Miserable Cinderellas

‘There is a castle on a cloud,
I like to go there in my sleep,
Aren’t any floors for me to sweep,
Not in my castle on a cloud.’

I saw two productions over half term. The Burton Operatic Society did a production of Cinderella at a local school. (I have discussed a production in a previous blog: https://samanthagray9.wordpress.com/2012/10/31/good-vs-evil/) I also saw Les Miserables (finally!) at  the cinema. Both productions were fantastic but naturally they are every different in terms of context and plot. But in this case, they are both musicals and me being me, I wanted to draw some comparisons from the characters. (Call me lazy if you like for not writing two separate reviews!)

I must confess that I didn’t really know the story of Les Mis. before I went. I know, I know, English graduate who has not read it or seen a version of it. Reasons, or excuses being, well for starters the book is reallllly long! I have since downloaded it to my Nook and it is a worryingly long 4000 pages! (You may not see so many blogs lately ūüėČ ) Also, I just never saw a production through reasons such as money, opportunity and I never particularly studied it. It was worth the wait though!

I loved the film of Les Mis. and recommend anyone who has not seen it, to go. Or wait for the DVD ūüėČ It was a brilliant portrayal of Paris after the French Revolution. It focuses on the poor – or asles miserables’ can be translated as ‘the poor ones,’ ‘the miserables,’ or ‘the victims.’ Then there is the juicy part of the plot of the June Rebellion also known as The Paris Uprising of 1832. This was good viewing and really gave a depiction of this battle between the rich and the poor man. I don’t want to go too much into the story because that isn’t the purpose of this blog. But just a few more thoughts of mine about the latest film version: the singing was good overall. I was well aware it was a musical and was fine with the characters singing when there was a vital part to the plot, when they had to sing their own thoughts or sing as a group¬† – fine. I wasn’t so sure about them ‘singing’ conversations to each other. That was a bit odd! I know that that is the case with all productions of Les Miserables but it just seemed a little odd to me. Russel Crowe singing seriously was even odder – he was the only one that I cringed in my seat a little when he let the notes escape his mouth. My other main point that comes to mind, is the children. They were fantastic little actors and really did the characters justice. Brilliant.

Cinderella I would think we all know a little about. It was a great production by Burton Operatics and an old story with a new twist, yet it still kept the original magic. I laughed out loud when the mice came out though Рas they were played by children, they were nearly as big as Cinders herself! The actress playing Cinderella was amazing and had that inner happiness to her that only resurfaced when she was with the mice, or day dreaming or when she meets the prince. She played the miserable and slave side to the character equally as well. (The other actors and everyone involved did a fantastic job too Рto risk a shout out!)

I started to¬†see the¬†old fairy tale in¬†a new light though last week. Possible because it was the first time I had seen it as an adult. It really is about a poor orphan girl, treated badly because of the times and bad luck of being left with an awful family. We are talking 17th century when this first was written, reflecting the role of women at the time. If women had no family or husband then they were worth nothing really. It isn’t until she meets her Prince Charming that her life becomes livable. The feminist in me, sobs at this.

This is what got me thinking when I saw Les Mis. Cosette is a lot like Cinderella. Think about it. They are both;

  • orphans and are left in terrible circumstances because of this.
  • slave like characters who like to dream and hope. The song at the top is from Les Mis. and sung by Cosette but it also reminded me of Cinderella.
  • young and beautiful
  • women in society who are not able to help themselves
  • (in the end) married to their heart’s desire who happen to rescue them from their misfortune. (I will admit Cosette¬†was already saved early on by Jean Valjean – but again saved by a man)

So whether fairy tales or historical dramas, women were still depicted and were indeed treated in the same, awful way years ago. In terms of fairy tales, I do sometimes think why didn’t Cinderella (or Snow White, or any other) put the broom down, go out get a job, fend for herself and forget about men? But as Les Mis. shows, it wasn’t as simple as that indeed in France or England or anywhere. I was horrified by Cosette’s¬†Mum in the film (played by Ann Hathaway) and how she had to have her head shaved to sell her hair and have her teeth pulled out for money. Definitely¬†showing the hardships of the time. Poor women then had to resort to prostitution if they weren’t lucky to get rescued by the Jean Valjeans¬†or the Prince Charmings of the world.

