Can I put a subtitle in here for this post? Is that going to bother anyone? No, don't raise your hands, because I don't actually care. If there were a spot for a subtitle on here, it would be filled as follows;
or, Why Classic Literature Almost Universally Sucks
Before you judge that subtitle, however, I want to say something. I've read quite a bit of classic sci-fi. It's one of my favorite genres, and between Jules Verne's 'The Mysterious Island' and H.G. Wells' 'War of the Worlds', some of my all time sci-fi favorites are close to a hundred years old. And in an effort to broaden my romantic fiction writing chops, I've recently taken to consuming some of the classics as audio books during my daily commute. It's been good fun, and I've realized something.
Nothing written a hundred years ago is actually very good.
Don't worry, that statement has some qualifiers. I listened to the entire written works of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle as they relate to Sherlock Holmes, and aside from the obvious fact that Doyle hadn't met a ton of American's, really enjoyed all of that. And really, Doyle had a gift for pacing that was missing in much of the fiction of his time. Dracula, in comparison, was quite slow. At moments that heightened the scariness of the work, and other times it detracted. But over all, both of those authors were quite adept as writers.
This brings me to A Princess of Mars. The novel, book one of the Barsoom series, is by Edgar Rice Burroughs, and if I'm honest, I wanted to read it because of a movie I saw. I liked the movie, and was interested in the book it was (mostly) based on.
And the book is good, really. I liked how well thought out the world was. The vegetation, the methodology adopted by civilizations faced with a rapidly fading atmosphere, the animals and their unique evolutionary patterns, the cultures. Heck, even his explanation for how they managed controlled flight in the atmosphere was really incredible, considering the book was written when planes were still in their infancy and he likely hadn't ever witnessed a powered flight. His use of concepts like the 8th and 9th rays of light were interesting, and while ultimately complete hogwash, they were original explanations to solve the problems that he needed to solve in order for his sci-fi universe to take shape. The very suggestion that light could exert force on something was weirdly prescient, and even his supposition that restaurants of an advanced civilization would be peopled entirely by robots is, even by todays standards, likely.
The fact is, I listened to the first third of this book, to the detailed setup of this world of Barsoom, and couldn't get over how well the creation of this world had gone. The entire world thrilled me. And then they introduced the Princess for which the book is named.
And here's where that subtitle comes in. The book is unbearably sexist.
The fact of the matter is, Sherlock Holmes is pretty dang sexist as well. There just aren't very many women in those stories to make it obvious. And I'm sure that The Mysterious Island and War of the Worlds would have been sexist as well, had there been any female character in them of any note. And Dracula... Well, Dracula is the chiefest offender in this way of any book I've read, and the honest truth is that once they introduce all of the female leads, the rest of the book is kinda a waste of time.
But I came away from this with a realization. Classics like these must be consumed with a pound of salt, and preferably some antibiotics as well. I found myself frothing with the treatment of some of the female characters. It really distracted from the story, to say nothing of my driving. So my verdict on The Princess of Mars?
Watch the movie John Carter instead.
Seriously, I'm not kidding. I wouldn't recommend you watch the movie versions of The Mysterious Island or War of the Worlds over reading either of those. Heavens no. But like I said, there aren't really any women in those books, so the rampant sexism of the times isn't really over-your-head there (assuming you can get around the omission... fortunately there just aren't that many characters in those books at all). But the treatment of the character of Dejah Thoris is SOOOO much better in the movie. In addition, the plot of the movie has been edited from the book. I'm not sure which elements they bring in from other books, but there are a number of things I liked better about the movie's story.
1. Better initial characterization of John Carter.
2. An explanation for how he got to Mars.
3. Actual villains, anyone?
4. The racist tendencies of the red men toward the green men aren't condoned in the movie.
5. Better characterization of Sola and Thars Tarkas.
6. A much better reason for ravaging the entire city and armed forces of Zodanga than "But I wanted to marry her!"
7. John Carter ISN'T a whiney child.
8. Dejah Thoris ISN'T the embodiment of the damsel in distress trope who can't do anything to rescue herself and throws herself completely on the "tenderness" and "love" of a random dude she just barely met.
9. A climax that actually means something.
10. That twist at the end. Holy crap, that twist at the end.
Hey look. Ten reasons why the movie is better than the book. Is the book bad? Um... well, that depends. The world that Burroughs creates in those pages is great, and you only get to see a slice of that world in the movie. But really, aside from that... The movie is better.
So there you go. I just saved you hours of your life that otherwise might have been spent mistakenly reading this book. You're welcome. And the next time somebody asks me if I've ever seen a movie that was better than the book on which it was based, I've got a great answer for them.
