CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Fanny Burney lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 12, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) Fanny Burney lol She was one tough woman. In 1801 D'Arblay was offered service with the government of Napoleon Bonaparte in France, and in 1802 Burney and her son followed him to Paris, where they expected to remain for a year. The outbreak of the war between France and England overtook their visit, and they remained for ten years altogether. Although the conditions of their time in France left her isolated from her family, Burney was supportive of her husband’s decision to move to Passy, outside Paris. In August 1810 Burney developed pains in her breast, which her husband suspected could be due to breast cancer. Through her royal network of acquaintances she was eventually treated by several leading physicians and finally, a year later, on 30 September 1811, she underwent a mastectomy performed by "7 men in black, Dr. Larrey, M. Dubois, Dr. Moreau, Dr. Aumont, Dr. Ribe, & a pupil of Dr. Larrey, & another of M. Dubois". The operation was performed in the manner of a battlefield operation under the command of M. Dubois, then accoucheur (midwife or obstetrician) to the Empress Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma, and considered to be the best doctor in France. Burney was later able to describe the operation in detail, since she was conscious through most of it, as it took place before the development of anaesthetics. I mounted, therefore, unbidden, the Bed stead – & M. Dubois placed me upon the Mattress, & spread a cambric handkerchief upon my face. It was transparent, however, & I saw, through it, that the Bed stead was instantly surrounded by the 7 men & my nurse. I refused to be held; but when, Bright through the cambric, I saw the glitter of polished Steel – I closed my Eyes. I would not trust to convulsive fear the sight of the terrible incision. Yet -- when the dreadful steel was plunged into the breast – cutting through veins – arteries – flesh – nerves – I needed no injunctions not to restrain my cries. I began a scream that lasted unintermittingly during the whole time of the incision – & I almost marvel that it rings not in my Ears still? so excruciating was the agony. When the wound was made, & the instrument was withdrawn, the pain seemed undiminished, for the air that suddenly rushed into those delicate parts felt like a mass of minute but sharp & forked poniards, that were tearing the edges of the wound. I concluded the operation was over – Oh no! presently the terrible cutting was renewed – & worse than ever, to separate the bottom, the foundation of this dreadful gland from the parts to which it adhered – Again all description would be baffled – yet again all was not over, – Dr. Larry rested but his own hand, & -- Oh heaven! – I then felt the knife (rack)ling against the breast bone – scraping it! She sent her first-person account of this experience months later to her sister Esther without rereading it, and it remains one of the most compelling early accounts of a mastectomy. It is impossible to know today whether the breast removed was indeed cancerous or whether she suffered from mastopathy. She survived and returned to England in 1812 to visit her ailing father and to avoid young Alexander’s conscription into the French army, while still in recovery from her own illness. Wiki Respect. Edited November 12, 2013 by mjmooney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) She was also one of the most influential early novelists. There was a good BBC doc (or series of documentaries?) about the rise of the novel in the 18th century. Worth watching. 'tis a funny name all the same Edited November 12, 2013 by CarewsEyebrowDesigner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Been recommended the Flashman series of books. Any good guys and gals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC_Hitz Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 The Flashman series is the dog's danglies. Loved them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 18, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted November 18, 2013 Been recommended the Flashman series of books. Any good guys and gals? Yeah, they're great fun. Helps if you're interested in history, but entertaining even if you're not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leemond2008 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 currently re-reading To Kill a Mockingbird but once I have finished that I will be starting this Book Description Publication Date: 6 July 2000 Johnny Truant wild and troubled sometime employee in a LA tattoo parlour, finds a notebook kept by Zampano, a reclusive old man found dead in a cluttered apartment. Herein is the heavily annotated story of the Navidson Report. Will Navidson, a photojournalist, and his family move into a new house. What happens next is recorded on videotapes and in interviews. Now the Navidsons are household names. Zampano, writing on loose sheets, stained napkins, crammed notebooks, has compiled what must be the definitive work on the events on Ash Tree Lane. But Johnny Truant has never heard of the Navidson Record. Nor has anyone else he knows. And the more he reads about Will Navidson's house, the more frightened he becomes. Paranoia besets him. The worst part is that he can't just dismiss the notebook as the ramblings of a crazy old man. He's starting to notice things changing around him . . . Immensely imaginative. Impossible to put down. Impossible to forget. House of Leaves is thrilling, terrifying and unlike anything you have ever read before. Apparently it has quite a cult following the bloke in Waterstones was raving about it when I took it to the till, has anyone here read it? The format and structure of the novel is unconventional, with unusual page layout and style, making it ergodic literature. It contains copious footnotes, many of which contain footnotes themselves, including references to fictional books, films or articles.