|
|
Content by Budge Burgess
Reviewer Rank: 21
Helpful Votes:
17740
|
|
Learn more about Your Profile.
|
Reviews Written by
Budge Burgess (Kilmarnock, Scotland)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
Stylish design, excellent performance, 6 Nov 2009
I had a black plastic 'le tea pot' for something like eight years, using it daily. A weak point in the plastic eventually led to its demise and I elected to replace it with the metal version. It has to be said, the plastic one was an excellent servant, if it did dribble a little when pouring. The metal version pours better,
This is a wonderful teapot. The internal strainer keeps your tea free of leaves - it has a very fine mesh and copes superbly with all forms of loose tea, from the finely shredded commercial varieties to the much larger leaves of specialist or Chinese teas. The strainer in this metal version is also better positioned than in my original plastic one and, with its folding handle, makes the loading of tea leaves much easier (and cleaning easier too).
The pot holds enough tea for two pint mugs - I do drink tea by the pint - so it is excellent for individuals or couples. The level of tea in the strainer means you need to add approximately one pint of water to ensure coverage of leaves, so adjust quantities to your taste.
The teapot has proved easy to clean, easy to use, and makes an excellent cuppa. Given the eight years usage I had with the plastic version, I expect this to be a long-lasting investment, easily maintained, and resilient (the glass bowl allows you to see the depth of water and the density of colour of the tea you're brewing - and in years of regular but careful usage, I never chipped or cracked the glass).
This is an excellent addition to the kitchen. Practical, of course, but a very stylish design, and an excellent balance, easy to pour, safe, and easy to use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
A mystery why any of these were published, 30 Sep 2009
Were it not for her name, it's unlikely any of these stories would have made their way into print in a magazine, let alone as part of a collection of shorts. Christie wrote a couple of whodunnit masterpieces and created a couple of memorable characters, but these stories are about as trivial as they come. They are badly worked tat.
The short story is a very tight medium - it has to be plotted rigorously, the characters drawn with economy and precision. Christie is not a master of the short story - she writes a competent Poirot novella, she does not write good short stories. These twelve are perfect examples of her shortcomings. The characterisation is simplistic and two dimensional - jolly, genteel young things (or middle aged things) struggle with mistaken identity, confusion, misrepresentation, etc., and come out on top. Good, morality, and the English way of life triumph over adversity.
It's all cosy stuff - the heroes and heroines all have private incomes or some comfortable way of life. Only the servants actually work for a living - and are grateful for the privilege. Foreigners, of course, are to be distrusted ... and are usually odious and duplicitous. It's all Established Church, King and Country fare. Christie didn't understand the psychology or sociology (or the politics) of crime, she really didn't understand people (beyond her narrow little circle and class), and it shows in these twelve stories.
The plots are threadbare, the characters are simple cutouts without any real presence, the villains are as predictable as they come. Christie can weave a masterly tale, but these are trivial. The writing can be utterly sterile, the pace turgid, and the outcome predictable.
Of the twelve stories ('The Listerdale Mystery'. 'Philomel Cottage', 'The Girl in the Train', 'Sing a Song of Sixpence', 'The Manhood of Edward Robinson', 'Accident', 'Jane in Search of a Job', 'A Fruitful Sunday', 'Mr.Eastwood's Adventure', 'The Golden Ball', 'The Rajah's Emerald', 'Swan Song') few are capable of really holding your interest; I suspect none would have been chosen for print in magazines of the day had it not been for the Christie name. The stories are trite. 'Philomel Cottage' may be better than the rest, but it is contrived and obvious - a modern writer could do a much better job developing the psychology of the story, could perhaps make it into a print-worthy narrative, but it is a good idea which lacks substance and which needed work.
If you are a Christie fan, you'll probably want to read this stuff - don't delude yourself into believing that it's evidence of her genius or that this is great writing. It's largely rubbish - and, if you write short stories yourself, look at these and learn ... understand just how bad short stories can be, and appreciate what goes into writing a good one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
Barely worth tuppence, 30 Sep 2009
Tommy and Tuppence are a pair of upper class investigators of crime (it would be far too common to describe them as 'sleuths'), and one of Agatha Christie's residual creations. Christie could produce a memorable detective in Poirot and a Marple who seems destined to be eternally loved by an English-speaking public, but this pair are as two dimensional as they come - instantly forgettable in any of their contrived adventures.
