History, love and murder

I WANT MY HOLDS FROM THE LIBRARY. They're just taunting me, the library is. I envision now a break-in: me in all black with my face smeared in black grease. A perfect throw of my rope hooks something solid on the roof and I scale to the second floor window. My glass cutter makes a perfect circle and I somehow (we edited that footage) remove the glass so I can enter undetected. I keep to the shadows as I edge toward the locked room of library holds. Using only a bobbypin, I quickly jimmy it open. There they are with the name "Madsen" written on the wrapping sheets of paper. The Kaminsky, McDermid, and Willig. Mine, all mine!


Okay, I think actually their holds are on a cart somewhere up there but it just didn't work into the scenario to not have to use a bobbypin somewhere. (sigh) They still make bobbypins don't they? I would like something fun to read this weekend, dammit.


Speaking of reading, in TEAM OF RIVALS I'm up to 1858 and I've crossed the 200 page mark. Woo hoo! One thing that amazes me is the description of the speeches these men made: three to five hours long! Okay, they didn't have tv or radio but they had newspapers, letter writing, and books and other diversions. Can you imagine standing in a crowd listening to a speech for three to five hours? Make your point and make it snappy, men, I've got cows to attend to! And the description of some of these speeches were masterpieces of logic that held the crowd spellbound and cheers erupted.


In all seriousness, the Nebraska Act seems to be the breaking point in America's history between North and South. And the election of blatently Southern President Buchanan and the arrogance of the completely South-leaning and not afraid to show it Chief Justice clinched the deal. And the unwarrented beating of Senator Stanton while he sat at his desk by a southern man pulled many fencers to the North. And something curious to me. Isn't it strange how the Democratic party then were the ones clinging to slavery and black people now mostly poll Democratic? Why would they do that? The newly formed Republican party in 1858 were the anti-slavery party. Why don't black people go that way? Just on principle? To me, skin color is irrelevent but wouldn't that mean something?


And I have to say, the division then over slavery -- the absolute difference in culture and beliefs -- seem similar to the divisions we experience now. Today we have different philosophies of life -- nanny state versus free markets. I don't think there is secession in our future but the split in thinking is painful to go through in our country. Haven't we learned anything? I guess we have to go through this battle every one hundred years.


I started the first episode of Wonderfalls last night. My initial assessment as to perhaps why the show didn't survive: The premise is interesting but the casting of the lead character is wrong. In buying into any story, you have to be somewhat sympathic to the main character; you want to like him/her. The actress in this show comes across too abrasive somehow. The character is prickly at worst but should be likeable at least to the audience and we have to want to care what happens to him/her. Just the wrong actress in the part. At this point, I think I will continue watching the show; I haven't been completely turned off.

Blog/Website of the Day: Okay, this is a fun one. You know I love crime fiction first and foremost, right? On very rare occasions, I read what is generally catagorized as straight romance novels. This website is a hoot even if you DON'T read that type of fiction (and for those who put it down and you know who you are, this is THE BIGGEST selling genre of them all so they outnumber us and could probably take us in a fight). (anybody who is snobby about books and what people like to read should just jump in a lake anyway) (be happy people read AT ALL because apparently it's a dying art) Ahem. Smart Bitches, Trashy Books can be found at http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php. It is snarky, funny and clever.

When I was wanting to open a bookstore of my own, I was going to call it Crime and Passion Books and sell only crime fiction and romance novels because those are the two top selling genres. And as I mentioned in yesterday's post, there was a period of time in grade school/early junior high that I read A LOT of gothic romances but that was the late 1970s/very early 1980s. Ancient history in the world of books. (Note: the very first gothic romance I ever read was a beauty: THE FLAME AND THE FLOWER by Kathleen Woodiwiss -- a classic). In researching for my hoped-for bookstore, I had to jump back into the romance genre to find out what was what in the present day. Just like crime fiction, there a number of sub-genres to appeal to every taste -- hetero, homo, paranormal, historical, chick-lit, etc. And there are a few authors out there that write a good, intelligent story about relationships. And why does this category of books get so maligned anyway? Why is writing about love looked down upon? When you're facing your maker at the end of your days, which would you be more proud of, that you contributed to love stories or murder? Hmmm? End defense of romance. :) Though I don't read a whole lot of it because I like crime and murder. Reading about it, people. Sheesh.

See y'all tomorrow. Oh wait, it's Saturday tomorrow and I have a history of missing them. I'll TRY, okay?

Much love (and murder)
PK the Bookeemonster