macca
Sitting For The Newtons
Posts: 2,084
|
Post by macca on Apr 29, 2006 18:44:21 GMT -5
I enjoyed this one - subplot and all. I usually enjoy any book featuring Marilyn and Carolyn, come to think of it.
However, I was bothered by some GLARING inconsistencies, the most obvious being Dawn's now-we're-sisters present she gave MA at the wedding! Um, she was saving for a now-we're-sisters present in Dawn's Wicked Stepsister and bought her a cat brooch in that book. Presumably, both books were written by Ann (there's no thanking any ghostwriter) so what's the deal? She can't remember what takes place from one book to the next?
There was an eyerolling feminist moment, when Sharon didn't want to be "given away" like property, but I overlook it because this book was good - I enjoyed hearing them make plans for the wedding and liked the surprise birthday dinner they organised for Sharon. I also thought it was incredibly sweet and sensitive of Mary Anne to write such a lovely letter to Kristy, in order to ease the insecurity and jealousy. Very realistic response from Kristy IMO.
I can even overlook MA's big temper tantrum when she found out she'd have to move to Dawn's house.
|
|
Amalia
Sitting For The Braddocks
Her Original Point of View
Posts: 3,664
|
Post by Amalia on Apr 30, 2006 1:57:34 GMT -5
I can even overlook MA's big temper tantrum when she found out she'd have to move to Dawn's house. I dunno. I'm weird. I liked seeing MA make someone else cry for a change. MA also got mad at Dawn when she couldn't come up with a good gift for Dawn's mom. Man, she sure likes to start some drama.
|
|
macca
Sitting For The Newtons
Posts: 2,084
|
Post by macca on Apr 30, 2006 7:05:20 GMT -5
^ yeah, for someone who's always described as soft, sweet, passive, doesn't get angry easily... MA certainly seems to have a short fuse.
|
|
inge
Junior Sitter
Posts: 767
|
Post by inge on Apr 30, 2006 7:56:56 GMT -5
Why did the parents hardly ever tell the kids when major events were going to happen? Like Richard was waiting for 'the right time' to tell Mary Anne. He knew she hung out with Dawn a lot - he could have known she would tell her. I also thought that Dawn started crying over nothing. Usually, Carolyn and Marilyn (sub)plots bore me, too. But I really did like the note Mary Anne gave to Kristy, and I liked the detail of Mary Anne ruining her make up by crying at the wedding.
|
|
|
Post by booboobrewer on Apr 30, 2006 17:46:01 GMT -5
Why did the parents hardly ever tell the kids when major events were going to happen? Payback for them never telling their parents about getting in dangerous situations?
|
|
|
Post by sugarmonkey on May 27, 2006 9:29:20 GMT -5
Do you think Marilyn and Carolyn needing their own rooms was a foreshadowing of Dawn and MA needed their own rooms? Or was it just a recycled idea?
The Laura Ashley dresses. I never did like those.
Re: The Thomas/Brewer clan and their fights. Pretty convenient it happened just as two BSC members became family. (Another foreshadowing? Another recycled idea?) Of course, I guess it just serves Liz and Waston right for springing a new sister on their new family. They hadn't been adjusting to one another for more than a year at most when they a new kid is thrown in among them without warning.
I did like how MA got her mothers necklace and wore it to the wedding. I thought it was nice for Alma to be remembered even though it was her husband getting married.
Richard was selfish I think. Never allowing MA to say Yeah or Hey or ever interrupt him. I now interrupting is rude but when you familiar with the person you're suppose to be able to relax a little.
|
|
wanderingfrog
Sitting For The Arnolds
Official BSC Archivist
Posts: 2,552
|
Post by wanderingfrog on May 27, 2006 9:48:17 GMT -5
There was an eyerolling feminist moment, when Sharon didn't want to be "given away" like property, but I overlook it because this book was good I don't really see this as eyerolling. Didn't this custom start precisely because the bride was being given away as property from her father, who owned her, to her husband, who would now own her? I know that's not what it means any more, but I completely understand why a woman would be uncomfortable with including this custom in her wedding, particularly if this was her second marriage -- by that point, the idea that you might even need the "permission" of your father is really a little silly. Although if there's anyone who should belong to a particular person so they can watch over her, it's Sharon. The woman leaves her @&*#ing shoes in the fridge. She's a danger to herself and others. I also don't remember exactly what she says in the book about being given away, so it's possible that she is acting like an ass and I just don't recall.
|
|
macca
Sitting For The Newtons
Posts: 2,084
|
Post by macca on May 27, 2006 18:22:44 GMT -5
Oh, I completely understand the reasoning behind it, but it just sort of bothers me how the BSC can't leave anything alone. So Sharon didn't want to be given away. Fair enough, especially considering it was her second marriage, but we can do without the feminist preaching. I mean, there are some feminists out there who argue that marriage itself is a sexist tradition and that even though it's been modernized to suit today's standards, they are opposed to it on principle. Ann, however, certainly seemed to think a LOT of marriage and weddings.
Just like in Dawn's Wicked Stepsister, when Dawn was confused about why Sharon would take Richard's surname as opposed to keeping her previous name - despite the fact that "Schafer" was her ex husband's name. Why was it bizarre that Sharon would take Richard's name but completely acceptable that she took hubby #1's name?
|
|
fluffy
New To Stoneybrook
Posts: 180
|
Post by fluffy on May 28, 2006 1:53:06 GMT -5
Well, IMO, 'Sharon Schafer' or does sound a lot nicer than 'Sharon Spier' or 'Porter' (which couldn't have made anyone else wonder if it had anything to do with 'Morbidda Destiny'?)...
|
|
|
Post by sugarmonkey on May 28, 2006 10:45:48 GMT -5
One thing I just remembered. There is more than one or two feminist moments in this book. Before the wedding when the Schafers and Spiers were having Chinese food ordered in, It's made very clear that Rich and Sharon each paid for half of the order.
|
|
macca
Sitting For The Newtons
Posts: 2,084
|
Post by macca on May 28, 2006 18:32:15 GMT -5
^ Now THAT is lame. THAT is feminism for the sake of feminism. Who cares who paid for the order? It's totally irrelevant. Why mention it at all?
|
|
wanderingfrog
Sitting For The Arnolds
Official BSC Archivist
Posts: 2,552
|
Post by wanderingfrog on May 28, 2006 20:17:17 GMT -5
^ Yeah, that is really, really lame. Definitely eye-rolling.
|
|
ktag
Junior Sitter
Posts: 694
|
Post by ktag on Jun 3, 2006 5:39:24 GMT -5
Mrs. Sharon Porter Schafer Spier. Say that 10 times fast.
|
|
wanderingfrog
Sitting For The Arnolds
Official BSC Archivist
Posts: 2,552
|
Post by wanderingfrog on Jun 3, 2006 10:41:38 GMT -5
^ Put her middle name in, too. Mrs. Sharon Emerson Porter Schafer Spier.
|
|
lyricalangel
Sitting For The Newtons
Logan's love-bunny
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by lyricalangel on Apr 27, 2007 0:52:44 GMT -5
I liked when Mary Anne had Claudia help her with makeup for the wedding. Then she cries it all off and ends up with black "raccoon" eyes.
|
|