#Bookreview ‘Sense & Sensibility’ by Jane Austen #TuesdayBookBlog #ccbookreview

Today, I’m reviewing as part of my 50 Classics Challenge, ‘Sense & Sensibility’ by Jane Austen.

Sense and Sensibility.jpg

Blurb (from Amazon):

Jane Austen’s first published novel, Sense and Sensibility is a wonderfully entertaining tale of flirtation and folly that revolves around two starkly different sisters, Elinor and Marianne Dashwood. While Elinor is thoughtful, considerate, and calm, her younger sister is emotional and wildly romantic. Both are looking for a husband, but neither Elinor’s reason nor Marianne’s passion can lead them to perfect happiness—as Marianne falls for an unscrupulous rascal and Elinor becomes attached to a man who’s already engaged.

Startling secrets, unexpected twists, and heartless betrayals interrupt the marriage games that follow. Filled with satiric wit and subtle characterizations, Sense and Sensibility teaches that true love requires a balance of reason and emotion.


Did I like it?

Yes and no. Yes for the language. It is just beautiful to read ‘Is it not’ instead of ‘isn’t it’. Reading something from someone who knew how to use words, how to paint a picture with words is just a pleasure.

What I didn’t like?

I’m not quite sure if Didn’t like is the perfect expression for it. But the constant money centred approach of several people is …revolting. John Dashwood for example His wife.

Would I recommend it?

Sure, if you haven’t read it, there’s a part of literary history missing in your life. 17 points out of 20

Ausone’s notebook, 70.th instalment #amwriting #mondayblogs #cats #IARTG

Good morning, Humans. Life’s still quiet in my little kingdom. It’s no longer cold, already something I like. Wet and windy as usual, I like that less. A lot less.

I haven’t commented on politics for a while. But today, I’m afraid, it will be a completely politics edition. Not only international, Belgians are capable of producing crap on their own.

Let’s start with international politics.

The US of A elected their new president last November. The outcome of this election is already something that’s very hard for me to understand. OK, if you only have the choice between two candidates (which they hadn’t). You take your decision, based on facts. One candidate represented the political establishment. Parts of her team were from something very bad for the environment. And being a woman doesn’t necessarily mean that you represent change. Something that the voters in the US apparently wanted more than everything else. I can understand that.

BUT. There are so many things in the behaviour of this guy that are just plain wrong it nearly hurts just to write them down.

1.During one of his speeches he was making fun of a journalist sitting in a wheelchair. Not about the fact that he’s a journalist. Nope, about the fact that he’s handicapped and sitting in a wheelchair. First and foremost you just don’t do that. And if you want to know why? Ever heard the expression, ‘human decency’? Apparently not.

2.During a TV interview, he said something about how to treat women. ‘Grab ‘em by the p…’. And this “thing” was afterwards called ‘ locker room talk’. The guy is not 16 years old. It would still be wrong saying something like that at 16 years of age. But you have an excuse. With the age of this guy, you haven’t any.

3.He claimed that he would clean the swamp. OK, I can get that someone would vote for him based on this premise. If you now look at his chosen secretaries and other members of his staff. Cleaning the swamp should look differently.

4.Apparently the guy is a successful businessman. Just ask yourself one question, Why was he the first who didn’t publish his tax returns? He’s got something to hide?

5.Again, he seems to be a billionaire. Why should he do something for the not so rich? If you’re not rich, he will do nothing for you.

6.During a speech at an event for the media, an actress (Meryl Streep) was saying something a bit along this line. Mostly about the way he the then president elect treated the guy in the wheelchair. She wasn’t mentioning this president elect even once. He commented on Twitter.: Overrated actress. And he didn’t do what she claimed he did. It was and still is on footage. I guess this is called ‘alternative truth’ now. Looks like someone has read ‘1984’. Although I strongly doubt that they got what Orwell was saying in this book.

7.The Mexican state is refusing to pay for the wall he wants to construct. Just, why should they?

8.In the end, what are you expecting they voted TWICE for GWB.

Belgium. There would be two things but it’s already enough. So, just one.

There is a thing called ‘Publifin’ in Liège. They are talking care of the things financial concerning pubic investments. Building roads, schools, etc. Their board of advisors consists of mainly politicians. Until now not a problem, although you could start to smell the rat. The members of this board of advisors were very, very good paid for their participation. Although this is not completely correct, because they didn’t have to participate. They just needed to be a member of this council to be paid. Even if they weren’t there. More than 100€ per hour of their time. A time they didn’t have to spent in these reunions. But they were paid for it. Paid for being elected to a council and potentially doing what they should do. But no obligation. Just being paid.

The secretary responsible for it had to step down. Because the pressure got to much to bear. Not because he wasn’t doing his job, the pressure was too high. At least Belgian politicians can’t start a third world war.

Aren’t politics fun?

Just to calm down, a nice photo of me taken by my preferred photographer.


See you next week



THROUGH THE BARRICADES by @denisedeegan Fabulous #Irish war time #HistFic #SundayBlogShare

Rosie Amber

Through the BarricadesThrough the Barricades by Denise Deegan
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Through The Barricades is an Irish based historical fiction.

The prologue opens in 1906, a house fire. Maggie Gilligan’s father gets her to safety out of a bedroom window. His last words to her are “Make a difference in the world, Maggie”.

Chapter one begins in 1913, Dublin. It is seven years after her father’s death. Maggie meets Daniel and Michael, two boys who help her with a flat bicycle tyre. They talk of trouble in the city, strikers are causing riots, Maggie fiercely defends them to the surprise of the boys.

Daniel is intrigued by Maggie, his privileged upbringing has sheltered him from the plight of the poor. He is determined to see Maggie again and learn more. Maggie challenges Daniel to help her at a food kitchen and her determination to help those in need and…

View original post 597 more words

Rosie’s #Bookreview Team #RBRT ARDENT JUSTICE by Peter Taylor-Gooby Financial #Thriller

Rosie Amber

Today’s team review is from Judith, she blogs at http://judithbarrowblog.com/

#RBRT Review Team

Judith has been reading Ardent Justice by Peter  Taylor-Gooby


My Review:

It could be seen churlish to be in any way negative about Ardent Justice, especially as the reader is told up front that the book is  endorsed by Polly Toynbee and that the book is inspired by such eminent authors as Zoe Fairbairns and Lionel Shriver. And that all profits will go to Shelter, the housing and homelessness charity. But the mention of this somehow grated on me; it was as though I was being challenged to find any fault in the novel.

So, gripe over and having said that I will try to be as balanced as I can in this review.

Starting with the Blurb. There are too many small details in the second paragraph that is more or less repeated in the last. I’m not sure the second paragraph…

View original post 680 more words