I suppose, though, the Valjean¬†character does show us just how hard it was for men too. He wouldn’t have been able to turn his life around (well firstly if he didn’t steal a lot of silver!) if he hadn’t the run and under cover, carving and scraping a life for himself along the way. But being a hero of a story, he still managed to save Cosette on the way also. Like fairy tales, there is some sort of happy ending.

So how many Miserable Cinderellas¬†are out there today? Women that have nowhere to turn or are so desperate that they turn to a horrible way of life. Because, unlike fairy takes, there isn’t always a happy ending in life. ūüė¶

XSXS

Advertisements

Men and Women are merely players….

‘All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,’

I could ask a really deep, philosophical question like; why are we here? Still think about it by all means, but what I really want to ask is how and why we do things whilst we are here. I think Shakespeare had it right. All the world is a stage and we are all players¬†or actors on it. Take away the fact that people do act as¬†a living or for a job and just consider the ordinary, unscripted man/woman for a moment. We are here from the day of birth, or as Shakespeare calls it our ‘entrance’ and we do not leave until our end has come and we ‘exit’ from the stage. The world as a stage is a great metaphor I think. We all act from cot to coffin. Every day.

On a daily basis, we smile at certain people or scowl at others (not openly if you are of the polite kind ūüėČ ). We are acting. We are choosing to be a certain way with certain people. We are consciously thinking how to be. Our speech is a little different though and as I did¬†my graduate degree on spoken language, I know that it is worlds (or stages) apart from a script. We naturally pause, we stutter, we splutter, we repeat things and sometimes we just say the completely wrong thing. In a script for a play or programme, none of that happens unless it has been included purposely for an effect. I have been thinking recently, as I decided on the topic for this blog, that more of this spontaneity¬†should occur in soap operas and dramas. They are supposed to reflect ‘real life’, even if it is a more dramatic¬†and¬† exciting version of it. I think we should see, therefore, someone starting to walk to the shop mumbling to themself, then rapidly turning around because they left the oven on. We should see people shuffle on past a neighbour half saying hi and half avoiding eye contact because they aren’t in the mood to talk. We should see people stuttering when they speak because they can’t get their words out. Or saying the complete wrong thing out of social awkwardness. Obviously now, I am talking about actors on earth acting as another character and this thought process can get a little crazy. But I just mean, television programmes would do well to add a little more ‘human’ to their characters¬†because even with our human mistakes and characteristics, we are still acting all the time.

We put on a ‘brave’ face when we need to face something we do not want to do. We put on a ‘serious’ face when someone is telling us a really boring, long-winded¬†story and all we want to do is laugh. And I tell you something for free, I put on a ‘happy’ face at work all day, everyday. That doesn’t mean I am faking being happy because I love my job. But working with children normally means you have to exaggerate your feelings of happiness, confidence and positivity – and definitely patience ūüėČ because you may not be feeling those things one day but you have to be them to do your job well. So I play the part.

So Shakespeare was also right by saying ‘His acts being seven ages.’ Meaning, man and woman go through the seven stages of life and obviously acting differently through each one i.e. infancy, teenage years, adult hood. But I think, we also have many, many different¬†roles to play in all stages of our life. I’ve¬†mentioned a job role – but what about yourself outside of work? For example, I¬†am a daughter. A sister. A grand-daughter. A girl friend. A friend. A niece. A cousin. There are seven more roles through life for you. And I act differently for each one. Not because I prefer certain family members to others – even though, naturally strength of relationship does also affect how we act – but I am supposed to act differently with my sister then I am with my boyfriend! We all know how to change how we are in a suitable way.

So who is the director of the play of life? Religious ones of you will say God.¬†Definitly¬†one option. Maybe fate is an option too. We are all meant to act certain ways at certain times for our lives to sketch itself out. Maybe there is a puppet master controlling our every move for giggles and sinister pleasure. Have you ever watched The Truman Show? We studied it at school and I remember¬†not particularly liking it. Yet, I can’t shake the idea that someone could be watching us at every given moment. Not in a Big Brother kind of way but, like on the film,¬†where the¬†world is watching your everyday life, like¬†a soap opera. And all your family and friends are ‘actors’ and your behaviour¬†is being observed and analysed. I’ve always toyed with this idea and think what people would make of watching me all day. Not that I do anything particularly fascinating you know, but it makes me conscious of my moves! And¬†if you think about it, you would think that when we are alone we are not acting and that is the one time that we are 100%, truly ourselves. But even then are we acting? I am sitting here now. Alone. I am writing this, but I am acting as a professional, writer who is rushing to get an article out on deadline. Our imaginations and thoughts mean we are acting all the time.