Yes. And Shockingly, it's John Carter.
or, Why Classic Literature Almost Universally Sucks
Before you judge that subtitle, however, I want to say something. I've read quite a bit of classic sci-fi. It's one of my favorite genres, and between Jules Verne's 'The Mysterious Island' and H.G. Wells' 'War of the Worlds', some of my all time sci-fi favorites are close to a hundred years old. And in an effort to broaden my romantic fiction writing chops, I've recently taken to consuming some of the classics as audio books during my daily commute. It's been good fun, and I've realized something.
Nothing written a hundred years ago is actually very good.
Don't worry, that statement has some qualifiers. I listened to the entire written works of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle as they relate to Sherlock Holmes, and aside from the obvious fact that Doyle hadn't met a ton of American's, really enjoyed all of that. And really, Doyle had a gift for pacing that was missing in much of the fiction of his time. Dracula, in comparison, was quite slow. At moments that heightened the scariness of the work, and other times it detracted. But over all, both of those authors were quite adept as writers.
This brings me to A Princess of Mars. The novel, book one of the Barsoom series, is by Edgar Rice Burroughs, and if I'm honest, I wanted to read it because of a movie I saw. I liked the movie, and was interested in the book it was (mostly) based on.
And the book is good, really. I liked how well thought out the world was. The vegetation, the methodology adopted by civilizations faced with a rapidly fading atmosphere, the animals and their unique evolutionary patterns, the cultures. Heck, even his explanation for how they managed controlled flight in the atmosphere was really incredible, considering the book was written when planes were still in their infancy and he likely hadn't ever witnessed a powered flight. His use of concepts like the 8th and 9th rays of light were interesting, and while ultimately complete hogwash, they were original explanations to solve the problems that he needed to solve in order for his sci-fi universe to take shape. The very suggestion that light could exert force on something was weirdly prescient, and even his supposition that restaurants of an advanced civilization would be peopled entirely by robots is, even by todays standards, likely.
The fact is, I listened to the first third of this book, to the detailed setup of this world of Barsoom, and couldn't get over how well the creation of this world had gone. The entire world thrilled me. And then they introduced the Princess for which the book is named.
And here's where that subtitle comes in. The book is unbearably sexist.
The fact of the matter is, Sherlock Holmes is pretty dang sexist as well. There just aren't very many women in those stories to make it obvious. And I'm sure that The Mysterious Island and War of the Worlds would have been sexist as well, had there been any female character in them of any note. And Dracula... Well, Dracula is the chiefest offender in this way of any book I've read, and the honest truth is that once they introduce all of the female leads, the rest of the book is kinda a waste of time.
But I came away from this with a realization. Classics like these must be consumed with a pound of salt, and preferably some antibiotics as well. I found myself frothing with the treatment of some of the female characters. It really distracted from the story, to say nothing of my driving. So my verdict on The Princess of Mars?
Watch the movie John Carter instead.
Seriously, I'm not kidding. I wouldn't recommend you watch the movie versions of The Mysterious Island or War of the Worlds over reading either of those. Heavens no. But like I said, there aren't really any women in those books, so the rampant sexism of the times isn't really over-your-head there (assuming you can get around the omission... fortunately there just aren't that many characters in those books at all). But the treatment of the character of Dejah Thoris is SOOOO much better in the movie. In addition, the plot of the movie has been edited from the book. I'm not sure which elements they bring in from other books, but there are a number of things I liked better about the movie's story.
1. Better initial characterization of John Carter.
2. An explanation for how he got to Mars.
3. Actual villains, anyone?
4. The racist tendencies of the red men toward the green men aren't condoned in the movie.
5. Better characterization of Sola and Thars Tarkas.
6. A much better reason for ravaging the entire city and armed forces of Zodanga than "But I wanted to marry her!"
7. John Carter ISN'T a whiney child.
8. Dejah Thoris ISN'T the embodiment of the damsel in distress trope who can't do anything to rescue herself and throws herself completely on the "tenderness" and "love" of a random dude she just barely met.
9. A climax that actually means something.
10. That twist at the end. Holy crap, that twist at the end.
Hey look. Ten reasons why the movie is better than the book. Is the book bad? Um... well, that depends. The world that Burroughs creates in those pages is great, and you only get to see a slice of that world in the movie. But really, aside from that... The movie is better.
So there you go. I just saved you hours of your life that otherwise might have been spent mistakenly reading this book. You're welcome. And the next time somebody asks me if I've ever seen a movie that was better than the book on which it was based, I've got a great answer for them.
Yes. And Shockingly, it's John Carter.
You've convinced me!
ReplyDelete