What’s the book?
Everybody has read Heart of Darkness. You probably skimmed it in high school, or read the Spark Notes (or Clif’s Notes, since Spark Notes didn’t exist for many of you) and went on with your life. Enter LiteraryHuman. We are here to suggest a different book by Mr. Joseph Conrad, a work whose merits and modernist credentials have really been overshadowed by Joe’s other work, and the torrent of cries of “RACIST!” that have come in its backlash. With a cast of characters that includes Marxists, terrorists, police inspectors, dolts, and evil genii (I think this is the correct plural?), The Secret Agent is an incredible exemplar of modernist technique. It is a tragedy and a work of early 2oth century quintessence.

What’s it about?
The Secret Agent himself, Mr. Verloc, is pretty much the antithesis of the common conception of a secret agent. He is the anti-007, fat, lazy, and ineffective. He lives in a sex shop. No, really, he does, and it is rather funny, especially considering the fact that the book was written 1907. The plot follows Verloc and his deviant clique of revolutionaries, their plans to bomb a London site, and the police that attempt to solve their attempts, but it quickly turns down a road more tragic than the reader may have initially expected. The Professor, a ruthless bombmaker, is truly compelling in his wanton disregard for morality, and the tension of the story carries the reader through to the literary punch without descending into the depths of boredom.

Why should you read it?
The buffoonery of some of its characters and the depravity of others, and the close looks at each one’s inner thoughts make it an intriguing read, but it’s not long enough to seem labored. It packs a lot of emotional punch and pounds its theme of modernist disconnection home with the hammer of innovative perspectives, allowing the reader to view events from many sets of eyes. Okay, that last sentence was a bit melodramatic, but seriously, it’s a good read and you’ll feel much more literary when you are done. Not to take anything away from Heart of Darkness, which is a terrific book, but this overlooked great brings a lot more groundbreaking style to the table.

District 9

District 9

We (the MovieHuman review crew) went into the theater tonight with very high expectations for this film, based on the people involved and its glowing reviews from other critics. Our expectations were met.

District 9 brings the almost flawless blend of action (with an abundance of terrific violence to go along with its unpredictable and therefore heart-pounding storyline) and commentary that the science fiction genre has largely been lacking at the box office lately. It is difficult to describe or summarize the plot, but suffice it to say that the movie basically mixes aliens with an apartheid-esque situation. The special effects, which these days seem to have exhausted most options of impressing us with anything new, delve into new realms of cool and even newer realms of violence. The script is sound and the alien race is perfectly revolting, making it almost as difficult for the audience to sympathize as it is for the “racist” (is this the right word?) characters in the movie. What comes out of all this production goodness is theatrical gold, largely helped by the extreme sense of unpredictability that one has when watching the film. As was true in The Hurt Locker, the viewer is never sure where the uncompromising story will go next, who will die, who will live, simply because of the film’s sheer originality. In the final third of the movie, the commentary gives way to awesome action, which overwhelms the occasional deus ex machina storyline fixes that come when the film’s more cerebral element is cast off in favor of explosions and blood–but it is still a great and thrilling finale. It is certainly a science fiction flick, but that doesn’t stop it from running the gamut with drama, love, comedy, and lots of bullets, and it makes for a great show.

If you have read the other reviews I've written so far this year, you may have started wondering if I am really easy to please. The answer is no; in fact, most people would tell you that I am terribly hard to please when it comes to movies, and that my standards are very high. As such, I typically see movies (and subsequently review them) that I think have the potential to be good. Fortunately, most of the films that I have seen lately have lived up to that. If you were looking for a negative review here, you won't find one. The writing, acting, directing, cinematography and even the music for this movie made it an incredible film. 4.5 out of 5 MovieHumans are not given lightly.

In fact, The Hurt Locker was one of the best films I have seen in recent memory. If you are looking for a heartwarming tale of love and success, you might want to look elsewhere. But if you want Oscar-worthy, albeit gutwrenching moviemaking, then don't miss it. Combining all-out intensity with ballsy truth (now that people are making movies where good people sometimes die, as opposed to the sorry excuses for action films that were made pre-1960, every scenario is tense), the film brought the right balance of provocative moments and exhilirating ones. A supporting cast that includes Guy Pearce, Ralph Fiennes and Evangeline Lilly plays soundly, while Jeremy Renner is perfect for the cowboy bomb-defuser that is followed for most of the movie. Pretty hard to say too much more besides "see it."

That umlaut cost me a lot of effort, so you better enjoy this brief review. Brüno is quite possibly the most ridiculous movie I have ever seen (and btw, the word is spelled RIDiculous and not REDiculous, for all you spelling morons out there whose mistakes I constantly read and abhor when surfing the interweb). Back to the movie. The film was epically vulgar. More male nudity than you will see in an average day, even if you spent the day in the shower. But beneath its vulgarity, which I won't call offensive because I classify offensive things as those that are racist or rude or unfairly hateful, it held a pretty substantial amount of humor.