So, maybe the only time we don’t act is in our sleep. But even then we dream and play a part, usually as the leading role or as a part that our unconsious wants us to play on the real stage of life. We need to listen to our hearts and minds and act in the best way possible. Do not wait in the¬†wings or become part of the audience of your life. Play the leading role and make the most of it before your final exit ūüôā

*Curtain Closes*

XSXS

A not so stupid Cupid!

A topical blog today (I do try!)… Happy Valentine’s day! That can mean whatever you choose. I think it is experienced in¬†three different ways: the completely insufferable loved up couples who completely embrace the commercialism of it all; the single people who also then stem into two groups of the cynical and the ‘couldnt give a damn’ ones; and the people who just use it as an extra excuse to appreciate and spend time with loved ones (well just the one ūüėȬ†)

I fall into the the¬†latter category. I didn’t always, as my boyfriend and I used to buy presents, go out for dinner and all that smoochy¬†stuff. I think when you have been together so long then you go from the that category to just appreciating each other. My boyfriend, incidentally, is with his true love¬†tonight (he does happen to have more than one!)… his rowing boat! No we haven’t spent the eve opening¬†loved up pressies¬†and having¬†a romantic meal¬†– he has at rowing and me? Well, I am sitting here writing about it! ūüėČ But, he is going to finish early – as to me ‘time’ is a more valuable gift than jewellery¬† – not that I wouldn’t happily¬†accept that too ūüėČ

Yes, a lot of people hate Valentine’s day because they think it another occasion that they have to remember, spend money and conform to. But as I say, it can just be an extra excuse to spend quality time together. I say ‘extra’ excuse because it should be in addition to other special evenings. You shouldn’t need Valentine’s day to arrive in order to have a ‘date’ or to spend some romantic time together….. love shouldn’t be an annual event! But you can receive the day with a hug and a kiss and feel blessed to have a loved one. Even if you don’t have a romantic loved one, you can still feel lucky and grateful to have loved ones in your life. Or just stick on the chick flicks/get drunk with other single friends/eat chocolate¬† – as you don’t have to share ūüėČ

Let’s remember¬†how Valentine’s Day began. Interestingly, it wasn’t associated with romantic love until the middle ages. Before this, it was a¬†date to celebrate¬†numoerous Christian¬†saints called ‘Valentinus’.¬† The 14th of February was the day they were ‘honoured’.¬† Then one particular ‘Saint Valentine’ was¬†focussed on when we look back to history¬†and he was¬† thought to be imprisoned for performing weddings for soldiers who were forbidden to marry and for ministering to Christians, who were persecuted¬†under the Roman Empire. During his imprisonment, he is said to have healed the daughter of his jailer Asterius and before he was executed he left a note saying ‘From your Valentine.’ Which could explain why it is typical to sign your cards as that now.

But yes the romantic love idea came more into play during the time of Chaucer, where ‘courtly love’ was popular. By the 15th century, this date became a day to present loved¬†ones with confectionary, flowers and¬†hand-made¬†cards. It was from¬†the 19th Century that mass-produced cards replaced the ‘hand made cards’.¬†Sad really, but I am sure there are still some people out there that do make their own personalised Valentine’s.

Also, don’t forget Cupid, who is a symbol or icon¬†of Valentine’s Day. Cupid was the god of desire, erotic love and affection. Cupid carries an¬† arrow with a golden, sharp¬†tip and who ever gets hit with it, experiences¬†uncontrollable desire. What a lot of people don’t know, is that he also had a second arrow with a lead point and this was for negative purposes – it would cause the person to run away. I didn’t realise this until it was mentioned in Romeo and Juliet where Romeo says that Rosalind¬†won’t be hit by the right arrow and return his love. I love this idea about Cupid as it has a dual effect and shows that love is two-sided. It can be¬† lovely and amazing but also painful and hurtful¬† – reflected by his two arrows!

I have to share you my favourite love poem with you today to finish off. I have mentioned it in a blog before so that may be why it seems familiar (https://samanthagray9.wordpress.com/2012/08/08/that-stinging-feeling/). I think it shows what should be important about Valentine’s Day and realising the reality of love:

Valentine

Not a red rose or a satin heart

I give you an onion.
It is a moon wrapped in brown paper.
It promises light
like the careful undressing of love.

