Click to read my introduction to this series, Part 1, and Part 2.
From 1963's The Sword in the Stone, we are moving on just a couple of years or so to 1967's The Jungle Book. This film is a bit like 1951's Alice in Wonderland in the sense that Mowgli, like Alice, is essentially just wandering around a land and meeting different types of characters--but Mowgli does have more characterization than Alice does, so we have at least enough of a sense of who he is for this post.
The obvious trait to bring up, though, doesn't have to do with Mowgli's character but rather with his physical self. The story takes place in India, meaning that Mowgli's the first non-white character in this series, even though we're still in the sixties. It took until the nineties for the Disney princesses to start gaining some racial diversity. So that's cool that the boys got a head start in this area (interestingly, I count both five non-white characters in this series and in the princess series).
Like Pinocchio and Arthur, Mowgli is just a boy, not a teenager like the princesses are. Like Aurora, though, he grew up outside of "his" homeland and within Nature. Instead of being raised by fairies, though, he's raised by wolves. The thing is, though, The Jungle Book turns everything around: instead of Mowgli's upbringing being evidence of wildness, it is evidence of innocence. He is raised to respect Nature and the animals within it, rather than loving hunting and guns like Man (when raised among his own kind) does.
Mowgli, then, is a completely positive character. Just look at him interacting with the other animals, for instance. He observes them and sees how they do things and then joins in. He's friendly and interested in learning others' ways. He talks to the young elephant before joining in the elephant march. He quickly starts up a mentor/apprentice relationship with Baloo. Near the end of the film, when he is feeling sad and betrayed, the vultures, by acting friendly to him, remind Mowgli of who he is: a friend to everyone who accepts him.
The reason Mowgli is so friendly with so many different types of animals is that he sees what they all have to offer. When Bagheera comments on Mowgli's ineptitude at climbing a large tree, Mowgli explains that it's because he doesn't have claws like Bagheera does. He's smart, and he's able to recognize individual strengths--and to try and imitate any strengths that he sees.
Mowgli is brave, too. Because the jungle is the only home he's ever known, he stands up to Bagheera and says that he wants to stay and isn't afraid of Shere Khan. This isn't just words, either. When he does finally face Shere Khan, Mowgli doesn't run: he prepares to fight instead. And when the vultures try and get him away to safety, he protests, "Let go--Baloo needs help." He won't flee just to save himself when he knows his friend is in danger.
Not that Mowgli is entirely without fault. He does fall for King Louie's offer. But he also learns from misjudgments. The second time Kaa tries to get him, Mowgli knows what's happening and knows not to trust Kaa. And Mowgli is, after all, just a child, so it's natural (well, it would be at any age, too, honestly) for him to misjudge some situations.
It's the princesses who are known for making friends with animals, but Mowgli quite literally talks to and befriends animals--and not in the casual way of Snow White or Aurora. He talks with them and shares in their stories and gets to know them, so much so that they are willing to risk their lives to save him. That makes Mowgli, first and foremost, a friend, which is not a bad trait at all.
Wednesday, November 8, 2017
Monday, November 6, 2017
The "Unmentionable" Side of Victorian Living
Usually it isn't useful to directly compare two very different pieces of fiction. Such a comparison, however, can sometimes be helpful for non-fiction. After having recently read Ruth Goodman's How to Be a Victorian, I was curious to see how Therese Oneill's Unmentionable: The Victorian Lady's Guide to Sex, Marriage, and Manners would compare. Obviously Goodman's book covered more ground, but I was interested to see how the two writers approached the same topics.
Now, both the title and physical copy (with its cover photo and bright pink spine) of Oneill's book let readers know right away what style and tone she's going for: sensational. If, then, either the title or look of the book turn you off, you easily know that this isn't the book for you. She chooses to focus not on providing an overview of Victorian living but on the scattered, scandalous details that might make for entertaining or shocking reading. She tries to shock her readers.
