Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Wilson's Syndrome More Condition_symptoms
The Beatrice - Stefano Benni (coming soon!)
From this brief description, then easily deduce that it will be as memorable as all the other books I've read Benni. And those poems and songs between a monologue and the other merely massively increase my impatience: Benni's poems are something that you come across, once in a lifetime, and are not like you never expect them.
raging! 
Title: The Beatrici
Author: Stefano Benni
Publisher: Feltrinelli
Collection: The Storytellers
Pages: 96
Release Date: January 26, 2011
Synopsis (from lafeltrinelli.it ):
Eight monologues for women. Saving Silverman A nun, a woman anxious and a career woman, an old shrew and an old dreamer, a restless young, adolescent cruelty and a female wolf. A continuum of angry insults, invective, spasms of love, bamboleggiamenti, rants, pompous judgments, alluring confidence, sexual delusions, dreamy whispers, struts deliberations. A "score" of voices, a unique work, including theater and narrative. Electric shock. In a monologue and the other six poems and two songs.Honestly? I can not wait. My itchy hands. I'm more in tights , as would the dear Lucianina. Because every book that I read about this writer is a breathtaking plunge into an uncharted sea. And I love to explore new waters to swim.
From this brief description, then easily deduce that it will be as memorable as all the other books I've read Benni. And those poems and songs between a monologue and the other merely massively increase my impatience: Benni's poems are something that you come across, once in a lifetime, and are not like you never expect them.
raging!
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Solar Cooker Pringle Can
A Study in Scarlet - Arthur Conan Doyle
I have always liked the figure of Sherlock Holmes, I have always found it virtually foolproof way of Arthur Conan Doyle - and yet, curiously, I had never read the first novel in which the detective appears, despite having read much of the rest especially the stories. Taking advantage of insomnia galloping, the Christmas holidays (we do not pretend that I had to study) and my beloved grandmother gave me the complete edition of all his works on Holmes, I certainly thrown headlong into reading A Study in Scarlet.
I think when you start to read a novel by Conan Doyle, as you may know the writer and his characters, as they can feel prepared, you have not ever really.
Suddenly, 30 seconds after I opened the book, I was not lying on my bed, buried under the shawl from Grandma Duck, but in the midst of Victorian London teeming with life and crime, and then, in a very short space of time it takes to turn a page, I was suddenly in the Far West, very confused and disoriented but completely absorbed. Finally, tossed back to London, 221b Baker Street, in my nostrils the smell of tobacco Holmes was replaced with that of the dust of the Holy Land.
Sometimes it makes me think that some books you risucchino so violent, morbid, inexplicable - almost sick - only touching them with your eyes. As if they own life and strength, I firmly believe that this is so, what was a fantasy girl just started with the wonders of reading has taken root in my brain to convince this young adult I've become that must be so.
Well, anyway, all the stories and novels about Sherlock Holmes have this effect, but A Study in Scarlet in particular. Moreover, besides being damn charming and evocative, as always amused me immensely groped to solve the case roughly mimicking the deductive method of Holmes (and promptly going to meet miserable failures).
But we are talking about Sherlock Holmes. How can you define this excellent mind, this post slim and agile, this pipe walking, this eye sharp, this irrepressible genius, this bad character, without using the key words, the only man who can sum up in a few syllables: "Perfect Character"? Yes I like to read, and I've read enough to recognize one when I see it. A perfect character, I say. And with "perfect", do not mean lovable, heroic, charming, etc. - that would be a bad character, as I see I. No: Sherlock Holmes is perfect because it is built with admirable (and I say, obsessive) accuracy, with stratospheric attention to every detail (nothing is left to chance), no one would think they would ever meet someone like Sherlock Holmes, but the feeling that I left is that with a good time machine and the right city I could have run into Sherlock Holmes in person. Not because in it the author has made particularly credible evidence, indeed, rather, because he knows everything, every detail of his day, every step of its reasoning. Usually not right away, we are given a chance - if one can say - to get there with our heads, until the end we know nothing of what he thinks Holmes while knowing how each move, but finally there is revealed every detail of what he thought (so we can feel greatly humiliated). And closing the book we know so much about him, we could easily believe that this really exists or has existed investigative consultant. But because of his genius, just because he is the perfect character, there would never dream of thinking that there might be someone even remotely like him.
All this - and wanting more - Arthur Conan Doyle is able to condense it without ever sacrificing them in a short novel, almost half of Holmes does not appear that either, because the workers from telling the story of Jefferson Hope. The murderess. This murderess, who is not just a dark spot, a symbol of "evil", which is around the margins of the novel, focusing instead on the "good" - no, none of this. Jefferson Hope is a deep character and defined, almost romantic in his adventurous and unfortunate life, in his boundless love and tragic in its relentless quest for revenge. One's purpose is in life, to avenge the death of his girlfriend, and that led him to pursue until the end. He died a few days later, as if providence, fate, or whoever he had been left just enough time to do his terrible revenge. As if, deep down, all side with him. I came naturally to her story moved me, I was impossible not to feel involved and touched by the inexhaustible power, the tenacity, all generated by love.