Here, Tommy and Tuppence find an entertaining sideline running a detective agency - it's all jolly japes and anyone for tension as bored housewife and underemployed secret agent become tradesmen for a short spell. It's probably the closest either of them ever get to doing a proper job ... although you certainly never get the sense that there's any work involved, just young things having adventures.
A series of short stories results in which they face jewel thieves and nasty Bolshevik agents. Amusing, light hearted it's supposed to be - Tommy and Tuppence are distinctly Christie light relief - but this is not the sort of stuff which is going to make you laugh. Cosy, genteel, it's not going to frighten the children, servants or horses ... and it's hardly even competent whodunnit writing. In fact, much of the writing, and a number of the stories, will make you wince.
Like so many of Christie's characters, Tommy and Tuppence are two dimensional representations of a class of young things which should have been extinguished by the Great War. The stories are rigidly class-ridden and biased, they are moralistic and bigoted, and extremely dated. Christie could tell a story - she wrote a couple of the all-time great whodunnits - but her tales are largely plot driven, and her characterisation can be very simplistic. Tommy and Tuppence are the stuff of schoolgirl fantasy, hardly the stuff of a mature writer.
Christie, despite her reputation as a crime writer, clearly didn't understand crime - she wrote about sanitised crimes, crimes which could be easily understood without recourse to sociology or psychology; she pictured polite little murders and robberies and deceptions against a backcloth of flat, predictable, upper-middle class worlds where predominantly decent (if gullible and deluded) people were normally honest and unquestionably moral, a place where the working class knew its place (servants, stout labourers, and corruptible oafs who could be led into crime). It was a world where foreigners - with the exception of the odd Belgian detective - were always to be viewed with suspicion.
These stories are sterile, dated (as dated as Dornford Yates ... remember him), and, if Christie's writing reputation relied upon them, she would never have been heard of. This is simplistic stuff - read it if you're a Christie fan to recognise just how poor her writing and stories could be. It's not mature writing (it's trivia for a jolly hockeysticks schoolgirl magazine), and really, it's best left in the locker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
Not a war film, an expose of French myths, 22 April 2009
Jean-Pierre Melville's 1969 tale of the French Resistance, and a film which explores courage without melodrama or hyperbolic heroics. The tone is set early, with the execution of a traitor; in its early days Resistance to German occupation is an amateur cause - survival, never mind success, will depend on how quickly the amateurs can learn a dirty and dangerous profession. This is warfare without glory - its only victory is in living another day.
The film opens with a triumphant German march past l'Arc de Triomphe as their propaganda machine publicises the surrender of France and Nazi occupation of Paris. Melville does not hide the fact that France had been humiliatingly defeated, nor that many in France would collaborate with the occupying forces. France was physically divided - part of it would be German occupied, the rest left under the control of the Vichy government (a collaborationist French regime), but France was also politically divided, most significantly between Left and Right.
Melville's characters, throughout, are trapped, imprisoned in an environment controlled by the Germans. Betrayal is always possible, suspicion is the watchword. When the film's central character is taken to London for a briefing, Melville contrasts the French experience with the British one just a few miles away across the Channel: in Paris we see German uniforms everywhere, we see a handful of resistance fighters struggling against them ... and risking betrayal by their own people; in London, everyone is in uniform, everyone is in the fight against the Nazis - the Germans may be bombing the city, but the spirit of London and Londoners refuses to be broken.
Melville was widely attacked in 1969 for showing the extent of collaboration in France - especially in demonstrating that the French police and French Fascists actively aided the Germans. The myth of the French nation solidly behind the Resistance was simply rejected by Melville - he knew many had collaborated unequivocally, he'd worked with the Resistance, he knew how dangerous it was, how few people could be trusted. The film, however, received a very chilly reception, and it was years before its quality was widely recognised - either in France or abroad.