Primarily, then, this book goes in the humor category more than the history category. In the beginning of the book, Oneill herself admits that she's going to jump around from topic to topic instead of following a straight path (like Goodman, for instance, did). And boy does she jump around. She says that she'll be focusing on the upper class but then she keeps on bringing up situations that would not apply to upper class women at all--but only readers who already know this will always pick up on this fact. That became a bit annoying: she focused on the social side of the upper class while also acting like those women needed to do all of the hard work that women of lower classes did (when in reality they didn't and the lower class women didn't have the same social standards to have to adhere to). Not that this book directly gives false information; it just sometimes implies false images. This, of course, leads up to the final chapter, in which Oneill admits that she has been exaggerating. ??? Then what's the point? Disrespecting dead women so we can all have a good laugh at them?
That's just how humor is, though. Either it's your style or it isn't. As you can tell, this book wasn't really my style (as I knew going in that it probably wouldn't be). But I did want to hear what she had to say.
The thing is, this book makes for easy reading. While Goodman's book was slow reading because it was so dense and so full of information, this book is 400 pages of not-densely-packed-words with plenty of headings and pictures that take up space on the pages. And because of Oneill's humorous style, the pacing moves quickly. She mixes facts in with her commentary so that this book is a quick read. And it does have some good factual information mixed in. Of course, with a book like this, whether or not it's all new to you or it's mostly things you've heard before is just going to depend on your own previous reading experiences. I don't think I came across much that I hadn't heard before, except in certain of the details (she does go into further detail than some places do). When giving sources, she tends to favor showing quotes from people of the time because those sound more shocking to modern ears than simply explaining how something was done. So while you'll certainly learn something from reading this book, there are other books out there that will give you the same types of information without the humorous-at-the-expense-of-the-Victorians style, if that's what you'd prefer.
Mostly I objected to the concept of trying to put down an era and also say that our is so much better. She's the first person I've heard say that corsets (not tightened or barely tightened, of course) were less comfortable than modern bras (I've never heard anyone else say that modern bras are comfortable). And in the end she praises modern ibuprofen, tampons, and shampoo--okay, maybe we don't put arsenic in face cream anymore but we put plenty of other harmful ingredients in things like tampons and shampoo and makeup (and food) and even ibuprofen isn't exactly the type of thing you want to be using regularly. We fill the ocean with plastic straws and bags and sprinkle wood pulp on our pasta and use cookware and dinnerware with lead in it (think twice about those great dollar store prices) and put parabens and Red 40 on our lips and drink high fructose corn syrup (and Red 40, too) and eat chocolate and wear clothing resulting from slave-like conditions (if not actually slavery). And plenty of us don't even have the excuse of ignorance. Why are we or our lives so much better than the Victorians? (Obviously there are plenty of ways in which we have things "better," but my point is that every era has its positives and negatives.)
And the thing is, why does the mere fact that you're talking about chamber pots, periods, and attitudes towards sex need to be scandalous? Ruth Goodman covered the same topics in her book and maintained the same matter-of-fact style throughout. She calmly described, for instance, her experience trying out the delicate process of making condoms out of animal intestines; Oneill, on the other hand, expects you to be shocked just because she's talking about subjects that novels don't cover (I for one don't think that fiction needs to show characters in the restroom or taking care of periods, unless perhaps the plot has to do with health and so this is a detail the story needs to show). What's shocking about being alive, or about realizing that people in the past were alive, too?
Sigh. I've ranted too long, haven't I? I guess you can always read this book as a conversation starter. It's the type of book that you can neither recommend nor not recommend (unless you already know someone's tastes): you just have to decide for yourself if it sounds like your style.
Friday, November 3, 2017
Zak's Chocolate: Haiti 70%
There I was, ready to choose the Madagascar bar, when suddenly I realized that the Madagascar could wait. I've had plenty of Madagascar origin chocolates; not that they're all the same, but I have had plenty of them (because cocoa from Madagascar has all of those wonderful fruity flavor notes). Chocolate sourced from Haiti, though, I see much less often. So today we're looking at the Haiti 70% bar from Zak's Chocolate (I'll get to the Madagascar bar at a later point).
