Top Ten Reasons Why Football Rules

I miss David Letterman.  His “Top Ten” lists made for some brilliant television (I am including both types of football in this post—soccer/football is all kinds of fun.)  In that spirit, I have put together my own Top Ten list of why football is the best sport on earth.

1   1.  The weather during football season is awesome. For those of us living in the weather hellhole known as the Deep South, we get our first taste of fall with glorious, crisp, sunny days and cool nights. The ferocious African jungle-style heat has finally diminished and we are left with weather patterns that behave in an astonishing, Camelot-like fashion. You can actually sit outside in the middle of the afternoon and enjoy the day without spontaneously combusting. This is otherwise impossible to do during the ravages of summer in the South.

2       2. From a female standpoint, football gives us all kinds of eye candy.  God would not have given us Tom Brady, Orestis Karnezis, or David Beckham if he did not mean for us to watch the game. These men are far too pretty to be wasted languishing in the mud; they are meant to be on national television, preferably without their shirts.

3    3. Without football, what else would we have to discuss on Monday mornings with our co-workers? No explanation necessary.

4  4.     Drunk, painted dudes.  In what other sport do we see fans standing around in freezing weather, painted up and liquored up? We get to watch sixty minutes of enormous, muscular men beating the bejeezus out of one another in the name of sportsmanship. This body-painting phenomenon seems to be especially popular with large, beer-bellied men in Northern climes. If you have ever seen a Packers or Patriots game, you have seen this species. They tend to be half-dressed, painted in team colors, drunk as a tinkler's dam, and yelling their fool heads off. It's fabulous.

5  5.     The fights.  Football is all kinds of dramatic.  Football can lead to some interesting and costly fights, particularly among the alumni of competing schools. As this is a Top Ten list, don’t have the space to relate the utter insanity of, say, London after an Arsenal victory. Or a Gunners' loss. Whichever. Londoners employ any opportunity to get hammered and yell at one another.

6   6.    From a male standpoint, the girls.  I mean, they made an entire movie about the Dallas Cowboys’ cheerleaders.  Granted, it was a made-for-television cheesefest, but that tells you something about how hot these women actually were.

7  7.     The parties.  Have you ever been to New Orleans during the Sugar Bowl?  Criminy.  It makes Mardi Gras look like a church social.

8   8.    Psycho goal guy.  Andres Cantor, arguably one of the most famous soccer announcers, literally loses his mind every time his team scores.  His insane vocalizations have become so popular that they actually sell a ringtone with his voice in Latin American countries.  

9  9.    Team mascots. From Bevo at Texas to Buzz at Georgia Tech, the mascots are a beloved part of the history of NCAA Football.  Heck, UGA V got so into the spirit of the game one year he tried to take down an Auburn player by biting the mess out of him.

1 10.  The pageantry.  Nothing beats watching Chief Osceola throw a flaming spear in the center of the field at the beginning of an FSU game, or seeing the Notre Dame Irish Guard lead out the band.  Listening to the fans sing every note of the school song or watching Gator fans do the “chomp” for hours only adds to the excitement.

Worst. Book. Ever. Review of "A Moral Dilemma" by Zara Kingsley

Oh dear GOD. I have tutored ESL middle-schoolers with a better grasp of grammar, syntax, and basic sentence structure that this woman has. There were errors on EVERY page. Often there were multiple errors. I am not being hyperbolic for dramatic intent--I could not find a single page in which the writing was correct.

For example, on one page, she refers to an eatery as a "brassiere". Twice. Really? Your characters will be dining in lingerie? It's called a "brasserie", you uneducated dimwit. On that same page, she describes the male character as "taking the reigns". Also twice. Erm, so I guess he is taking over the throne of England? Better inform the King.

She also misuses vocabulary, often laughably. Early in the book--page 17--she tells us that the male character is "reticent" about buying an expensive flat. She later describes how he absolutely does not want to spend the money. He sure as hell isn't reticent, then. Seems fairly communicative to me. Buy a dictionary, Ms. Kingsley.

