Home

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Still Here:- Danny Question

  • Sep. 4th, 2006 at 7:07 PM
Still not sure if anyone frequents these pages but I thought if I had a question about Danny it makes sense to ask it in a forum meant for Danny. It doesn't seem to work as well if I just shout my questions at random people on the street and then curse them for not knowing the book, that can appear psychotic. Anyway here's the question.

There is a story mentioned in Danny by John about something that Ian had once told him (I know that’s a confusing sentence). The story is about a broken mirror and a piece of the mirror getting stuck in a boys heart when it smashes. Is this the story of the snow queen? Also does Ian tell the story in the book at any point, because no matter how many times I read the book when I get to the part John mentions the story I can't remember whether I have read the story in the book or if I'm just remembering the actual story.

It's been really annoying me for ages now because when I ask people I know who have read the book they don't seem to know what I'm talking about. That may be because they haven't heard it and I only remember it because I liked the story so much when I was younger. If anyone knows/thinks that this is the story the book is referring to and if the actually story is told in Danny please put me out of my misery and give me an answer. Thanks

Comments

[info]valentinotango wrote:
Sep. 14th, 2006 07:39 pm (UTC)
Snow Queen
Hi! Yes, I'm sure the story John refers to is the Snow Queen but I don't think Ian tells it in the book.

While I'm here - my time is brief, I'm working as a trainee manager in Debenhams while I wait for an eleventh hour decision on my post-grad funding - I thought that you might like to hear a quote from my dissertation on "Huxley's Legacy". I made a list of 100 post-Huxley novels that have shaped the form and here's my one-liner on Danny.

"At first glance Danny seems to be a throw-back to the Victorian novel with it's thousand-page length and wealth of character detail but on careful reading it is the definitive product of the twenty-first century. The prose is sparse and word-processed to find and remove all superfluous adverbs and it's real-time narrative is reminiscent of the insomniac watching Big Brother in the small hours, sifting through chance conversations to glean small insights into the motivations of the characters. A classic."

Val
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 9th, 2006 02:14 pm (UTC)
Re: Snow Queen
YOU SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT A MORE IMPORTANT TOPIC: WITH ALL THE RAPE GOING ON, HOW LOOSE WILL DANNY'S ASSHOLE BE BY THE END OF THE SERIES?
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 3rd, 2006 08:35 pm (UTC)
LOL CHANCERY, TALKING TO YOURSELF!

DUMB TWAT.
[info]jillandjodie wrote:
Dec. 4th, 2006 12:35 pm (UTC)
Suggestion for wankers
Go fuck yourself
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 4th, 2006 07:39 pm (UTC)
Re: Suggestion for wankers
WHY DON'T YOU LOVE US ANYMORE CHANCERY? :(
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 9th, 2006 02:14 pm (UTC)
Re: Suggestion for wankers
SHE JUST USED US AND THREW US AWAY. I'LL NEVER TRUST ANYONE AGAIN!
[info]jillandjodie wrote:
Dec. 4th, 2006 07:53 pm (UTC)
Because you don't have one original or amusing or interesting thought between any of the countless number of you. Could be one freak or could be twenty twats that are bored with their lives.
I know it sound simplified but why don't you all just read another book and slag that one off for a couple of years.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 4th, 2006 07:59 pm (UTC)
BUT I MADE YOU A PIE AND EVERYTHING!

LOOK, I EVEN MADE IT WITH A HAIRY SCOTSMAN ON IT, DRAWN IN ICING. (AND YES, I AM AWARE MOST PIES DO NOT HAVE ICING. BUT I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS PRETTY AND EVEN YOU MUST LIKE PIE!)
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 4th, 2006 09:09 pm (UTC)
THAT'S WHY CHANCERY IS MAD AT YOU, GUN STOLE THE PIE!
[info]tristasugyk wrote:
Jul. 17th, 2008 12:28 pm (UTC)
  The joke was, you know, the Colonel would get mad at you, or something, and so, I would say, "Well, what are you going to do, send me to Vietnam.
[info]jillandjodie wrote:
Dec. 4th, 2006 08:06 pm (UTC)
Oh my god, that act of generosity has finally broken me, I admit it am Chancery and so is Val and everyone also on the internet, even you. In fact the only person who is not Chancery is Chancery Stone, she is in fact Jodie and ironically Jills real name is Sockpupet.
At last I can release the truth.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 4th, 2006 08:13 pm (UTC)
I'M NOT CHANCERY STONE! :( I'M MSSCRIBE! GET YOU INTERNET WANK-CULTURE ARTIFACTS RIGHT! (OR AM I CHANCERY STONE? AND IF MSSCRIBE AND CHANCERY STONE ARE THE SAME PERSON, DO THEY CANCEL EACH OTHER OUT!?)