Dark, gloomy, stripped of any Hollywood glamour or bravado, Melville emphasises the moral nature of resistance, alludes to its intellectual roots (recognising that the Resistance brought together people from a wide spectrum of French politics - Communists, Socialists, Catholics, Gaullists, Republicans, even Monarchists). A courageous film in its refusal to glamorise warfare and its expose of the myth of the nation in resistance - finely acted, beautifully directed, and only lately winning a deserved reputation for its portrayal of wartime France.
We follow the tale of Phillipe Gerbier (Lino Ventura), an engineer turned Resistance leader. His is an army of the shadows - they do not fight major battles, they do not wear uniforms, they seem to spend more time killing one another than attacking the Germans. They smuggle radios back and forth, they are constantly on the run, constantly on their guard against betrayal. It's claustrophobic, lacking in glamour, bleak, austere, and tinged with the depressing certainty that the Germans must get them in the end. Melville is demonstrating that it's the hopelessness of their position which makes their courage so extraordinary - and made collaboration so despicable.
The DVD offers a fine combination of extras - a 35 minute newsreel shot by Resistance cameramen during the Paris uprising and liberation of 1944. Graphic, raw in its courage, and a must watch supplement to the film. And there's an excellent commentary by Ginette Vincendeau and an analysis of Melville's work, the film, his selection of shots, etc. Excellent value.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
Competent, but uninspiring, 21 April 2009
Slow to start, slow moving, and a touch contrived in the manner in which it tries to establish a picture of a happy, suburban family in a happy, suburban environment, but this is a competent, made for TV movie. It'll offer light entertainment, not inspiring viewing or riveting drama.
So, take an ordinary family - he's a competent young architect, establishing a sound local reputation, she's a doting mother and teacher. They have a young son, they are good family people, with good neighbours, good church connections, good prospects - the sort of American family that could be used as a yardstick to make the Simpsons look dysfunctional. Yes, they're that goody-goody - they look about as real and as natural as the hairstyles and wigs which will dance across your screen in the course of this film.
Then somebody abducts their child. They try to cope. They cooperate with the police, they do everything they can to trace the boy. But one of them has a secret.
A drama rather than a thriller, it can be slow moving at times, predictable at others; there are times when the annoying background music becomes the most dynamic thing happening. The acting is generally good - Ann Jillian is especially convincing in the role of distraught mother. Camera work and lighting are limited, and direction is sparse - it's a very middle-of-the-road, made for TV, don't do anything to frighten the horses, cliche-ridden production, with no great surprises, no originality, everything too neat and tidy, everything tied to the demands of TV advertising.
A competent production which doesn't get above average and which won't get your pulse racing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
Spark, just enough to enlighten your understanding, 13 April 2009
"Spark Notes" is an American series 'created by Harvard students for students everywhere'. It offers a slightly different perspective on Shakespeare, so there are advantages and disadvantages for British 'A' level students. The Othello Spark Notes, for instance, present a major theme of the play as the incompatibility of military heroism and love - it would be more usual to look at the conflict between love and duty.
The Notes open with a brief biography of Shakespeare and a plot overview - what happens in the play? There are brief portraits of the three leading characters (Othello, Iago, Desdemona), then sections on themes, motifs, symbols (the Handkerchief), and a scene by scene textual analysis. It concludes with some specimen questions on the play.
This is an interesting little book which makes some useful points. I'd recommend the York Notes and the Letts Explore series as offering better value for 'A' level or even first year at university, but it's worth remembering that books like these won't pass exams for you. It's worth collaborating with your fellow students and sharing the expense of buying two or three different sets of critical notes - pass them around, talk about them, familiarise yourself with the text.
There is, however, no substitute for reading the play thoroughly, reading it several times, and, ideally, getting to see a live performance or video/DVD of the play. The value of study notes is in helping you focus, assemble ideas, and gain perspectives which inspire you to look at the text differently and help you understand it. They don't offer answers you can parrot in essay or exam - they help you think, they encourage you to learn, but they won't do the work for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
Stories which may show their age, but also their quality, 13 April 2009
The Victorian or Edwardian ghost story is a gentle affair - no slasher horror or technicolor gore here. They describe a darkly mysterious atmosphere, a sense of you really wouldn't want to spend a night alone in this empty house. It's cerebral, the emphasis more on doubt and intrigue than on what would be described as contemporary horror. The only special effects required are your ability to doubt reality, to imagine that the physical world might be insubstantial, might be interwoven with gateways to another dimension, might be peopled with creatures and places which are not what they seem.
