McfunkyMcsplunky commented on moontea's update
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on a post
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on Woven.words's update
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on kit_s's update
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on a post
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on ghostmums's update
ghostmums made progress on...
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on McfunkyMcsplunky's update
McfunkyMcsplunky started reading...

All Systems Red (The Murderbot Diaries, #1)
Martha Wells
McfunkyMcsplunky made progress on...
McfunkyMcsplunky started reading...

All Systems Red (The Murderbot Diaries, #1)
Martha Wells
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on a post
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on SammySosa's update
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on a post from the Pagebound Club forum
I'm sure a lot of us have heard about Shakespeare theories, was Shakespeare really Shakespeare, or was it a name a group of people used to write under (or other similar theories like this one). I was wondering how everyone felt about these theories. I personally really dislike them. We have a lot of historical evidence on who Shakespeare was, and some of the main 'evidence' used within these theories can easily be disproven with a bit of research like Shakespeare wasn't one person because he never spelt his name the same, but with some research we can see that was normal/typical for the time period. The website Folger Shakespeare library has a section called Shakespeare Documented which has "the largest and most authoritative collection of primary-source materials documenting the life of William Shakespeare (1564-1616), bringing together all known manuscript and print references to Shakespeare, his works, and additional references to his family, in his lifetime and shortly thereafter. Nearly 500 references, found in roughly 400 print and manuscript documents". So maybe it's the history major in me that makes me dislike these theories, not that they can't be thought-provoking at times, but I feel like we have so much evidence of Shakespeare instead of trying to prove/theorize that it was someone else, we could uplift writers of the past who might not have gotten the credit they deserve maybe due to being a woman or a person of color. But what does everyone else think of these Shakespeare theories?
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on McfunkyMcsplunky's update
McfunkyMcsplunky paused reading...

Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants
Robin Wall Kimmerer
McfunkyMcsplunky paused reading...

Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants
Robin Wall Kimmerer
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on EllaUndead's update
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on OhMyDio's review of Jane Eyre
ETA: my review does not contain spoilers, but the comment section does!
I was pleasantly surprised by how different this was from Wuthering Heights, which is maybe not fair but since they get lumped together all the time I definitely thought they were going to be more similar. And there are definitely fingerprints of each on the other, but generally this was much more enjoyable.
I am also surprised that this has never been spoiled for me? Once she leaves the school, and even while at the school, I didn't really ever know where this was going.
If this were a solid two hundred pages shorter I think most of my gripes would fade into more of a "this just isn't for me" and out of "wow, I actively dislike this" but because it's sooooo long winded and overwrought with itself I am firmly in the "but, why?" camp.
There was a solid portion where I was totally engaged and invested, and when the twists twisted I was entertained. I thought a few times "okay, yea, I get the hype" but when we move into the next plot point it all crumbled away back into just wholly mediocre and annoying.
I did enjoy that Jane, at times, would stand up for herself - station and gender be damned, but I found it entirely frustrating that a woman with such a strong will and since of justice would ultimately make the choices she did. After spending 400 pages languishing on how she wouldn't compromise on her ideals it 100% felt like that's exactly what she did in the end. She then waxes poetical about how her life is now fulfilled because she's living entirely to serve a man. Big ole barf for me, fam! That shit is not romantic. Every single man in this book is a walking stack of red flags and I genuinely hated every single one of them. While I do appreciate that Jane got to "choose" her marriage, it really felt like there were no options, and so much would be different for her if she had ever met one (1) man who was single and not a whole entire asshole.
Also, shout out to religious abuse; glad that hasn't changed a jot in 200 years.
Anyway. I'm rambling. I did not care for this, but it did have it's moments here and there.
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on a post from the Pagebound Club forum
Am I the only one who notices specific words throughout their reading? Not words you hate, just words you flag? For example, 'dais' seems to be used in almost every fantasy book. Or I always note when 'cerulean' is used regardless of genre.
In scientific writing I always notice the word 'paucity' because I had an advisor who used it in nearly every paper... So that one does lean a bit more towards hated words for me haha
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on a post from the Pagebound Club forum
I have a few triggers that, when they appear unprompted in books, can cause me to spiral a bit into an anxious or depressive episode- naturally making reading unappealing because, what if the next book upsets me too?
I have found YA/New Adult Romantasy and silly smutty books can pull me out of that mood - but what do you do when a book upsets you and makes you scared to read again?
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on amanda_the_tangerine's update
McfunkyMcsplunky commented on superllaine's update