Cheery gold flower shapes blossom out of the red paper that wraps up this bar. The bar itself also has a touch of that redness in it. Though I don't taste any floral notes in the chocolate, the aroma does seem to me to have a floral tone.
Instead of tasting floral, this chocolate tastes, in a way, earthy. In the beginning stages, there is a flavor of either wood or smoke; it seems to be not so biting as smoke, though. That flavor may develop into a slight floral taste for a moment before becoming slightly sweet--specifically that particular type of sweetness that stems from the flavor notes of the cocoa rather than added sugar. Everything grows more tender then, reminding me of grasses somehow; the flavors richen while also staying quite light. The finish is a light, tender hint of tang, and the aftertaste is of warm chocolate.
This is why I call this chocolate earthy: it reminds me of a place in nature. It doesn't taste bitter or too tangy or deep. It's more like water in a quiet pond, cool and clear and welcoming, a mirror or window for you to sit and stare into.
The lightness of this chocolate makes it quite different from other chocolates, and it's that difference from the usual that is drawing me in. Yes, this most definitely is dark chocolate and not milk chocolate but that lightness almost puts in mind more the concept of milk chocolate. The bar's tasting notes, by the way, explain that it "exhibits mild chocolate and light roasted nut flavors." Usually when a chocolate tastes primarily of cocoa, the general feeling is of richness, which has more of a deep than a light tone. So the fact that the cocoa here is so featherlight keeps fascinating me.
This is a chocolate that transports me and makes me think and makes me happy, and it's a chocolate that's easy to keep eating. Maybe I'm just excited to find a chocolate that feels so different from others, or I may have just stumbled on the chocolate that best matches me. Either way, this is another great installment from the Zak's Chocolate line.
Cheery gold flower shapes blossom out of the red paper that wraps up this bar. The bar itself also has a touch of that redness in it. Though I don't taste any floral notes in the chocolate, the aroma does seem to me to have a floral tone.
Instead of tasting floral, this chocolate tastes, in a way, earthy. In the beginning stages, there is a flavor of either wood or smoke; it seems to be not so biting as smoke, though. That flavor may develop into a slight floral taste for a moment before becoming slightly sweet--specifically that particular type of sweetness that stems from the flavor notes of the cocoa rather than added sugar. Everything grows more tender then, reminding me of grasses somehow; the flavors richen while also staying quite light. The finish is a light, tender hint of tang, and the aftertaste is of warm chocolate.
This is why I call this chocolate earthy: it reminds me of a place in nature. It doesn't taste bitter or too tangy or deep. It's more like water in a quiet pond, cool and clear and welcoming, a mirror or window for you to sit and stare into.
The lightness of this chocolate makes it quite different from other chocolates, and it's that difference from the usual that is drawing me in. Yes, this most definitely is dark chocolate and not milk chocolate but that lightness almost puts in mind more the concept of milk chocolate. The bar's tasting notes, by the way, explain that it "exhibits mild chocolate and light roasted nut flavors." Usually when a chocolate tastes primarily of cocoa, the general feeling is of richness, which has more of a deep than a light tone. So the fact that the cocoa here is so featherlight keeps fascinating me.
This is a chocolate that transports me and makes me think and makes me happy, and it's a chocolate that's easy to keep eating. Maybe I'm just excited to find a chocolate that feels so different from others, or I may have just stumbled on the chocolate that best matches me. Either way, this is another great installment from the Zak's Chocolate line.