The writing can be dense, even laboriously ornate, like the ornamental scrolling on Victorian wrought iron ware. At best, it adds to the atmosphere, to your sense of the ominous, of the outlandish or out-of-this-worldish. The most interesting feature is the range of authors whose works appear within this volume - 42 stories by authors like Le Fanu, Dickens, Henry James, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Bram Stoker, E.Nesbitt, M.R.James, and many more. Some of the names are ineluctably associated with the ghost story or horror genre, but others clearly are not. These ghost stories, these writings, are an insight into the psyche of another time and another world.
For anyone interested in writing 'ghost' stories, these works represent a tradition which is far removed from the modern ghost - a creature of visceral horror or of slapstick humour. It is gentle, very gentle horror by modern standards, almost bland. But understanding the history of the genre gives the writer insight into the nature of horror. It changes through time, in parallel with our changing recognition of what counts as evil. For the reader, it demands a different suspension of disbelief, an ability to step back into a different era with a different perspective on horror and evil, a different moral and social portfolio.
If your expectation is of stories which will readily translate to the 21st century, you will be disappointed by this volume. It is nevertheless an excellent anthology.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Anatomist
|
by Federico Andahazi
Edition: Paperback |
| Availability: Currently unavailable |
|
|
|
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
Censorship and sensuality, 13 April 2009
Federico Andahazi's first novel, 'El Anatomista', won plenty of plaudits when first published in Argentina - not least because the sponsor of one award ironically refused to present it to him, denouncing him as a "communist porn artist" ... thus cementing his literary status and establishing him as a cause célèbre in Latin America. Given that 'The Anatomist' is a book about censorship, it seems fitting that it should be exposed to censorship in its own right - the irony doubly confounded in this instance by the fact that the would be censor was a woman.
The book follows the efforts of Mateo Colombo, a 16th century Venetian physician who became the first European male to document, if not discover, the existence of the clitoris. A man, you'd think, whose efforts might have been celebrated by women, a man who, in his time was threatened and silenced by other men, notably the hierarchy of the Church.
Andahazi's novel moves at a slow but compulsive pace. He treats his subject gently, exploring and uncovering his theme, arousing the reader's interest by careful asides and explorations of Colombo's world. While his namesake discovers the existence of a huge continent - well, two, really - Mateo follows his nose to a much tinier earthly presence. Man, we find, can profit from the plundering of continents, but the pleasuring of women offended the sensibilities of the Church ... and perhaps inflated the inadequacies of too many men. The West would steal two continents, men still struggle to pinch a single clitoris.
'The Anatomist' is a compelling, funny, picaresque tale. Though an historical novel, its themes of science and discovery confronting false morality and genuine hypocrisy are no less relevant than in today's world. Censorship takes many forms, and sexuality and desire are still too often shrouded in mystery.
Mateo Columbo wrote 'De re anatomica', exploring the anatomy of the clitoris, but, while Andahazi's novel is based on historical fact, much of its detail is imaginary and imaginative. Indeed, he seems to deliver two parallel tales, the one, Colombo's obsessive love of a famous courtesan, the other, his compulsive investigation of anatomy and struggle to publish his findings in the face of censorship and an oppressive Church. We get a vision of a man with lofty, scientific ideals, and a man with baser physical desires, a man enraptured by a passion for science and enquiry, and a man obsessed with romantic love and the pursuit of the unattainable.
