Between reading about Appeasement historiography and reading Lady Chatterley's Lover, believe it or not, both for the same class, I did nothing worthy of note. Though I suppose noting that I'm reading about appeasement and Lady Chatterley's Lover somewhat contradicts my previous statement.
I will admit to being a tad surprised by the first few pages of Lady Chatterley. I'm used to reading Victorian classics (and Harry Potter) where British literature is concerned. The difference was pretty obvious from the first pages. Right from the beginning I'm reading about Lady Chatterley's thoughts on sex. And the word sex does not refer to one's gender or necessarily, the roles associated with that gender. I was immediately intrigued and amused. From rather stuffy Victorian triple deckers where having a wife locked in an attic while attempting to marry another is considered risque to actually discussing one's first sexual encounters. How things changed! And I'm pretty sure I haven't gotten to the really scandalous bits yet. Bring on the scandal says I!
Incidentally, I don't think there are many comparisons to be made with Harry Potter. I just threw that in for the sake of being random. As I read on, I'll be sure to look for similarities. Just in case.
I might not read of Lady Chatterley before bed though. The last couple of nights, I've been reading Glee fanfiction and having messed up Glee dreams. I think I might have been Quinn and was trying to attack Santana? I don't really remember. Suffice it to say, it was weird. I really don't need hetero-sex dreams. That would be entirely too much.
And now, back to Chamberlain, Churchill and the problematic policy of appeasement. Eesh. Maybe I should read Lady Chatterley instead... Then again, I don't think I can afford the mental bleach in the event that I blend the two together. Yuck. Talk about a nightmare.