Wednesday, November 1, 2017
Forty Years of Star Wars
The full title of this book is Star Wars from a Certain Point of View; it contains "40 stories celebrating 40 years of Star Wars." That being said, even though the 460 pages don't have very high word counts, this is a hefty book to get through. Forty individual stories by forty writers with forty different perspectives and almost as many different settings meant that at times I felt like I should be taking forty whole days to read this book. Though a few stories are either longer or shorter, most of them come in at around ten pages--which is quick to read, but that quickness also means that as soon as you start in with one story, you're on your way into the next, where you have to readjust to the new tone and narrator. This being that type of book and also being a special celebratory book release, you may want to allow extra time to let this one sink in instead of trying to rush through it.
When this book was first announced, I was a bit confused about the content. At first I thought it was going to be non-fiction. What it is is quite literally Star Wars (what those of us who weren't alive in the 70's know as Episode IV or A New Hope) from 40 different points of view--chronologically. So we start with Captain Antilles on the Tantine IV while the ship receives the Death Star plans, then move on to a stormtrooper who boards the ship, and then to an Imperial logistics liaison. We're seeing the same scenes that are in the film or we're hearing about the events in those scenes, but we're getting to hear about it from the perspective or side characters or other people who would have been involved even if they never appeared onscreen. The concept makes for a great way of celebrating Star Wars and revisiting familiar things in new ways.
The stories are quite varied. They all feature very different narrators. Some we know already by name (like Lando). Some we know by face (like the stormtrooper who told let Obi-Wan and Luke "move along"). Some we know from other Star Wars stories (like Aphra). Some are random. We usually get to hear backstories for the characters, which can be intriguing and very Once Upon a Time style. Some of the stories have more action, some have more drama, some have more philosophy. Some are better than others. And naturally different readers are going to have different favorites depending on what types of things we all respond to most.
I was so excited that Beru has her own story--but I have to admit that it slightly disappointed me. I had made up my own idea of Beru and this story didn't completely match mine. Beru was the soft and kind young woman (well, and later older woman) to whom hard work was like breathing, the woman (in my mind) who gave up having her own children to raise this little child who came into her arms. So I guess sometimes it's almost better to fill in the blanks on your own.
With that said, we did, however, cover plenty of fascinating ground. While I didn't love the tone in which Obi-Wan's story was written, I did enjoy the thoughts and scenes that we got to see there. And Yoda's story was great, particularly because we learned that he had hoped to train Leia and not Luke (it almost feels like a slight teasing for events in the sequel trilogy, where we now see Luke as troubled and possibly having failed and Leia as the strong, active leader).
Because these are just short stories, this book would be perfect for someone who doesn't usually read Star Wars book. You can read a little at a time or get more of an overview look versus having to focus on just one longer story. And of course it's a must-read for anyone who does normally the novels: it truly is a celebration of the types of things that we love.
When this book was first announced, I was a bit confused about the content. At first I thought it was going to be non-fiction. What it is is quite literally Star Wars (what those of us who weren't alive in the 70's know as Episode IV or A New Hope) from 40 different points of view--chronologically. So we start with Captain Antilles on the Tantine IV while the ship receives the Death Star plans, then move on to a stormtrooper who boards the ship, and then to an Imperial logistics liaison. We're seeing the same scenes that are in the film or we're hearing about the events in those scenes, but we're getting to hear about it from the perspective or side characters or other people who would have been involved even if they never appeared onscreen. The concept makes for a great way of celebrating Star Wars and revisiting familiar things in new ways.
The stories are quite varied. They all feature very different narrators. Some we know already by name (like Lando). Some we know by face (like the stormtrooper who told let Obi-Wan and Luke "move along"). Some we know from other Star Wars stories (like Aphra). Some are random. We usually get to hear backstories for the characters, which can be intriguing and very Once Upon a Time style. Some of the stories have more action, some have more drama, some have more philosophy. Some are better than others. And naturally different readers are going to have different favorites depending on what types of things we all respond to most.
I was so excited that Beru has her own story--but I have to admit that it slightly disappointed me. I had made up my own idea of Beru and this story didn't completely match mine. Beru was the soft and kind young woman (well, and later older woman) to whom hard work was like breathing, the woman (in my mind) who gave up having her own children to raise this little child who came into her arms. So I guess sometimes it's almost better to fill in the blanks on your own.
