very simple

I finally finished reading Pride & Prejudice, and it was great. I’ve been totally addicted to the A&E adaptation of the book, going so far as to get in on DVD as soon as it became available, but for some reason I never got around to actually reading any Jane Austen. And maybe it’s my 20th century sensibility, but I kept wanting Mr. Darcy to just grab Elizabeth and kiss her already! It would have solved so many communication problems. But that was probably the point.

I am actually offended by this adaptation, but I’ll probably end up seeing it against my better judgment. I do actually want to see this one though, if only because Bend it Like Beckham was awesome.

Anyway, adding to my list of books that I’ve now purchased before finishing the other ones that I’m in the middle of reading are Angels and Demons by Dan Brown (okay, so it’s basically the mental equivalent of a romance novel without the romance, but I did like the Da Vinci Code, even if it did only take me about 5 hours to read) and the book about Paul O’Neill, the former treasury secretary (I’m interested in seeing what it actually says, rather than hearing over and over again the three quotes that the news media has chosen to constantly repeat – although I personally see nothing wrong with continually emphasizing that George Bush is a "blind man in a room full of deaf people"). I also didn’t get the point of this review in Slate. Does the author not understand the concept of a parable? or sarcasm? And if I’ve heard the statement before, it’s got to be at least somewhat common – I find it hard to believe that Kinsley is so insistent on taking it literally. To me he just sounds like an idiot who has never picked up a copy of Bartlett’s.

Tags: books