Here.
It will blind you with tears
like a lover.
It will make your reflection
a wobbling photo of grief.

I am trying to be truthful.

Not a cute card or a kissogram.

I give you an onion.
Its fierce kiss will stay on your lips,
possessive and faithful
as we are,
for as long as we are.

Take it.
Its platinum loops shrink to a wedding-ring,
if you like.

Lethal.
Its scent will cling to your fingers,
cling to your knife.

So there you have it. You may have flowers today. Or a necklace. Or some chocolate. But it doesn’t have all that emotion and meaning¬†to it like an onion does it?! I love this poem as it shows that love starts and stops like the stanzas and the lines. Love clings to you, whether you want it to or not, like the stench of an onion onto your skin. It is honest about love and a brilliant metaphor for love.

There you go, we have the history of Valentine, cupid and how the day has changed, all for a modern poet to say that love is a vegetable! ūüėČ

Enjoy your Valentine’s Day in which ever way you choose ūüôā

XSXS

A Gay Affair….

…… but¬† gay people won’t be able to have gay affairs if they aren’t allowed to wed in the first place!

You may have gathered that I am straight. I am a female and I have spoken about my boyfriend on many occasion – who is male. So I am not a gay man or a lesbian woman using my blog to try and get my views across. No. I am a straight woman, using my blog to give my views on the matter. Giving the homosexuals an extra voice if you will.

It seemed a good time to write this today. The political debate has been going on for a while now, plus I went out for my GBF’s (Gay Best Friend – referred to in prrevious posts) birthday on Friday. Also, last night, I showed the said GBF an essay I wrote at Uni about the origin of the word ‘gay’. So I am going to combine all thoughts of these subjects into today’s post.

I’ll start with our Friday night out. It was a real ‘gay affair,’ I have to say. We had Tepanyaki at a Japanese restaurant, which was served to us, funnily enough, by a very camp Japanese chef. Me and a few mates spent the night guessing if he was gay or not. He put cups under his top at one point and blew kisses at the males and femles, yet wouldn’t come and feel my boyfriend up – I’m not sure who this says the most about ūüėČ

The night was fun, followed by Karaoke. I took the piss a little out of my friend for this saying it was all a very themed night ūüėČ He likes various langauges and cultures, so the night wasn’t a¬†surprise, I just loved how it was all inkeeping with the Japanese idea¬†– but that was partly the restaurant I guess ūüôā The first song to be sung was Papa don’t Preach by one of my GBF’s lesbian friends. She homosexualised the lyrics with, ‘Papa don’t preach, I’m a lesbian.’¬† – you’re all singing that to yourself now, aren’t you?!¬† I felt it was a bit ‘much’ for the first song of the night as some of the lyrics were very female love explicit ūüėȬ† – maybe I just hadn’t drank enough! But the homosexual supporter side of me was filled with admiration for this girl. She was singing in a public place about her homosexuality with pride, confidence and joy. Why shouldn’t this girl marry who she wants to one day? ¬†Across the room there could have been a very unhappy, hetreosexual couple – stuck in a marriage they are unhappy with. Who is the happiest?

That’s what I think it all comes down to. Happiness. To quote the picture at the top, ‘Why can’t people marry who they want to?’ There have been subjects arising such as religion, kids, society – blah blah blah. People should have the free will to love who they want and celebrate it how they choose. To touch on the ‘kid’s’ subject, I also think that a child in today’s society is¬† likely to be just as¬†happy with two loving dads or two loving mums than they are with a mum and a dad who are fighting, or with a single mum or dad or even with the whole ‘conventional’ family. Let’s face it, the idea of ‘family’ has changed over the last fifty years anyway, so why shouldn’t the marriage rules?

Someone said to me that ‘marriage is between men and women.’ I replied with, ‘it has been up to now, yes. But why can’t that be changed?’ Men were only allowed to vote until the suffragettes came along and until then ‘voting was just for men.’ That changed, so why can’t this? My friend’s reply was that gay people can have a civil ceremony and they should be happy with that. Well, why can’t they have the same as anyone else? If marriage is just a piece of paper then it is down to the inidividual to decide if they want that piece of paper. It shouldn’t be a case of ‘marriage is just a document and won’t affect their lives anyway so there is no point in fighting for it.’ If that’s the case then just aboloish marriage altogether then.