AND YOU NEVER CALL ME WHEN I SEND YOU FLOWERS OR ANYTHING! :( I'M BEGINNING TO THINK OUR ENGAGEMENT WAS FALSE, CHANCERY-BABY.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 9th, 2006 01:57 pm (UTC)
IF I'M CHANCERY, THEN WHY DON'T I HAVE A DANNY BOOKMARK?
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 4th, 2006 10:13 pm (UTC)
OT
Having just completed the reading of the excerpt, I must say that I am most upset that Henderson was killed off. He was by far the most appealing character and the one with the most depth.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 5th, 2006 05:43 pm (UTC)
Hi jodie-whats say me, you and Chancery get together on a internet video link-kill two birds with one stone (get it? Stone? clever for me isn't it?), meet an amazing author and end this bollocks about us being her once and for all. (Although I must admit people thinking were a talented author is not really an insult).
Jill xxx
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 7th, 2006 09:30 pm (UTC)
ONLY IF IT RESULTS IN A SEXY 3 WAY.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 8th, 2006 04:28 pm (UTC)
Wouldn't that be onanism
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 9th, 2006 01:57 pm (UTC)
OH SNAP! XD
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 9th, 2006 05:17 pm (UTC)
ARE YOU GOING TO DO THIS? HOW WILL YOU PROVE THAT JILL AND JODIE ARE WHO THEY SAY THEY ARE? YOU COULD HIRE ACTRESSES, FOR ALL WE KNOW. AND PAY THEM WITH COPIES OF DANNY.
[info]jillandjodie wrote:
Dec. 10th, 2006 07:17 pm (UTC)
That was actually a joke do you think anyone would be sad enough to waste their time like that, I think most people have more going on in their lives.
Oh, wait a minute I’m preaching to the choir.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 10th, 2006 08:55 pm (UTC)
To whom are you talking? And what about?

Live Journal has this amazing feature where you can reply directly to the person you're speaking to instead of posting a completely new comment. Just hit "reply to this comment", it's so easy!
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 11th, 2006 03:19 pm (UTC)
SPEAK ENGLISH, PLEASE.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 12th, 2006 09:35 am (UTC)
What are "offisionardos"?
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 13th, 2006 10:27 am (UTC)
So I actually leave comments wanting to discuss Danny and you only reply to the insults. Why is that?
[info]jillandjodie wrote:
Dec. 14th, 2006 05:44 pm (UTC)
I'm getting too suspicious
Sorry about that, I'm assuming that this is the user who posted the Henderson related comments, I just assumed that it was a trick to get me to start talking and then for someone to go ha ha we don't actually care, just more ammunition to slag people off. (It was the anonymous posting that made me think so.)
How come Henderson is your favorite, although I think he is a useful character that moves the plot along, I never really warmed to the character enough to miss him at his demise.
What makes you favor him.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 15th, 2006 11:36 am (UTC)
Re: I'm getting too suspicious
He's the only character with any compassion or intelligence, to be very honest. He seemed to have one foot on the ground whereas all the other characters seem to be out of touch with reality. Henderson could have been Danny's way out - not necessarily romantically but also as a role model, "Hey, here's someone decent, maybe I can make something of myself as well!" It's a pity he was killed off. I couldn't warm to the other characters at all. That's not a criticism of you, by the way, we all like different things.

I'm anonymous because I didn't like the way Chancery treated other people who commented on her book and I don't want her to visit my lj or to be linked to her in any way. I do really like Henderson however, and wanted to take the opportunity to say so.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Dec. 28th, 2006 11:01 pm (UTC)
Re: I'm getting too suspicious
your site is shit
[info]jillandjodie wrote:
Dec. 29th, 2006 03:07 pm (UTC)
Re: I'm getting too suspicious
Hi sorry I haven't replied yet, have been a little busy, better late than never I hope.