With that said, we did, however, cover plenty of fascinating ground. While I didn't love the tone in which Obi-Wan's story was written, I did enjoy the thoughts and scenes that we got to see there. And Yoda's story was great, particularly because we learned that he had hoped to train Leia and not Luke (it almost feels like a slight teasing for events in the sequel trilogy, where we now see Luke as troubled and possibly having failed and Leia as the strong, active leader).
Because these are just short stories, this book would be perfect for someone who doesn't usually read Star Wars book. You can read a little at a time or get more of an overview look versus having to focus on just one longer story. And of course it's a must-read for anyone who does normally the novels: it truly is a celebration of the types of things that we love.
Monday, October 30, 2017
Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake
One of the reasons why Sleeping Beauty is one of my favorite of the Disney animated films is Tchaikovsky's music. So while at first I thought I wasn't going to see Ballet Arizona's Swan Lake, the lure of Tchaikovsky and the opportunity to see one of the most famous ballets brought me once more to Symphony Hall.
I had begun to decide that ballet wasn't really my medium, wasn't really the thing I liked most to regularly watch. I found, however, that Swan Lake was my style of ballet. As soon as the curtain came up, I felt like they had put everything together for me. The woodsy, rich-with-details backdrop drew me in to this fantasy, medieval setting. Tchaikovsky's music kept me enthralled and engaged in that personal way that his music has. In fact, I felt like I could have been there just to hear Phoenix Symphony performing this music, even without the rest of the ballet (which I don't say in order to speak against the beautiful sets and costumes and the skill of the performers, just to emphasize my interest in the music).
The choreography also felt very different, to me, from Romeo and Juliet last season. Here there were always multiple pieces. If a pair danced in the center of the stage, there were usually also performers on the sides of the stage. And the style of dancing changed in different scenes or parts of scenes to go along with whatever is happening at the time. All of this meant that there were more things for me to watch, more options for my eyes, more ways to hold my interest. Then of course was the way in which the choreography mimicked the movement of swans to show the cursed identity of Odette and her friends.
What I felt while watching this production was a complete synchronization between visuals and sounds. This was music and dance telling a story in an elegant and emotional composition. I always want to see emotion on stage, don't I? Well, Swan Lake certainly portrays emotion. It's a lovely artistic fantasy, truly a magical piece.
I had begun to decide that ballet wasn't really my medium, wasn't really the thing I liked most to regularly watch. I found, however, that Swan Lake was my style of ballet. As soon as the curtain came up, I felt like they had put everything together for me. The woodsy, rich-with-details backdrop drew me in to this fantasy, medieval setting. Tchaikovsky's music kept me enthralled and engaged in that personal way that his music has. In fact, I felt like I could have been there just to hear Phoenix Symphony performing this music, even without the rest of the ballet (which I don't say in order to speak against the beautiful sets and costumes and the skill of the performers, just to emphasize my interest in the music).
The choreography also felt very different, to me, from Romeo and Juliet last season. Here there were always multiple pieces. If a pair danced in the center of the stage, there were usually also performers on the sides of the stage. And the style of dancing changed in different scenes or parts of scenes to go along with whatever is happening at the time. All of this meant that there were more things for me to watch, more options for my eyes, more ways to hold my interest. Then of course was the way in which the choreography mimicked the movement of swans to show the cursed identity of Odette and her friends.
What I felt while watching this production was a complete synchronization between visuals and sounds. This was music and dance telling a story in an elegant and emotional composition. I always want to see emotion on stage, don't I? Well, Swan Lake certainly portrays emotion. It's a lovely artistic fantasy, truly a magical piece.
Friday, October 27, 2017
Zak's Chocolate: Halloween Truffles Selection
Well, actually, only one of these truffles is a Halloween piece. But I didn't want to say "Halloween and others" or "Halloween and non-Halloween." So here we are: four truffles, one of which is a Halloween truffle.