A funny, fascinating fable, this is a book whose subject can still shock, can still provoke violent reactions. Four hundred and fifty years after Mateo Colombo's discovery, America has been well and truly mapped, and has become the master of self-publicity. Perhaps reading this novel might acquaint you better with the smaller subject and inspire you to follow in Mateo's finger steps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
Pretentious? Moi?, 13 April 2009
Loosely based on a work by Proust, this is a film which rapidly dissolves into obscurity and enigmatic pretensions. A rich, effete, dilettante young man is obsessed by his skinny (almost anorexic) girlfriend. He doesn't work, he doesn't have to. Occasionally, he does some translation of literary texts ... when he can be bothered. The sole purpose for his pampered, purposeless, passionless life seems to be his obsession. He's loathe to let her out of his sight unless accompanied by another, equally slim, young woman and without, apparently, the further chaperone of a camera.
He keeps his captive in his house, she is invited to visit his bed from time to time, but his sexual contact is adolescent, premature, and entirely self-centred. He is obsessed. But what does she appear to gain from the relationship? She lives a life of idleness and ennui. Deciding which dress to wear is the most exciting and most challenging thing she will do in the day. She certainly does not appear to be captive. Somehow, she has captivated him, and he is the one trapped by the nature of his obsession.
Quite frankly, it's a film in which I could not identify with any of the characters, could not sympathise with any of them, and in no way wished to sympathise with any of them. Obsession is a fascinating subject for literary or cinematic enquiry. Obsession, here, takes place in such an extraordinary and unreal a setting as to make it trivial and unbelievable. Obsession becomes transparently the vehicle for a story which otherwise has no substance, and the absurdity of the setting robs the vehicle of any drive or direction.
In the end, you want to be charitable and decide that this is not pretentious drivel, and then wonder if you are trapped in your own intellectual pretensions and are extending too much weight and significance to this film because it's French? If it had been an American or a British movie, I would have been instantly more scathing. Because it's French, I looked for greater depth, sophistication and significance. Ultimately, therefore, I won't be charitable - this is pretentious drivel!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
Make sure you get the version you need (if not two or more), 13 April 2009
'Othello' is one of Shakespeare's later plays and one of his great tragedies, penned sometime between 'Hamlet' and 'King Lear'. It's a play which emphatically presents cultural tensions - gender, race, religion, nation, role. It's a play which, perhaps more thoroughly than any of his other works, relies on the potency of opposition and contrast, the characters being polarised into black and white.
Othello is a Moorish general who has saved Venice and who is now based on the exotic Mediterranean island of Cyprus. Here is a man who, despite his 'alien' origins, is hailed as the saviour of his community, a man who is universally loved and admired, except by his lieutenant, Iago.
In Iago Shakespeare beats out with blacksmith rhythm one of his greatest creations, a man fired by jealousy, tempered by hatred, a man whose determination is hammered into shape and whose evil expresses itself in duplicitous twists and malignant turns enough to topple Othello. It is the nature of Shakespearean tragedy that the hero should plunge from the sublime heights to utter destitution, despair, and death.
The cornerstone of Othello's triumph is his great love for his lady, Desdemona. Winning her hand, securing her devotion is his greatest achievement and elevates him to unimagined happiness. Yet it this very foundation which Iago undermines with the seed of jealousy. As suspicion takes root, the whole edifice of Othello's power and completeness collapses about him. He murders his wife, faces the realisation of what he has done, and recognises that eternal damnation is less of a punishment that enduring life aware of his own guilt.
Shakespeare is a major architect of English. His phraseology permeates the language like the mortar binding together a building. 'Hamlet', it has been said, is a play written in clichés, so commonplace have become the scores of quotations which have been lifted from it. 'Othello' has had a less dramatic impact on the language, but it remains one of the great examples of the tragedian's craft.
'Othello' embodies Shakespeare's oft-repeated theme of love and duty as the mortar mix which binds society. It is Othello's tragedy that he should adulterate both, exposing them as weaknesses rather than strengths, the alchemy of his emotions reducing them to acids which will eat into his soul and corrupt his very nature.
Shakespeare took characterisation to a new level. His triumph is not only in his invigoration of the English language but in his psychological awareness and insight, his ability to get inside the minds of his characters long before social science was conceived or psychology became the lingua franca of literature. Shakespeare's characters have a realism which contrasts with the earlier role of the staged character as a mouthpiece for words and vehicle for action. Shakespeare's characters breathe, their dilemmas and tragedies are painfully human.