You are completely entitled to any opinion and will not be insulted for it I am also entitled to disagree with it, therefore a debate may occur (yay finally), not an argument.

I disagree that all the other characters are out of touch with reality, its just that there reality differs from everyone else. Their family set up is fucked up and this has bled into the way there interact with everyone else. They are, I agree, not respectable members of society and have very deep problems but that’s what makes them interesting I wouldn’t want to read about people with out any problems.

If the book had been written like you suggest it would have been that Danny slept with some members of his family a few times then found a policeman he wasn't related to, wasn't attracted to, didn't even really like but was an escape from his brother who he has never actually wanted to escape from. Also what’s so moral about Henderson he saw two men getting down to it in a car, got turned on and decided to harass/bribe all of them into sleeping with him because he couldn't get the one he actually wanted. I don't think Henderson even wanted Danny really, so to me that is a terrible couple.

Also, and I know no one will agree with this but, I think John is a much better role model, even though he does terrible and hurtful things he has good points. He never apologizes for something when he thinks its right, he has his own opinion on thing that aren't tainted by society, he thinks that if he wants something he'll have it fuck everyone else and their preconception, he doesn't care what anyone else thinks, which is in my opinion the most important thing you can ever learn.
Obviously on deep down he does get cut up about the things he does but he isn't vulnerable or pathetic so the person he appears to be is someone to admire a lot more than Henderson therefore I think Danny was better off staying put. Henderson was vain and pathetic, a coward, a snob, envious of what others had, always wanted to show he was better than everyone else, he definitely cared what others thought and he had to get pissed to get fucked, this is not a noble man.

In my opinion, Danny does not need a role model, that is not what the book is about, so much has happened to Danny in 20 years that hardly anything is going to change him now anyway. His problems are too rooted in who he now is to ever change. The book is not about Danny finding a way out, because Danny finds it many times in the book but always hangs about long enough to make sure someone else makes sure he doesn’t take it, because in reality he wants to stay where he is.

Is there honestly no one else in the book that you had any interest in?
(Anonymous) wrote:
Jan. 5th, 2007 11:00 am (UTC)
Re: I'm getting too suspicious
That's cool.

The book is not about Danny finding a way out, because Danny finds it many times in the book but always hangs about long enough to make sure someone else makes sure he doesn’t take it, because in reality he wants to stay where he is.

You've actually summed up why I'm not interested in the other characters. I'm not putting you down, you can like what you want. Everyone's entitled to their opinions. In my case, I'm supremely uninterested in people who don't want to grow. Danny wanting to stay where he is makes for a boring story because it's just more of the same, day after day. I'm far more interested in the journey (emotional journey, that is). Henderson might not have been perfect but he was on a journey and that made him interesting.

His problems are too rooted in who he now is to ever change.

I have a lot of problems with this way of thinking. Danny's screwed up but thinking that you can't change is just an excuse, you know?

It's been fun and as we fundamentally disagree on the premise of the book, it's time to part. Thanks for the chat!
(Anonymous) wrote:
Jan. 23rd, 2007 04:39 pm (UTC)
Re: I'm getting too suspicious
Anyone whose reading not just above, please stop apologizing for opinions your not offending anyone, everyone can say whatever they like. Everyone in the book went on a journey they were just subtle each one of them had shifted power by the end. but I an not going to get into that cause your probably gone now and I'm talking to myself (hardly much of a change there then). Just wanted to say I do think people can change if they want to, my point was Danny doesn't want to change for (what other people's oppinion would be) the better and isn't attempting to for most of the book. When he does change the reasons are not for personal growth or anything like that, they are emotions that were always there waiting to come out or they are for reasons that depend on already well seated resentments and revenge plots. My interpretation of Danny is not my opinion on everyone else.

This is Jodie by the way couldn't get my login to work

Profile

[info]cstonesdanny
Hope House Farm, Danny by Chancery Stone

Latest Month

May 2008
S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031