This should have been a clue; but because I refuse to let my Goodreads friends subject themselves to this horror, I persevered. Oh, and later in the book, she forgets a character's name TWO LINES later. Criminy. That is the fastest name change in the history of time.

I hope by all of the gods of literature that this abysmal mess was self-published. If not, the editors need to look elsewhere for employment because they are horrific at this position. Other folks described the book as funny--honestly, the only humor I could discern was how laughably bad it was.

Ms. Kingsley may be a lovely person; but I beg of you, Ms. Kingsley, by the swirling-rapidly-in-his-grave ghost of Shakespeare, please don't foist another book on the public.


P.S. On a side note, the author describes herself as a "Yummy Mummy". She may be hotter than a ghost chili, but cripes. Way to pat yourself on the back. Granted, that little blurb has nothing to do with this crapfest of a book but it annoyed the bejeezus out of me.

I Need to Stop Re-reading Teenage Favorites. A Review of "A Rose in Winter"

When I read this as a teenager, I thought it was the best romance EVAH. My little adolescent heart swooned at the idea of a gorgeous man who was kind and intelligent and willing to do anything to win the heart of his chosen fair maiden. (Mostly because the really good-looking guys in my high-school were generally genial, beer-addled horndogs.)

Rereading it as an adult was a study in disenchantment. Erienne is a hopeless, shallow snob without any sense of loyalty. For all of her supposed education she is pretty stupid to fall for the ridiculous ruse perpetrated by the erstwhile hero. The writing also has a marked tendency to veer into purple prose. This would have been a much higher ranking from my teenage self--as it stands, I can only give it 2 stars now. I should have left the damn thing on the shelf and let the teenage me have her adolescent fantasies intact.

Magic and Manners? More Like Magic and Meh.

Don't get me wrong--I didn't hate this book.  The editing in the e-version was all kinds of cattywumpus, but that is not the author's fault. I guess that I just love the original so much that this started to piss me off.  The parts that were directly taken from Austen's novel were lovingly recreated and stayed true to the feel of the original.

This was a mashup work so I expected to have a bit of a giggle at the bizarre mix of Regency manners and fantasy.  There were some great parts--I loved that she incorporated some LGBT characters and had one of the romantic heroes come from African descent. 

That being said, the magic portion of the novel is what made me want to smack the author with a hardback copy of a grimoire.  There was a scene in the library at Darcy/Archer's manse that was frigging endless.  She was obviously trying to set up some kind of belated world building, but it seemed a bit late as more than half the book had already transpired at this point.  I also thought the ending was fairly lame; Elizabeth/Elsabeth is trying to start some kind of feminist/LGBT rights/magic user acceptance in the strictured society of Regency England.  Oh, and everybody is mostly just fine with that.  Really?!  Cause we don't even have that now in 2016, if the furor over the Target bathroom incident is any indicator.

My biggest pet peeve with this book is I felt it didn't deliver on its promise.  As a Jane Austen tribute novel, it worked fairly well.  As a mashup fantasy novel it fell woefully short.  The author is a solid writer and I enjoyed parts of the book a great deal.  Yet the book does leave much to be desired as a literary mashup.  For that reason, I must give it a reluctant 3 stars.

Damn you, Neil Gaiman. A Review of "Mairelon the Magician" by Patricia C. Wrede

I loved the premise of this one, and  I generally adore Patricia C. Wrede's writing.  I loved the Pygmalion-esque feel of Kim's lessons with Mairelon.  I have a soft spot for Regency era novels, which is all Jane Austen's fault, and a marked penchant for fantasy for which I blame C.S. Lewis and Neil Gaiman. So you can imagine my joy when I stumbled across this one--a Regency-era fantasy.  Unfortunately, the book just fell flat for several reasons.

I liked that Kim came from nothing, but she was such a milquetoast for someone who supposedly grew up an orphan on the mean streets of Regency London.  One would definitely expect her to have more spine. 

The ending just annoyed the bejeezus out of me.  It felt like a French farce except it wasn't that funny.  I half expected someone to pop out of a closet and whack people over the head with a rubber chicken--it was that silly.  It was good enough to lure me into reading the second, but I give this one three stars with some trepidation.