For the first time in my life, my romantic soul was met by a detective story.
I think it's great, but basically this is Arthur Conan Doyle: Always unpredictable, always impeccable, always engaging to a nervous breakdown (the player, of course). Also outstanding in every respect. 
I have always liked the figure of Sherlock Holmes, I have always found it virtually foolproof way of Arthur Conan Doyle - and yet, curiously, I had never read the first novel in which the detective appears, despite having read much of the rest especially the stories. Taking advantage of insomnia galloping, the Christmas holidays (we do not pretend that I had to study) and my beloved grandmother gave me the complete edition of all his works on Holmes, I certainly thrown headlong into reading A Study in Scarlet.
I think when you start to read a novel by Conan Doyle, as you may know the writer and his characters, as they can feel prepared, you have not ever really.
Suddenly, 30 seconds after I opened the book, I was not lying on my bed, buried under the shawl from Grandma Duck, but in the midst of Victorian London teeming with life and crime, and then, in a very short space of time it takes to turn a page, I was suddenly in the Far West, very confused and disoriented but completely absorbed. Finally, tossed back to London, 221b Baker Street, in my nostrils the smell of tobacco Holmes was replaced with that of the dust of the Holy Land.
Sometimes it makes me think that some books you risucchino so violent, morbid, inexplicable - almost sick - only touching them with your eyes. As if they own life and strength, I firmly believe that this is so, what was a fantasy girl just started with the wonders of reading has taken root in my brain to convince this young adult I've become that must be so.
Well, anyway, all the stories and novels about Sherlock Holmes have this effect, but A Study in Scarlet in particular. Moreover, besides being damn charming and evocative, as always amused me immensely groped to solve the case roughly mimicking the deductive method of Holmes (and promptly going to meet miserable failures).
But we are talking about Sherlock Holmes. How can you define this excellent mind, this post slim and agile, this pipe walking, this eye sharp, this irrepressible genius, this bad character, without using the key words, the only man who can sum up in a few syllables: "Perfect Character"? Yes I like to read, and I've read enough to recognize one when I see it. A perfect character, I say. And with "perfect", do not mean lovable, heroic, charming, etc. - that would be a bad character, as I see I. No: Sherlock Holmes is perfect because it is built with admirable (and I say, obsessive) accuracy, with stratospheric attention to every detail (nothing is left to chance), no one would think they would ever meet someone like Sherlock Holmes, but the feeling that I left is that with a good time machine and the right city I could have run into Sherlock Holmes in person. Not because in it the author has made particularly credible evidence, indeed, rather, because he knows everything, every detail of his day, every step of its reasoning. Usually not right away, we are given a chance - if one can say - to get there with our heads, until the end we know nothing of what he thinks Holmes while knowing how each move, but finally there is revealed every detail of what he thought (so we can feel greatly humiliated). And closing the book we know so much about him, we could easily believe that this really exists or has existed investigative consultant. But because of his genius, just because he is the perfect character, there would never dream of thinking that there might be someone even remotely like him.
All this - and wanting more - Arthur Conan Doyle is able to condense it without ever sacrificing them in a short novel, almost half of Holmes does not appear that either, because the workers from telling the story of Jefferson Hope. The murderess. This murderess, who is not just a dark spot, a symbol of "evil", which is around the margins of the novel, focusing instead on the "good" - no, none of this. Jefferson Hope is a deep character and defined, almost romantic in his adventurous and unfortunate life, in his boundless love and tragic in its relentless quest for revenge. One's purpose is in life, to avenge the death of his girlfriend, and that led him to pursue until the end. He died a few days later, as if providence, fate, or whoever he had been left just enough time to do his terrible revenge. As if, deep down, all side with him. I came naturally to her story moved me, I was impossible not to feel involved and touched by the inexhaustible power, the tenacity, all generated by love.
For the first time in my life, my romantic soul was met by a detective story.
I think it's great, but basically this is Arthur Conan Doyle: Always unpredictable, always impeccable, always engaging to a nervous breakdown (the player, of course). Also outstanding in every respect.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Iron Deficient Anemia More Condition_symptoms
bad mood Miss
mixed blood and forget words,
pretends to have in your pocket the summer, says
still believe in love.
bad mood Miss
hides a notebook of poems,
has already grown tired of its charms, the hotel has forgotten
fury.
Miss bad mood,
are random words that you write?
can still weave a network
your hands cloaked in envy?
Lucrezia Brambillasca
(that rose full of thorns)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)