I do enjoy getting special seasonal or holiday selections. Most of the store chocolate, if anything, just gets a holiday-themed wrapper for a regular flavor. Chocolate shops like Zak's Chocolate, on the other hand, have the chance to throw in fun pieces like this.
- Bloodshot Berry Bonbon - I say fun because even though a bloodshot eyeball sounds like it would fall into the gorey side of Halloween, this eye is actually rather cute. Perhaps I'm just admiring the paint job. A box of these would make a nice little gift (gifts aren't a standard Halloween tradition, but a gift is always in season), or you could put out a small plate of them at home on Halloween night. Perfect for everyone who just stays home for the holiday but still likes to bring in a couple of Halloween touches. Now, as far as taste goes, you get a berry flavor from this truffle's ganache right away, then tangy chocolate, and then more of a semisweet chocolate flavor once the ganache has melted away and left you with just the chocolate shell. I'm not always the biggest on berries, so I can't say specifically what berries I taste; it seems like more of a general berry flavor to me, perhaps with some blackberry in there. It's somewhat tangier than I'd expected. Overall this is a simple, flavored truffle.
- Cinnamon Plum - This one, visually, makes for a great companion to the Bloodshot eye: it also comes in a rounded shape, with some red, purple, and white painted on. And the cinnamon (and even the plum) makes for more of a fall type of flavor. You get that cinnamon flavor right away, followed quickly by the plum; the two together create that spiced fruit tone. The plum I would say is more of a general either spiced fruit or fruit-in-a-dessert flavor, not specifically recognizable as plum. It's the cinnamon that's the star and takes the most attention, in an absolutely warm and delightful way. Cinnamon is a wonderful spice and goes so well with chocolate and yet I don't feel like it gets used very often these days. The cinnamon here is nice and strong (properly, not overly, strong) to really give you that feeling of the holiday season. I taste this and instantly picture fireplaces and pine garlands and The Nutcracker and plum pudding in A Christmas Carol.
- AZ Queen Bee Honey - The biggest of the four, this truffle is a sort of round, thick disc with scalloped edges and a yellow honeycomb pattern on top. The ganache here is a big firmer, almost chewy. While you do taste some chocolate first, it's that rich kind of creamy flavor belonging to honey that quickly takes over. Strongly, recognizably honey. I don't know that I've ever come across the honey flavor in chocolate being this strong--which is a compliment. If a chocolate is labeled as honey, then I want to taste the honey. And of course that would be where the different texture comes in: the ganache seems to be made largely of honey. That's why it has a texture like the thicker, creamed honeys, almost grainy like that; I approve since that type of honey is usually my favorite. This truffle is the perfect example of two flavors working together as one, the chocolate and the honey blending together and enhancing each other. Lovely.
- Peixoto Mocha - A nice square with the coffee bean (shape) on top. Sleek-looking. I cut this one open (I can hardly even remember the last time I just bit into a truffle: I always have to be prepared to take pictures of the inside) to find a strong coffee scent. Naturally, then, this truffle tastes strongly of coffee right away--and yes, mocha specifically. It's like I can taste the coffee, the cream, and well, the chocolate--so I suppose this could be a cafe mocha, too. The strong and fresh coffee flavor will make this one a win for coffee-lovers.
I think my favorite is the Cinnamon Plum because it transported me and made me feel warm and happy, then the Queen Bee because it's awesome. And the Bloodshot Berry Bonbon is just the thing for Halloween. When I was at the shop earlier in the week, they mentioned that they would also be putting out plain chocolate in Halloween shapes. So for everyone who isn't trick-or-treating, try stopping at a chocolate shop instead; it's just as fun.
I do enjoy getting special seasonal or holiday selections. Most of the store chocolate, if anything, just gets a holiday-themed wrapper for a regular flavor. Chocolate shops like Zak's Chocolate, on the other hand, have the chance to throw in fun pieces like this.