While the first 45 minutes of the movie were less than spectacular, and only middlingly funny, Brüno picked up at the midway point when it reverted to Borat's winning formula of making fun of homophobes, rednecks, and what The Graduate would have dubbed "plastics." Please, don't take your parents. About 10% of the patrons in my theater walked out, a pretty sizable number considering the fact that movie tickets are not free. But if you are unfazed by terrfic amounts of material that would have given a Victorian viewer multiple heart attacks, then you might actually enjoy the satire and even the stupid humor present in the movie. The fact that most of the film was unscripted makes it more enjoyable. Best of all, the fact that a movie containing so much sexuality is garnering so much national attention is a good thing for the movie industry and for the fight against censorship in general. Hopefully, the sheer over-the-topness of Brüno will NOT have the same effect as the 1972 film "Deep Throat," which disgusted the foolish, unwitting crowds that entered theaters expecting anything more than a thinly-veiled porno so much that it set the fight against censorship back several years. Cohen focus on satire over otherwise-gratuitous nudity and sexual content, however, should keep this film from having the same effect.

Unlike the movie I just wrote a review for (The Hangover), Away We Go turned out to be almost exactly what we expected. Penned by famed novelist/memoirist Dave Eggers and his wife, Vendela Vida, the movie was intended to play like Juno

and Little Miss Sunshine (seriously, these two movies are mentioned almost everywhere Away We Go is brought up), quirky, self-important, half-cute, and overly committed to seeming realistic. Many of the characters introduced — in fact, most of the non-leads — are practically unreedemable for one reason or another, leaving the protagonists played by John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph to be the only likable people on the screen. However, thanks to the ultimately unstoppable likability of both, Away We Go succeeds in offering enough laughs and warm moments that you wouldn’t be able to find in a more conventional (and therefore boring) rom-com. Some of the lines are forced, and while the MovieHuman opinion very usually a product of the scripts successes or failures, in this case, the main characters have the charisma to pull it off. In other words, it’s worth the watch, and even after a few awkward moments, in the end, it feels like a lot more than the sum of all its parts.

In all honesty, yours truly didn’t expect much from The Hangover based on its previews. Sure, it stars Nick Galifasdfalndfnj from Out Cold, a middling comedy

that I found humorous in my younger days, and all-star asshole Bradley Cooper, but who knew the script would actually hold up with constant laughs for the entirety of the film. Marketed as a typical raunchy 15-20something comedy, there was actually a good amount of hilarious, creative moments and more than a few situationally funny scenes. I would have liked more Heather Graham, but the movie succeeded beyond expectations in doing what it set out to do, and that’s all we ask. Definitely a recommended flick.

What’s the book?
We apologize for our ineptness and general lateness in bringing you this fourth Book Worth a Look. Elizabeth Bowen’s The Heat of the Day may be a novel of which, frankly, you have never heard. Bowen herself flew slightly under the American radar as an Anglo-Irish author of late modernism. Her relative underratedness, however, should not deter you from attempting a read that combines subtle psychological depth with a realistic portrayal of femininity within her protagonist’s upper-crust society life.

What’s it about?

We will only give you a little more back-cover blurb info because, well, it’s already been written by the blurb-writers. Essentially, The Heat of the Day depicts woman living and loving during the blitz of London of the Second World War, and the intrigue (there is possibly a hint of spy-thriller involved) that surrounds her relationship with the important men in her life. The word sensibility comes to mind when one thinks of the main foci of the story–Stella Rodney, the protagonist, is compelling as a character study, a relatively normal widow going about her life in the extraordinary circumstances of WWII.

Why should you read it?

1984 and Death of a Salesman, both of which also came out in 1949, may be more vividly stowed away in your literary Rolodex. But The Heat of the Day only gains appeal from its understated fame–the novel is all about understatement. Its depiction of modern loneliness is tempered by its commitment to dead-on realism, and its author was herself involved in the chaotic world of the London blitz. Free indirect discourse (a word often thrown around by professors that passed on their teachings to SportsHuman ears) is sprinkled throughout the narration to reinforce the importance of perspective to the various characters involved in the occasional spy-thriller-esque moments of the plot. It is also one of a less-populated class of late modern novels written by women, and is unique because of this feminine point of view (on a subject–spies and bombs–typically delved into by men). The development of the intrigue within the high-society/World War II framework makes it a good read that offers a chance to experience a rather uncommon, modern voice.

What’s the book?
Our third Book Worth a Look is Don DeLillo’s White Noise, another 1985 novel and the book that won that year’s National Book Award: quite a year for literature was 1985! White Noise earned such high praise because of its relevant and altogether as-hilarious-as-it-is-recognizable saturation with the absurdity of the post-modern world. We recommend books that are often overlooked, usually because of their relative recency, and this masterpiece, and DeLillo’s first big hit, definitely fits the bill. In fact, perhaps the most compelling thing about this book is its foresight. Although it was written more than twenty years ago, its hauntingly but humorously realistic treatment of the Information Age remains quite relevant.

What’s it about?

The plot follows Jack Gladney, a university professor, through a ridiculous chain of events involving biochemical scares, marriage problems, and over-informed children. The tone of the story walks a fine line between depressingly serious and mockingly satirical: Jack and his wife are each others’ fourth spouse. Et cetera. Jack Gladney and his wife are horribly afraid of death, and as contemporary people are wont to do, Mrs. Jack Gladney seeks a drug to solve this anxiety. When a “toxic event” strikes the university town, the unquenchable angst it causes spurs a chain of events (we apologize for the double use of this word in the sentence; we were unable to come up with a different way of phrasing things [sometimes, LitHuman is lazy too]) involving this drug that challenges Jack’s marriage and illustrates the utter blandness of his world

Why should you read it?

Our third BWaL, like the second Book Worth a Look and the first, continues a rather post-modern trend of being interesting — for White Noise, the interest comes in the form of humorous satire — while still being literarily relevant. These novels are able to do this because they deal with issues that have not exactly gone away since their publishing. White Noise is a terrific example of a work that retains its pertinence even in these later stages of the Information Age. Complete with the post-modern inclusion of occasional random lists of all-things-mundane-and-contemporary, the novel deserves the April 30th spot because it challenges an array of issues from consumerism to sensationalism in a humorous and yet not heavy-handed way. That is really all there is to say without giving away what can only be truly experienced by reading this Book Worth a Look.

That's how long it's been since the World Wide Web was created.

That's how long it's been since the Lorena Bobbitt incident shocked the country. And really scared adult males.

That's how long it's been since Doom (the first-person shooter that started it all) was released for personal computer.

and…

That's how long it's been since an American won the Nobel Prize in Literature. It happened in 1993 when Toni Morrison won as a still relatively young author after Beloved achieved international fame.

So why should you care? Because the Nobel Prize is basically the epitome of accolades in general in our world today. It is the award to end all awards. It is used in jokes, and its winners are glorified as heroes (Al Gore, for instance. No, seriously. Stop laughing.) and the monetary reward is rather hefty as well. You should care because the most important award of our time is being withheld from some of the greatest authors of our time. The proof that this injustice is more than just a coincidence?

"The US is too isolated, too insular. They don't translate enough and don't really participate in the big dialogue of literature," said Horace Engdahl, a member of the Swedish selection committee, last year before the award was given out. Take that America! Because your recent government has enraged the world at large, ALL of your citizens must suffer the consequences. Sorry Philip Roth. Your incredible body of work won't cut it.

Insular? That would be as in: related to or deriving from an "island." Apparently, Mr. Engahl was implying that American fiction does not have a worldly appeal. I take offense: read our most recent Book Worth a Look. Blood Meridian focuses on man's inhumanity to man. Isn't that a rather universal issue? Is there no inhuman violence in Europe? I seem to recall a Great War, maybe two…

No, the award won't be given out for several months now. But I have recently written an article elsewhere on the lack of respect given by popular culture and by the university community to contemporary American fiction, and it got me thinking on this subject. When I looked up the numbers (1993 was the last time an American won the award; before that, I think you have to go back to 1962 when Steinbeck for the last person born in the US to win) I was appalled. Morisson is certainly deserving. Steinbeck was good, even if East of Eden is underwhelming. But both are just what the Nobel Prize commission loves: uber-liberal authors with uber-liberal themes. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Not at all. The problem here is that excellent authors are being ignored because of European closed-mindedness. The Modernist movement, perhaps THE great cultural movement of the last century, was spurred by both US citizens and expatriate American authors. Where has the respect gone? The LitHuman opinion (at least as far as the Nobel Prize goes) is that the respect lost by the American foreign policy decisions of the last several years has carried over into other realms as well. In my opinion, Cormac McCarthy's The Road is quite a universal novel, with an appeal that does not rely on its American-ness. Unfortunately, the fact that McCarthy is a card-carrying Southwestern American will probably preclude him from the runnings in December. His post-apocalyptic novel, the setting of which – the US – is only barely recognizable by decaying signs (and was inspired by a trip to IRELAND, which happens to be a European nation), and which brings up questions of father-son companionship and the future of mankind… well it's just too insular.

I suppose we are harping on the Nobel Commission with the hope that you, the reader, will begin either to see it as a less prestigious award (and begin to look for other awards, such as the Pulitzer Prize, National Book Award, the PEN awards, etc. for suggestions on what to read) or send angry mail to Sweden declaring our disgust at their own lack of open-mindedness. It would pretty sad if their opinion is derived as a reaction to American intolerance; it would appear that their own behavior reflects a rather hypocritical mindset.