Othello and Iago are two of his greatest creatures. Villainy, we discover, can be as enthralling and dramatically dynamic as any heroic role. A play which can pit such characters against one another is a play which will provide lasting rewards for both its audience and its actors. Shakespeare's plays, remember, have thrilled and inspired actors for centuries: they continue to do so, and each generation of actors wrings new interpretations and understandings from performance.
There are many published editions of the play available - your choice may reflect your pocket, it may more likely reflect your need to study for school or college. It's worth contrasting the various popular editions available and considering which most adequately meets your needs.
My first choice, for any student or anyone seeking a sound understanding of the play, is the Arden edition. It provides the most extensive notes, offers insights into the play and its performance, explores the dynamics of its characters, and offers you an excellent appreciation of the text. The textual notes are comprehensive and readily comprehensible. They are included on the same page as the text - text at the top, notes at the bottom - and make it easy to follow the meaning of the dialogue. Add to this good quality paper and printing, and you have a robust edition and an exciting resource for the student.
The Penguin Shakespeare edition offers an excellent introduction - some seventy pages of analysis of the play's themes and dynamics. This is well worth reading by any student. A small, pocket-sized edition, it is also convenient for carrying around. However, the notes on the text, while excellent, are confined to the back of the book - you have to keep turning backwards and forwards to refer to them, and this can be a drawback. Note, also, that there are three Penguin edition available. The Penguin Shakespeare is more up-to-date than the New Penguin Shakespeare, and the Penguin Popular Classics simply delivers the text of the play with little or nothing in the way of notes.
The New Cambridge Shakespeare is a sophisticated resource - it provides a dynamic Introduction, analysing the play and providing the sort of intellectual baseline sixth form and first year university students need. It offers further analysis at the end of the play. The text, itself, is beautifully printed, with tight little notes at the foot of each page (you may find you need glasses to follow these, however). Still, an edition to be recommended.
The Cambridge School Shakespeare provides lots of ideas for groupwork and class analysis of text and themes, and must provide teachers with an excellent practical resource with which to engage their class. The text appears on the right hand page, notes and commentary are kept to the left hand page - making it very accessible and readable. There is also a quality feel to the paper and printing.
The Heinemann edition is aimed at 'A' level students in the UK. It offers page by page notes on the text plus an overview of what is happening on stage to give you an insight into this as an active dramatic production, not simply words on a page. It's well laid out, well produced, well printed, making the text easy to follow. There are questions posed about the drama and characters, providing stimulating material for teaching and learning in groups, or for individual thought. There's a significant section at the rear of the book exploring themes and the major questions in the play, leading the student (and teacher) into a deeper awareness of language, setting, characterisation and drama. Designed emphatically for 'A' level students, it will nevertheless prove useful for first year at university (and possibly beyond), thanks to its ability to generate ideas and questions.
The Longman's School Shakespeare also provides notes on the left hand page, text on the right. The text is, perhaps, better presented than the Cambridge 'School' edition - it is slightly more expansive and lucid. The notes, however, don't feel as robust as in the Cambridge edition - they're more limited and less comprehensive.
The Oxford School Shakespeare is, I feel, the weakest of the 'school' editions. Overall, I didn't find it as dynamic or thought-provoking as the others. It provides a brief synopsis, a scene by scene analysis, and some useful notes. But text and notes run together on the same page, giving it a congested, claustrophobic feel which I found disconcerting.
For school work, I'd go for the Cambridge, Heinemann, or Longman's, for the keen student, the Arden edition is my top recommendation, followed by the New Cambridge. However, if you are studying the play, it's worth collaborating with your fellow students - you each acquire a different edition of the text, then you can compare and contrast the notes and commentaries.
|
|
|
|
![The Army In The Shadows (aka L'Armee Des Ombres) [1969] [DVD]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/02/misc/no-img-lg-uk._V45480597_.gif)
![Original Sin [1988] [DVD]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/416ZREMNTTL._SL110_.jpg)
![The Captive [DVD] [2001]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51DME9YWANL._SL110_.jpg)