- Bloodshot Berry Bonbon - I say fun because even though a bloodshot eyeball sounds like it would fall into the gorey side of Halloween, this eye is actually rather cute. Perhaps I'm just admiring the paint job. A box of these would make a nice little gift (gifts aren't a standard Halloween tradition, but a gift is always in season), or you could put out a small plate of them at home on Halloween night. Perfect for everyone who just stays home for the holiday but still likes to bring in a couple of Halloween touches. Now, as far as taste goes, you get a berry flavor from this truffle's ganache right away, then tangy chocolate, and then more of a semisweet chocolate flavor once the ganache has melted away and left you with just the chocolate shell. I'm not always the biggest on berries, so I can't say specifically what berries I taste; it seems like more of a general berry flavor to me, perhaps with some blackberry in there. It's somewhat tangier than I'd expected. Overall this is a simple, flavored truffle.
- Cinnamon Plum - This one, visually, makes for a great companion to the Bloodshot eye: it also comes in a rounded shape, with some red, purple, and white painted on. And the cinnamon (and even the plum) makes for more of a fall type of flavor. You get that cinnamon flavor right away, followed quickly by the plum; the two together create that spiced fruit tone. The plum I would say is more of a general either spiced fruit or fruit-in-a-dessert flavor, not specifically recognizable as plum. It's the cinnamon that's the star and takes the most attention, in an absolutely warm and delightful way. Cinnamon is a wonderful spice and goes so well with chocolate and yet I don't feel like it gets used very often these days. The cinnamon here is nice and strong (properly, not overly, strong) to really give you that feeling of the holiday season. I taste this and instantly picture fireplaces and pine garlands and The Nutcracker and plum pudding in A Christmas Carol.
- AZ Queen Bee Honey - The biggest of the four, this truffle is a sort of round, thick disc with scalloped edges and a yellow honeycomb pattern on top. The ganache here is a big firmer, almost chewy. While you do taste some chocolate first, it's that rich kind of creamy flavor belonging to honey that quickly takes over. Strongly, recognizably honey. I don't know that I've ever come across the honey flavor in chocolate being this strong--which is a compliment. If a chocolate is labeled as honey, then I want to taste the honey. And of course that would be where the different texture comes in: the ganache seems to be made largely of honey. That's why it has a texture like the thicker, creamed honeys, almost grainy like that; I approve since that type of honey is usually my favorite. This truffle is the perfect example of two flavors working together as one, the chocolate and the honey blending together and enhancing each other. Lovely.
- Peixoto Mocha - A nice square with the coffee bean (shape) on top. Sleek-looking. I cut this one open (I can hardly even remember the last time I just bit into a truffle: I always have to be prepared to take pictures of the inside) to find a strong coffee scent. Naturally, then, this truffle tastes strongly of coffee right away--and yes, mocha specifically. It's like I can taste the coffee, the cream, and well, the chocolate--so I suppose this could be a cafe mocha, too. The strong and fresh coffee flavor will make this one a win for coffee-lovers.
I think my favorite is the Cinnamon Plum because it transported me and made me feel warm and happy, then the Queen Bee because it's awesome. And the Bloodshot Berry Bonbon is just the thing for Halloween. When I was at the shop earlier in the week, they mentioned that they would also be putting out plain chocolate in Halloween shapes. So for everyone who isn't trick-or-treating, try stopping at a chocolate shop instead; it's just as fun.
Wednesday, October 25, 2017
Once Upon a Time Starts Again
Back in May, I commented (you can read that post here) that the "soft reboot" of Once Upon a Time would probably be a good move for the show. And though I was past being excited for the new season, the three episodes that have come out so far have reignited my interest.
Exactly the two things that I predicted/hoped for are happening: intentional repetition and learning from the past. Now that they're a few seasons in, the writers have a better idea of the kinds of things that did or didn't work before; coming in with a fresh start, they can gently move away from what didn't work as well. If these first episodes are a taste of what's to come (and if enough people are even still watching the show), then Once Upon a Time has the chance to keep running.