This is where the church comes in. Religion has also changed over the years and less people are involved in organised religion. There are many religions and beliefs and people are more confident to explore and believe in what they choose. The Christian (and other) church need to stay with the times, or they will lose even more ‘custom’ so to speak. They believe that God treats us all equally¬† – well then let them marry equally. MPs are saying ‘we can’t redefine marriage.’ Why not? It is only a case of gender. Man loves woman. Woman loves man. Man loves man. Woman loves woman. All the same service give or take a prefix.

To finish I’ll share with you a little about the history of the word ‘gay,’ which my GBF was very interested to read last night. In 1310 the definition of ‘gay’ was:

‘Of persons, their atributes and actions: Full of disposed to joy and mirth manifesting or characterised by joyous mirth; light hearted exuberantly cheerful, sportive.’

It was nothing but positive back then. To be gay was to feel joy – no matter what the gender or sexual preference. The word was used frequently to display happiness pf charcters in work’s of literature. For example, Chaucer described someone as ‘gay’ in 1386. By Shakesperian times, the term ‘the gays’ was commonly used to refer to men on stage who played the female parts.¬†My GBF and I¬†talked about the fact that these men may have had to feminise themselves and put on female voices but at same time they were over enthusiastic and joyous. Explaining a little about how the two definitoins have had a crossover. Also in the 19th Century, female and male prostitues were referred to as beinig ‘gaily’ dressed. This again gives the idea of the lable ‘gay’ in our modern society: to be feminine, smart, flamboyant (even if they aren’t actually a homosexual.)

So, if we take the old, postive¬†definiton of ‘gay’ to be happy and joyous – then, in my opinion, if we are going to wed, we all need a very gay marriage ūüėČ

 XSXS

Numbers 2: Chaos

The second book in Rachel Ward’s fantastic trilogy doesn’t disappoint. It is just as exciting, if not more, than the first. I must say though, if you haven’t read the first book yet – then click off this page now until you have. As it may spoil some of the plot from the debut. ūüėČ

Half of this¬†book is from the perspective of Adam, the son of Jem and Spider. The other half is from Sarah’s point of view – one of Adam’s school colleagues, who first knows him from her nightmares. She can see the future, you see, in her nightmares. And Adam, you’ve guessed it, has his Mum’s gift and can see the numbers in people’s eyes. Yet, the gift seems to be developing with each generation and Adam can see and feel how the person is going to die too.

Spider and Jem aren’t in this book – you’ll see why at the end of the first book ūüėČ We are left with Adam, his great-nan¬†from the first book and Sarah to try and help save London from the looming disaster. Adam keeps seeing the same number: 1st Jan 2027.¬† He sees it in people everywhere he does and knows something terrible is going to happen. This is no London Eye incident from the first book, this is going to affect thousands of people.

Adam starts to record the numbers, the people he saw them in, the place he saw them and the kind of death they will have. He starts to notice a pattern: fire, water and tumbling rubble. If people aren’t going to die on New Year’s Day then a lot of them are predicted to die days after. So what is going to happen? And can Adam change the future by warning people? Is anyone actually going to believe him?

Sarah has the same nightmare every night and her days are filled with a nightmare too¬† – her Dad rapes her on a regular basis. Up to this point, I thought these books would be great for teenagers in schools to study, but it does has very adult themes like this. Something good comes out of her horrible ordeal though.¬†A child. Which to me, seems a bit odd. I mean, I get why it happened, as a result of incest. But she seems absolutely fine with bringing up her Dad’s baby and doesn’t seem emotionally torn in how to love the baby or now – I just thought that may have been more of an issue. And what will happen when the baby asks about her¬†Dad one day?¬†But Ward does do a great job with Sarah and her love/hatred/fear of her father. And the story running parallel to the first book¬†: means she also runs away. She is also partly running away from Adam, he may have met her at school, but she has known him for years from her nightmares! She is terrified of him but doesn’t know why and as much as she runs, she finds that she always runs into him.

Together, will they figure out a solution to the looming New Year’s Day? Will they all survive? And since the gift has now changed through the generations – can Adam now change the numbers?

