Response To Tazmina

     I read the blog post written by Tazmina. She wrote about the book Everlost. it's about child ghosts trapped in a half life, and she writes about how, like Mary Hightower takes something away from others (SPOILER) she dos this by not telling the children how to get to heaven (or hell). I've also read the book, and I loved it.
     The reason i'm reviewing this post is because it made me think of this book in a completely different way. When I read it earlier I thought about how Mary Hightower was lying and withholding information from the children in Everlost. But Tazmina pointed out how Mary was actually taking things from the kids, by not allowing them into wherever they were going. I have re-read the book several times and never thought of it like that. People who don't let others get things, or know things, are kind of like thieves. It's the equivalent of a thief to that person. AMazing how I could overlook an idea so many times, but when someone else points it out, it opens my mind to this whole other path of ideas.
     One problem, though, I had with tazmina's post is that she set it up badly, and it's a little disorganized. I'm quite disorganized with my blogs to sometimes, but when you step back and look at a blog post set up strangely, it is really confusing. I think Tazmina should put a litlle more organization and set-up in this post. Otherwise, I think it's a great post, and really makes me think in new ways.

Story Endings

     Why is it that in the stories that we most like things turn out badly? Actually let me re-frase that. In the stories I most re-read things turn out badly. For instance the Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy series doesn't turn out that well. In an arsonists guide to writer's homes in new england he (SPOILER ALERT) ends up back in prison. In the Bartimeaus trilogy (another SPOILER) Nick dies at the end. But i loved all three books and re-read all three many many times.
     Maybe it's because I'm trying to impose a happy ending on it. Like, if I read it enough times it will change how i ends. Sometimes in other books I'll go back and re-read the sad parts. It's like my brain can't accept it and I want it to change. That's something hard I find in books. whatever decisions the author makes, I can't change it. In real life, at least with the little things, I can change them. But books won't change. I'll throw them against a wall sometimes I'm so angry at a stupid line or plot choice.
     Maybe that's why people like books or tv shows, especially thrillers. You can't control what happens and it leaves you helpless, and at the edge of your seat. Conversely, maybe that's why people like certain video games so much, because they give you the ability to control so much more then you can in real life, but you stay safe.

Awkward Main Characters

      In the book I'm reading, An Arsonist's Guide To Writer's Homes in New England, the main character is a self described bumbler and never really does anything right. He's over emotional and doesn't get people. However this really adds to the humor of the book. Every situation he messes up I crack up at.
     Why do we find people that act stupidly funny? I think it's because if you project humor onto something you can sort of hide it. Like if you're embarrassed about a fact, if you make it funny you can hide behind the humor. Or if something makes you uncomfortable and you draw attention away from it with a joke.
      But why is it amusing if main characters are awkward? is it because we project ourselves into the book and want to hide ourselves behind humor, or does it remind us of ourselves and let us laugh at that?