[1] Some pages contain only a few words or lines of text, arranged in strange ways to mirror the events in the story, often creating both an agoraphobic and a claustrophobic effect. The novel is also distinctive for its multiple narrators, who interact with each other throughout the story in elaborate and disorienting ways. it wasn't cheap either it was £25 So I finished this on Saturday, not sure what to think of it to be honest, you have to appreciate the work that went into writing the book, I don't think I have ever or will ever read anything quite like it again. The story wasn't great and certain parts dragged pretty badly but I enjoyed it on the whole. The format of the book is truely baffling though and I suppose it would be worth reading it just for that. I would probably give it 5.5 out of 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leemond2008 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 currently re-reading Amazon Review Why read Carrie? Stephen King himself has said that he finds his early work "raw," and Brian De Palma's movie was so successful that we feel like we have read the novel even if we never have. The simple answer is that this is a very scary story, one that works as well--if not better--on the page as on the screen. Carrie White, menaced by bullies at school and her religious nut of a mother at home, gradually discovers that she has telekinetic powers, powers that will eventually be turned on her tormentors. King has a way of getting under the skin of his readers by creating an utterly believable world that throbs with menace before finally exploding. He builds the tension in this early work by piecing together extracts from newspaper reports, journals, and scientific papers, as well as more traditional first- and third-person narrative in order to reveal what lurks beneath the surface of Chamberlain, Maine. News item from the Westover (ME) weekly Enterprise, August 19, 1966: "Rain of Stones Reported: It was reliably reported by several persons that a rain of stones fell from a clear blue sky on Carlin Street in the town of Chamberlain on August 17th." Although the supernatural pyrotechnics are handled with King's customary aplomb, it is the carefully drawn portrait of the little horrors of small towns, high schools, and adolescent sexuality that give this novel its power, and assures its place in the King canon. --Simon Leake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogso Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Carrie is OK. Not top drawer King. I would agree that it is very 'raw'. There's some I like about it, but a fair bit I don't. Compared to his other early work (whether released at the time or not), things like The Long Walk, 'salems Lot, The Shining, it's significantly worse. The '76 film is a cracker though, not heard too much about the upcoming new version (it must be out soon?), and I haven't seen the TV movie or the sequel either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leemond2008 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Carrie is OK. Not top drawer King. I would agree that it is very 'raw'. There's some I like about it, but a fair bit I don't. Compared to his other early work (whether released at the time or not), things like The Long Walk, 'salems Lot, The Shining, it's significantly worse. The '76 film is a cracker though, not heard too much about the upcoming new version (it must be out soon?), and I haven't seen the TV movie or the sequel either. Yeah when you put it along side the other books that you mentioned it doesn't really stand up to them but as far as horror books go it is one of those that I would say you should at least read once if you are interested in them. I am quite looking forward to the remake its got Chloe Moretz in it and she is becoming quite a scream queen, she has already been in a fair few horrors, I just hope that they don't tone it down and turn it into a teen horror film like scream and all them sorts of things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 I would be interested to read the Shining because I have heard King say that he didn't like the film at all and he didn't agree with casting of Nicholson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leemond2008 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 The Shining is a brilliant book, I could do with reading that one again actually, I haven't read it in years, the sequal was pretty decent as well, completely different to the original and a lot easier to read but I still thought it was good, finished it in 2 or 3 days if I remember correctly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 How does it compare with film? Is it very different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leemond2008 Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 yeah there are quite a few differences between the book and the film, definitely enough to justify reading the book even if you have seen the film, I saw the film before I read the book but instantly preferred the book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogso Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 The 'problem' with The Shining movie is that it is very much Kubrick's The Shining and not Stephen King's The Shining directed by Stanley Kubrick. Which is fine, it's a good film. The issue King has with it, and some fans of the book, is quite simple really - Kubrick depicts Jack Torrance as a nutjob from the very outset. In the book, Jack has his faults, many of them, but he is not a Very Bad Man. It is the hotel that makes him a Very Bad Man. Like I said though, I don't have a problem with that, or other chnages, in the film. They're both great, but very much different beasts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginko Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Hm, I don't know about that. Jack's portrayed pretty early on as having some pretty major anger and drinking issues. I'm not sure the film really captured that though, and instead of showing a writer and family man plagued by his demons, he did come across as slightly unhinged from the offset, which isn't supposed to happen quite so soon. I love the film and the book, but I saw the film first. It's definitely a good read though. I found the book much more creepy than the film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 I've tried many times to read Stephen King but his writing just doesn't work for me. Maybe I'll download a few audiobooks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 The hedge animals were a major loss for the film. I don't know why they spooked the hell out of me. I know there's a mini-series endorsed by King but it looks crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 What's all the fuss about with Hilary Mantel; anyone read Wolf Hall? I'm still waiting for a copy to turn up at one of the local charity shops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 19, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted November 19, 2013 What's all the fuss about with Hilary Mantel; anyone read Wolf Hall? I'm still waiting for a copy to turn up at one of the local charity shops. Not me, but Mrs M says it's pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts