Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare

 Review: ⭐️⭐️⭐️.5

    Let me preface this by saying that I understand how amazing this book is.  It's one of the most famous plays out there, it changed the way we view romance, and I really like the themes.  The idea of fate and how much control we have over our lives is really interesting to me.  The amount of dick jokes were astonishing and funny, Mercutio was amazing, and the characters each had depth and tragedy to them.   So all in all, I understand how revolutionary and objectively good this book is.

    HOWEVER.  I have some issues with this book.  Just because it's iconic it doesn't mean that it's perfect.  

    First off, the age gap.  I understand that 17-18 and 13 is miles better than 32 and 13, but it's still a large age gap.  The story is essentially about a horny 18 year old guy who marries a 13 year old girl within a week of meeting her for the thrill of it and for lust.  What the hell?  The book portrays romance as wild, passionate, and spreads the idea of love at first sight.  I don't understand how we ever looked at this and thought "you know what?  This is how we should all fall in love."  Love shouldn't be that way.  It shouldn't be binding or forced, or passionate to the point that being separated would be a worse punishment than death.

    I think I just hate Romeo and the way he views love.  He spends Acts 1-3 depressed over the fact that he was friendzoned by Rosaline until he forgets about her because he found a girl prettier and better.  He just wanted to find someone to hook up with.  He's the ultimate fuckboy.  

    Juliet on the other hand?  Absolute diva in the making.  I actually said "DIVA DOWN!!" when she died.  She was so smart and she had Romeo on a LEASH.  I'm not 100% sure on whether or not she actually loved Romeo as much as he loved her, but either way she was the brains and the heart of the love story.  She used Romeo's passion for her to escape her arranged marriage, knowing that he was so desperate that he would do anything for her.  She accelerated her love story with him and controlled the entire operation.  If Romeo wasn't so dumb, they would've had their happily ever after.  But because he fumbled, they both died.  I loved the end when Prince said "For never was a story of more woe / Than this of Juliet and her Romeo."  Like YESSSS Juliet was the mastermind and Romeo was manipulated by her.  It was such a queen move.

In the end, I gave the book 3.5 stars because Mercutio and Juliet were too iconic to be given 3 stars.  The story was interesting but there were some details that didn't sit right with me.  

P. S.I honestly prefer the ballet version since it feels more romantic and you could actually feel the emotions in the air.

Summary

In the 14th century, the Italian city of Verona is being torn apart by a centuries old feud between the powerful families of Montague and Capulet. The patriarchs of each household encourage their young male relatives and servants to battle their disagreements out in the streets. To stem the violence, the Prince of Verona sets a harsh law that any further brawling will result in the execution of the perpetrators. 
Romeo, the son of Montague, is depressed over his crush, Rosaline, when his cousin, Benvolio, and best friend, Mercutio, invite him to crash a Capulet masquerade ball.  When they get there, he meets a young girl named Juliet, and they immediately fall in love.  At her balcony, they promise to get married in the following morning.
After the marriage (and completely unrelated to it), Tybalt, Juliet's cousin, challenges Romeo to a duel.  When he refuses, Mercutio gets annoyed and fights Tybalt.  In the duel, Mercutio is killed, which makes Romeo so angry that he hunts him down and kills him.  This causes the Prince to banish him.  Juliet learns of all of this, and Friar Lawrence tells her that Romeo will come visit her tonight.  Meanwhile, the Capulets grieve Tybalt, causing Lord Capulet to move Juliet's arranged marriage to County Paris to the following day.  Juliet panics and refuses to marry him, causing her family to disown/abandon her.
Juliet knows she can't avoid this forever so she goes to Friar Lawrence to beg for help.  The friar gives her a potion that would temporarily stop her heart to convince everyone that she died.  He later sends a letter to Romeo to tell him to save his sleeping wife.
However, Romeo doesn't get the letter in time.  He arrives in Verona where he learns that she is "dead".  Distraught, he drinks poison and kills himself, right when she wakes up.  Discovering the body, Juliet grabs Romeo's dagger and kills herself.  This event causes the patriarchs to resolve their feud.

True Crime Story by Joseph Knox

Review:⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️

I enjoyed this book way more than I thought I would.  For being a story that doesn't have a clear ending, it was executed pretty well.  I thoroughly enjoyed it.  Now, I have my gripes – which I'll get into later – but I want to talk about what I think they did right.  

I think it was really good commentary on the crime genre of entertainment.  The victim of the murder was a flawed teen who lied to all of her friends and family, and unknowingly pit them against each other, while portraying herself as an angelic, kind person.  It spoiled the idea of a "perfect victim".  

The "perfect victim" Theory describes how crime victims in media gain sympathy and support due to characteristics like looking weak and vulnerable.  However, Zoe Nolan wasn't a perfect victim.  She was friendly but she was also impulsive and manipulative.  She wasn't overly evil and she wasn't overly kind.  She was just an average teenager hiding her secrets from her family.

I also liked how all of her friends were flawed people too.  They weren't bound to tropes like "The Sidekick" or "The Jock".  They were made to be like real people.  They each spoke with a different voice and personality.  I really recommend reading this with the audiobook.  It might slow you down a few minutes, but it's worth it.  It really immerses you into the world of J.Knox, and makes you feel like you're the investigator.

The book also commented on the endings in crime media.  Usually, in horror/crime movies like Scream and American Psycho, or even True Crime media, a clear answer is revealed at the end.  The true timeline, the killer, the aftermath.  They're all definitive answers.  True Crime Story defies it.  In the last chapter, the book reveals the killer, but comments that they might have caught the wrong guy; there was plenty of evidence pointing to him but there were other pieces of evidence that would've proven his innocence.  There is doubt in the arrest.  Unlike crime media, the true timeline of events is never revealed.  It was definitely not a satisfying ending, but I thought it was an interesting way to end the book.

I watch a lot of whodunnit movies where the characters' goal is to find the killer/villain, and I listen to true crime podcasts.  They both reveal the villain in the end and I can leave the immersive world feeling satisfied that the heroes caught the villain.  Yet, I think I keep forgetting that nearly 47% of all murders remain unsolved.  Not all crime stories end on a good note with the killer admitting to their crimes and giving a clear answer.  True Crime Story reminded me of the 47% of murders.  Not everyone's crime story gets to end with the true killer being caught.  Sometimes, the wrong people are caught, and sometimes, no one is caught.

That doesn't mean there wasn't anything bad though.  There was one thing that I didn't enjoy and made me take a star off.  The ending was extremely sudden and felt rushed.  It was definitely a plot twist, but not because it made me doubt the character's actions, but because it made no sense and wasn't foreshadowed at all.

But other than that point, highly recommend and I would 100% read it again.

Summary

In 2011, Zoe Nolan, a popular university student, left her dorm in Manchester University and was never seen or head from ever again.
Now, it's 2018.  7 years since Zoe's case went cold.  Struggling crime writer/investigator Evelyn Mitchell finds herself drawn to the case.  She and her good writer friend, Jospeh Knox, collaborate on writing a book dedicated to solving Zoe Nolan's case.  Evelyn begins to interview her friends and family, slowly uncovering dark truths about her past.  As she gets closer and closer to the truth, Evelyn's life starts to be put in danger.  She is stalked, assaulted, and her car gets vandalized, until she is killed by a masked man.
Left alone and mourning, Joseph Knox chooses to continue pursuing the truth about Zoe to pay tribute to his friend.  He continues to interview her friends and family, which takes him on a journey through a murder in Europe and a tax scandal that her father caused.
Finally, after years of pursuing the truth and being taken on a wild trip around the world and different families, the book ends on a peculiar note.
Zoe's best friend killed her.  But there isn't enough evidence to convict him.  But there isn't nearly enough evidence to convict anyone else either.  Zoe's father was abusive and a con man.  Zoe's sister was jealous of her success.  Zoe's boyfriend cheated on her with her twin sister.  Now, the question is, who do you believe is guilty?

Why the marketing for Jennifer's Body sucks donkeypoo

    Jennifer’s Body tells the story of Jennifer Check, a high school student, who is kidnapped and sacrificed by an indie band in exchange for fame, which leaves her demonically possessed and hungry for boys.  

    In the poster, Jennifer is wearing a cheerleading uniform, commonly used to signify popularity, attractiveness, and beauty.  Her top is low cut, bringing spotlight to her chest, or as she calls them, her “smart bombs”.  She is posing in a powerful, predator-like stance, giving the audience a Kubrick stare, and facing the audience head on, but her closed legs signify a defensive nature.  Her body language communicates that while she may be feisty, she’s just “playing hard to get” and is an invitation for unwanted sex.  The title, Jennifer’s Body signifies the value of Jennifer’s actual body over who Jennifer becomes after her possession, emphasizing the word body instead of Jennifer.

    However, the poster itself is a mockery of the movie.  Unlike what the poster implies, Jennifer isn’t a cheerleader in the movie.  She’s in flagship, with a higher cut, longer top, but even then her flagship is only briefly mentioned at the beginning of the movie to establish her, at most, semi popularity.  Jennifer faces her prey head on, breaking their bones and egos with all the confidence in the world, without the fear of being attacked.  The movie is a dark comedy that criticizes the male gaze, and the exploitation of women with a violently feminist plot.  Jennifer Check is a succubus, exploiting the lust of men to kill them, and is a result of a symbolic assault, more feminine and powerful than ever.  She is equally lustrous as she is calculated and smart.  The movie challenges the notion that women are either pure, angelic virgins or TNA shot-only, sex objects, and instead mixes the two to show that women don’t need to be the “perfect victim” to be a victim.  Yet, the poster contradicts its point.

    The poster uses the male gaze to gain attention, using the seductiveness of Megan Fox (Jennifer)’s body.  After all, lust is always profitable.  Every aspect of the poster serves to objectify Jennifer, and reduce her character to a mush-for-brains playgirl.  Her breasts are the focal point, her waist is accentuated, and the spotlight is on her body, not her.

This poster is meant to market to young men, to VERY obviously hint that this movie will be full of sex, blood, and boobs.  This poster was proven effective when the movie was dragged through the mud during the initial release for not living up to the dirty and sexy 100 minutes they were promised.  The public was misled by the body being presented, not the actual story of Jennifer.

    The poster for Jennifer’s Body depicts Jennifer as a slut, highlighting her body through costume design, body language and text.  The movie is marketed to lustful young men, when in reality it’s a horror comedy for women, meant to criticize the very audience it was marketed to.

A Deep Dive into 2 Non-Water Floods

The Dublin Whiskey Fire

    This flood and fire took place on June 18th, 1975 in Dublin, Ireland. The fire originated in the storehouse of a bar called Laurence Malone, where 1.2 million litres (315 thousand gallons) of pure whiskey were stored. The cause of the fire is unknown, and our only guess is that it caught on fire between 4:30pm when the storehouse was checked and 8:30pm when alarms were raised. The fire caused the barrels of whiskey to explode from the heat and stream out of the burning building, catching fire in the process, and becoming a flood of what is essentially liquid fire.

    The citizens were first alerted when the fire spread to a nearby pig pen, causing the pigs inside to squeal uproariously. By the time the citizens began to evacuate, 3 different streets in the city were already demolished, rapidly spreading the fire and flood. The evacuation process was surprisingly efficient for the time, with the mayor commending the emergency personnel who made the escape possible. He is quoted as saying: "The time given for escape in some places during the progress of the fire was so short, I was apprehensive that some people should be left in danger in the garrets and cellars of the district. But on inquiry I was happy to learn that no life was lost during the great conflagration."

    However, despite the amazing evacuation, there was one small issue:  This is a flood of whiskey in a city known for its alcohol culture and high rates of alcoholism (at the time).

    As they were evacuating their burning homes, people noticed that the flood was made of whiskey and began using their hats, boots, and other vessels to gather the alcohol to drink it. This led to the people of Dublin drinking so much that all twenty four hospitalizations and thirteen deaths caused by the flood were not from burns, drowning, or smoke inhalation, but were caused by alcohol poisoning.

Rockwood & Company shipping department fire

    Rockwood & Co. was a famous chocolatier company that was the second largest producer of chocolate after Hershey and created Tootsie Rolls. However, on May 12, 1919, a fire started on the 2nd floor of the shipping department of the factory in Brooklyn. The 2nd floor contained finished chocolate products as well as cocoa beans which are believed to have spontaneously combusted, starting the fire. The fire was discovered just after 1 am by a factory worker who soon alerted the fire department. However, between the time that the worker discovered the fire and the time the firefighters arrived, the fire spread to the 3rd floor, which stored ingredients like cocoa, butter, and sugar.  The products from the 2nd floor and the raw ingredients on the 3rd floor mixed and formed a flood of molten chocolate.

    When the firefighters arrived, they began spraying the chocolate with water, unintentionally causing the sugar and butter to separate from the mixture and solidify all over the city streets, making them greasy and hindering the efforts of the firefighters.

    The fire in the factory was extinguished, but it left the city covered in butter and chocolate.  The Brooklyn Daily Eagle would report it as an "ocean of fudge flooding the street like lava", and that the river of chocolate was so deep that you could "float a rowboat for 2 blocks along Flushing Avenue".  Unsurprisingly, this flood attracted the local children who were eager to eat the delicious chocolate.  The children were allowed to eat the chocolate but were collected by officers an hour later to go to school.  

    Although children got to eat the chocolate for free and there was no real damage to the factory, the company suffered damage worth 1.8 million dollars in today’s money.