My only issue with the book (apart from the baby issue¬†that I have already mentioned) is technology. I like how the book is set in the future and people get chipped and there are these palm computer¬†gadgets that every school pupil has. There are TV screens all over London giving safety info. That all seems quite believable. Yet, Adam doesn’t know how to use the internet. Whaaat? Ward claims, Jem always kept Adam away from the internet because it¬†is full of rubbish. But would we seriously believe that a teenage boy, even these days, would do as his Mum says and avoid the internet completely? Let alone in 14 years time! Teenagers can’t avoid the internet, yet Adam doesn’t even know how to warn people of 1.1.2027 through forums or blogs or anything. I find this to be unrealistic, as I imagine people will pretty much use the internet to survive in the future! Adam would have grown up with it.

This book is aptly named ‘Chaos’ as there is nothing but that from beginning to end. It isn’t a particularly happy book,¬† but as I say about things like that, it will always make you feel better about your own life ūüėČ I did get a bit freaked out though by the 1st Jan 2027 date – because could something happen on that day?¬† Could Ward be right? But I guess you always get that with books set in the future – and George Orwell wasn’t right with 1984 was he?! ūüėČ

Happy reading,

XSXS

Numbers

I have never had a head for numbers. You may have realised that I am more of a words kind of girl. ūüėČ That doesn’t mean that I am not fascinated by numbers though – even if I can’t always add them together very well ūüėČ For this reason, I would like to say that is why I was drawn to reading the book Numbers by Rachel Ward. But I was bought it randomly by my sister and her boyfriend for Christmas – random, just as numbers can be.

Numbers is a trilogy¬† – Numbers 2 Chaos and Numbers 3 Infinity completing the trio. So far, I have read the first two. And they are fantastic. Full of drama and twists and turns. And, I know we shouldn’t judge a book by the cover and all – but they are pretty ace too. Numbers also litter the pages and I swear I could see numbers along the closed pages when the book is shut – but I wasn’t sure if I was going a little crazy like the characters and thinking I could see numbers ūüėČ

The first in the fantastic series….

But I haven’t told you enough to make you want to pick up a copy yet. In the first book, Jem is a troubled teenage girl and she can see numbers. In people’s eyes. It is a date. Of when they are going to die. As soon as I read that on the blurb, I was intrigued. I like psychological plots and I knew this would be one. Like, would she ever tell someone their number? Could she save lives? Will she find out her own number? It is compelling stuff because if you think about it, we all have a number. A death number. Without being too morbid, we are all going to die some day. But we don’t think about it because there is no point. We don’t know when it will be. Even if¬†we have¬†a terminal illness, we don’t know the exact day. Would you want to know? I sure as hell wouldn’t. I would be terrified of that day getting nearer. We all like to believe that we have a long stretch of life in front of us and maybe that’s what gets us from day-to-day.

But Jem does know. She sees a number each time she looks at someone, meaning that a lot of the time she doesn’t want to look people in the eye. She is a typical teenage girl in that she avoids eye contact and is awkward in social situations. She is not so typical for the reasons though: She not only sees the date that will end a person’s existence but she has lost her mum to drug addiction, she has no other family and gets shoved from foster home to foster home and she has no friend in the world. Depressing yes¬†– so maybe not get it your teenager to help cheer them up ūüėČ

It is however action packed and this begins when she meets Spider. Jem is a small, delicate, white girl. Spider in strong contrast is a tall, black, gangly bloke. They are opposites, yet find that one thing in common. They are both outcasts and both lonely.

The plot thickens when Jem and Spider are out for the day. Hanging out in London like teenagers do, they want to go on the London Eye but realise it’s too expensive. Jem quickly realises this is meant to be, as all the people around them, have the same death number. The date of that day. She manages to convince Spider, without telling him why, that they need to go. Minutes later, the London Eye explodes. Taking lives and reinforcing the fact that the numbers must be true! But they are seen running from the London Eye just before the explosion and the police think they are responsible for it. So they go on the run.

I won’t give more away but it all gets very intense as these two naive teenagers go on the run. Spider steals cars yet he has never driven one before. The whole country knows their faces so they have to keep hidden. And remember, as soon as Jem looked Spider in the eye, she knew his number. And she knows his fateful day is going to be soon. So it’s all about can she change his number? Can they stay hidden from the police and the press? Or is she going to have to come clean about her number visions?

It really is an amazing story and they are believable characters. Spider’s gran adds a lot of humour and wackiness¬†to the story, whereas Karen, Jem’s foster Mum brings in the realistic and sensible elements – and tries to bring in some stability for Jem.

I’ll discuss the second book in a separate post – but if you like drama, action and romance, then this book is a great combination of all three! ūüôā

XSXS