Obviously the main repetition is with Henry and Lucy and a cursed town whose inhabitants have lost their memories. It's the same, but it's different. We also have the chance to see the "believing child" as a girl instead of a boy and the "unbelieving adult" as a man instead of a woman. All of the repetition goes with this idea of stories, stories being things real and tangible and always happening and always beginning again and never really ending.
Right away, though, the main difference in this new version of the show is the approach to fairy tales. Sure, the original show said that it was showing fairy tales like we hadn't seen them before--but they mainly stuck to the basic concepts. Now everything is turned around more. Deliberately, the main traits of a story (whether themes or characters' personalities or plot elements) are flipped, resulting in more unpredictability than we had before. Henry even mentions that there are different versions of each story, so we're getting to see some of these "different" angles play out (Cinderella, for instance, did appear back in season one, but that was a different Cinderella). This gives the writers the chance to play with the stories more; it also lets the audience feel like the plot is, once again, something new for us to discover.
Speaking of new things to discover. I can't pass on at least mentioning Rumplestiltskin. He was so wonderfully mysterious in season one, a trait that mostly vanished by the end of last season. Now he's back to being that weird character on the sidelines, the one who seems to know more than everyone else does, the one whose motives and agenda we can't quite discern. Love it.
This was one of those shows that people tended to say was a little white, wasn't it? It looks like that's one of the things they're changing up this time, mainly with the casting of Cinderella and Lucy. And of course I love that we're finally getting to see Tiana since she's one of my favorites; I look forward to seeing more of her story.
I think that's about it. Mainly I just wanted to say that I'm impressed at how much I enjoyed these first three episodes; I wasn't expecting that. I'll update again later, either at mid-season or at the end of the season, depending on when I have something more to add.
Exactly the two things that I predicted/hoped for are happening: intentional repetition and learning from the past. Now that they're a few seasons in, the writers have a better idea of the kinds of things that did or didn't work before; coming in with a fresh start, they can gently move away from what didn't work as well. If these first episodes are a taste of what's to come (and if enough people are even still watching the show), then Once Upon a Time has the chance to keep running.
Obviously the main repetition is with Henry and Lucy and a cursed town whose inhabitants have lost their memories. It's the same, but it's different. We also have the chance to see the "believing child" as a girl instead of a boy and the "unbelieving adult" as a man instead of a woman. All of the repetition goes with this idea of stories, stories being things real and tangible and always happening and always beginning again and never really ending.
Right away, though, the main difference in this new version of the show is the approach to fairy tales. Sure, the original show said that it was showing fairy tales like we hadn't seen them before--but they mainly stuck to the basic concepts. Now everything is turned around more. Deliberately, the main traits of a story (whether themes or characters' personalities or plot elements) are flipped, resulting in more unpredictability than we had before. Henry even mentions that there are different versions of each story, so we're getting to see some of these "different" angles play out (Cinderella, for instance, did appear back in season one, but that was a different Cinderella). This gives the writers the chance to play with the stories more; it also lets the audience feel like the plot is, once again, something new for us to discover.
Speaking of new things to discover. I can't pass on at least mentioning Rumplestiltskin. He was so wonderfully mysterious in season one, a trait that mostly vanished by the end of last season. Now he's back to being that weird character on the sidelines, the one who seems to know more than everyone else does, the one whose motives and agenda we can't quite discern. Love it.
This was one of those shows that people tended to say was a little white, wasn't it? It looks like that's one of the things they're changing up this time, mainly with the casting of Cinderella and Lucy. And of course I love that we're finally getting to see Tiana since she's one of my favorites; I look forward to seeing more of her story.
I think that's about it. Mainly I just wanted to say that I'm impressed at how much I enjoyed these first three episodes; I wasn't expecting that. I'll update again later, either at mid-season or at the end of the season, depending on when I have something more to add.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)