greatly, in fact, all my favourite books are very little predictible, if not nothing. However, I don´t deny that could be people who prefer this.

To end with, I have to make a formal critic to the spanish edition, to the traduction, to the ed., or to whoever is: a very grave critic I thing. And an advertisement to all the teachers in the world: I have a few relations with teachers from diferent schools and institutes because of several reasons and, everywhere, one of the most favorite sentences from the teachers today is: "I can´t handle their misspellings, if they just read some more..." WRONG. If they just read some more they´ll have MORE misspellings because in the books thar are now publicated are filled with them. I can´t avoid my eyes bleeding sometimes when I read some of them in the books -no counting accents... if I count them, I wold be already blind-. No, I´m not proffesional corrector, nor linguistic, either anything of that, but I do know spelling, at least, from all the spanish words I know and... well, the truth is that lastly I have found not even one book without one misspelling... it is regrettable, if children read this, what is what we really pretend them to learn? I move my head resignated... "where do we go?" I ask myself...

Then, I have to say that this book also has some very good strong points. At first, i have to recognize that, thoug the descriptions remain being low, at least they aren´t missing. The autor has been improving step by step this fact and she delights more in some of the moments she has to, in my opinion. I like that. 
Also, the  plot, even being predictible, has caught me so much that I have read the book again in a whole one day. This is good, I have liked the story and how every secuence of it has been developed this new year in the book. Maybe it is true that the autor uses the loving stoy a lot, even without any sense sometimes, when she culd focus on other things, but, when I remember that, in theory, it is a book writen for teenagers, it makes sense, a lot of sense.
Again, I love the same caractures than in the first book: Cinna -my favourite with difference and more every time-, Prim, Gale and Peeta. And even some of the ones who I didn´t like -in particular, Haymitch- I have started to like them some more. Also, new caractures have appeared that i like too, in particular, some new tributs, thought I don´t like  the other ones at all. And I don´t know why, but I like the teacher of knots whose stan is always empty a bit. 

So, to end with this long critic, nothing else that encourage who hasn´t read the trilogy already, because, at the momento, the first and the second ones are very interesting and, though from a critic perspective, they have their weak points, as everything ;) the truth is that strong points are over them and the plot is quite good. 
Also, one last thing this autor does very well, is to let you asking what´s going to be next, so, when you read the last sentence of the book, you always want more and this is very important. A point for her!. 

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario