The Book Discussion Thread

[Melville]

I finally finished volume 2 of In Search of Lost Time. A month and a half to get through a 750 page book... ouch. While Proust's endless first-person descriptions of sensuous experience still reach occasionally dazzling peaks, the whole thing is a lot less interesting than the first volume, in which the peaks were more consistent and in which the second half was dedicated to a really engaging third-person narrative that forewent those descriptions.

I also read Sophocles' Oedipus at Colonus about a week ago. It was strange to read an ancient Greek play that is neither a tragedy nor a comedy. It was also interesting to see just how much Sophocles' admired Oedipus' reactions to fate. However, on the whole, the play was pretty much a non-event, with no interesting characters or events. The use of the chorus, which is frequently my favorite thing about Greek tragedies, was especially bland.

[Mysterious Dude]

I tried to read Swann's Way last year. I got all the way through Combray and realized that, at the rate I was going, it would take me a whole month to read the rest of it. I decided it wasn't worth it.

I'm reading The Great Gatsby for the first time ever right now. I've got to say, it's not very interesting, but at least it won't take long to read.

[Llopin]

I also read Sophocles' Oedipus at Colonus about a week ago. It was strange to read an ancient Greek play that is neither a tragedy nor a comedy. It was also interesting to see just how much Sophocles' admired Oedipus' reactions to fate. However, on the whole, the play was pretty much a non-event, with no interesting characters or events. The use of the chorus, which is frequently my favorite thing about Greek tragedies, was especially bland.

Well, technically it is a tragedy. Sure, more reflexive than they generally are (specially compared to Rex), without much action, but have in mind Oedipus' kind of "transformation" which renews him and stands as the dramatic and passional centerpiece of the oeuvre. I actually believe it is more psychological than Rex, more centered on the evolution of the Oedipus character (even if Rex is the perfect example of a tragedy), and the ending, with his death, serves as a good catharsis.

[Melville]

Well, technically it is a tragedy. Sure, more reflexive than they generally are (specially compared to Rex), without much action, but have in mind Oedipus' kind of "transformation" which renews him and stands as the dramatic and passional centerpiece of the oeuvre. I actually believe it is more psychological than Rex, more centered on the evolution of the Oedipus character (even if Rex is the perfect example of a tragedy), and the ending, with his death, serves as a good catharsis.
Thanks for making me look up Aristotle's definition of a tragedy. I didn't realize a tragedy could have a reversal of fortune from bad to good; I always assumed it had to be from good to bad. So I guess what I meant was that it was the first Greek tragedy with a happy ending that I've read. Maybe I'll read Aristotle's Poetics today.

Anyway, I definitely agree that Oedipus' final transformation works as commentary on and a culmination of Sophocles' oeuvre. And I agree that it is more psychological than Oedipus Rex. But I thought the interplay between the characters, and between the chorus and the characters, was too staid. Although I actually prefer Antigone to both Oedipuses—it's really a pretty marvelous exploration of social and ethical issues, as well as a great tragedy.

[jesse]

Finished Hawthorne's The Blithedale Romance yesterday and gotta say, I really, really enjoyed it--definitely the best book I've read in recent memory. My only other experience with Hawthorne has been The Scarlet Letter and "Young Goodman Brown," and it's nice to see him working in a vein that isn't so overtly seeped in moral symbolism; Zenobia certainly deserves her status as one of the most interesting female characters in 19th century American Lit, and I quite liked the contrast set up between her and Priscilla (even if their convoluted connection isn't nearly as interesting as I'd hoped).

Who's read The House of Seven Gables?

[SpaceOddity]

definitely the best book I've read in recent memory.

*refrains from comment* :p

[Melville]

Finished Hawthorne's The Blithedale Romance yesterday and gotta say, I really, really enjoyed it--definitely the best book I've read in recent memory. My only other experience with Hawthorne has been The Scarlet Letter and "Young Goodman Brown," and it's nice to see him working in a vein that isn't so overtly seeped in moral symbolism; Zenobia certainly deserves her status as one of the most interesting female characters in 19th century American Lit, and I quite liked the contrast set up between her and Priscilla (even if their convoluted connection isn't nearly as interesting as I'd hoped).
Awesome. It's one of my favorites, and I much prefer it to The Scarlet Letter. I love how the destruction of the communal ideals by personal relationships and histories is reified by the novel's narrative shift into melodrama.

[Melville]

*refrains from comment* :p
Did you not like it, or are you just commenting on jesse's refusal to finish Wuthering Heights?

[SpaceOddity]

Did you not like it, or are you just commenting on jesse's refusal to finish Wuthering Heights?

Oh, just that he hasn't read many books in recent memory.
*defensive on Heathcliff's behalf*

[jesse]

Oh, just that he hasn't read many books in recent memory.
*defensive on Heathcliff's behalf* Since you own it you should read it. I can see strong reactions to the Zenobia/Priscilla dichotomy, but I can't quite figure out in which direction. In a love or loathing sense, I mean.

[jesse]

Awesome. It's one of my favorites, and I much prefer it to The Scarlet Letter. I love how the destruction of the communal ideals by personal relationships and histories is reified by the novel's narrative shift into melodrama. I quite loathed Scarlet Letter when I read it in high school; I had a much more favorable reaction when I revisted it a few years later.

Regarding the shift, I was afraid that after Coverdale left Blithedale that the narrative had jumped ship--my interest totally fell off for a chapter or two. But once Zenobia & Co. reappeared I was hooked again, even if, as I noted, I ended up wishing that the Zenobia/Priscilla connection had been more interesting, or perhaps a bit more fleshed out. I was totally expecting something totally out-there gothic, especially with the whole "Veiled Lady" element in play. Ah well, it really rallied in the last chapters with the confrontation in the forest and the subsequent scene on the river--two beautifully handled chapters.

I take it you haven't read Seven Gables? The story has really piqued my interest, but I hesitate to jump into another book by the same author--I tend to loose interest quickly in that way.

[SpaceOddity]

Since you own it you should read it. I can see strong reactions to the Zenobia/Priscilla dichotomy, but I can't quite figure out in which direction. In a love or loathing sense, I mean.

I will if you get back to Wuthering Heights. :p

[Melville]

I quite loathed Scarlet Letter when I read it in high school; I had a much more favorable reaction when I revisted it a few years later.

Regarding the shift, I was afraid that after Coverdale left Blithedale that the narrative had jumped ship--my interest totally fell off for a chapter or two. But once Zenobia & Co. reappeared I was hooked again, even if, as I noted, I ended up wishing that the Zenobia/Priscilla connection had been more interesting, or perhaps a bit more fleshed out. I was totally expecting something totally out-there gothic, especially with the whole "Veiled Lady" element in play. Ah well, it really rallied in the last chapters with the confrontation in the forest and the subsequent scene on the river--two beautifully handled chapters.

I take it you haven't read Seven Gables? The story has really piqued my interest, but I hesitate to jump into another book by the same author--I tend to loose interest quickly in that way.
I read The Scarlet Letter after reading Blithedale Romance, and it just seemed too on the nose about everything, with none of the narrative flair of Blithedale.

Embarrassingly, I don't really remember the relationship between Zenobia and Priscilla. Were they sisters? However, the way I remember it, the secret relationships between the characters managed to walk a fine line between realism and gothicism. That seemed important for the connection between the ideas about socialism and the personal melodramas: it's not completely far fetched melodrama that disrupts ideal social models—it's real, concrete human relationships, and the melodrama that we inject into or wrap around those relationships.

Unfortunately, the only Hawthorne I've read is Scarlet Letter and Blithedale. I'd be interested in hearing about more of his work, if you read it.

[lovejuice]

i too love blithedale romance to death. i feel a strong personal connection to coverdale. how tragic it is to be doomed an "observer" forever. one thing though that i have against the novel is

i don't like the last revelation about coverdale actually being in love with priscilla. i much prefer him to be zenobia's suitor.

[jesse]

i too love blithedale romance to death. i feel a strong personal connection to coverdale. how tragic it is to be doomed an "observer" forever. one thing though that i have against the novel is

i don't like the last revelation about coverdale actually being in love with priscilla. i much prefer him to be zenobia's suitor. Yeah, I'm not sure how I feel about that last line--or, more accurately, I'm not sure as to how much I like its calculated "wtf?" quality.

I do wonder though how much it changes the character of Coverdale in a reread...

[jesse]

I read The Scarlet Letter after reading Blithedale Romance, and it just seemed too on the nose about everything, with none of the narrative flair of Blithedale.

Embarrassingly, I don't really remember the relationship between Zenobia and Priscilla. Were they sisters? Indeed. I'm not sure what I expected, but something a tad more exciting than that. Something outlandishly gothic, I guess.


However, the way I remember it, the secret relationships between the characters managed to walk a fine line between realism and gothicism. That seemed important for the connection between the ideas about socialism and the personal melodramas: it's not completely far fetched melodrama that disrupts ideal social models—it's real, concrete human relationships, and the melodrama that we inject into or wrap around those relationships. I do agree completely with you here--and I think the more organic relationships between the characters in Blithedale is one of the main strengths over Scarlet Letter.

[jesse]

I will if you get back to Wuthering Heights. :p Heh... I just realized "Jesse" rhymes with "Cathy"...

Random, but that's what popped into my head when I read this and started singing the song. :lol:

[SpaceOddity]

Heh... I just realized "Jesse" rhymes with "Cathy"...

Random, but that's what popped into my head when I read this and started singing the song. :lol:


Sounds like you're getting ideas about Heathcliff. :p

[lovejuice]

umberto eco's misreadings is among the funniest and most intellectual books i have ever read. granted some chapters are pretty weak -- i don't dig his non-fiction as much -- but when it hits the mark, it's just terrific.

[MadMan]

Well I got my hands on a book that contains five of Dashiell Hammett's novels:

Red Harvest
The Dain Curse
The Maltese Falcon
The Glass Key
The Thin Man

So far I'm 15 pages into Red Harvest and I think its really good. Hammett's style is certainly interesting. I must admit it wasn't my first choice to rent from my school's library-their two copies of A Confederacy of Dunces was out.

[D_Davis]

Red Harvest is awesome. It and the Glass Key are said to be the literary basis for For a Fist Full of Dollars and Yojimbo.

[MadMan]

Red Harvest is awesome. It and the Glass Key are said to be the literary basis for For a Fist Full of Dollars and Yojimbo.Yeah I remembered your recommedation, and I decided to finally act upon it. I've been seeing way too many damn movies over the past couple of months.

[lovejuice]

just for the heck of it, i'm doing close reading on carver's will you please be quiet please? damn, the man is genius! and close reading is kinda fun. i just can't imagine going this for the whole book though. besides i hardly think many books merit this much attentive reading anyway.

[Qrazy]

I started reading The Maltese Falcon a while back and it seemed nearly identical to the film to me. This is good in a certain sense, because I love the film's script, but I felt I was getting out of it what I would get out of reading the film's script... which is in some ways a great deal but as literature... having already been exposed to the film's dialogue, it didn't seem all that novel. I guess what I'm saying is that from my experience with Hammett, most of his literary technique (at least in Maltese) seems to be in the dialogue itself, while everything else seems to exist as a minimalistic backdrop for the dialogue to play itself out upon.

[jesse]

I started reading The Maltese Falcon a while back and it seemed nearly identical to the film to me. This is good in a certain sense, because I love the film's script, but I felt I was getting out of it what I would get out of reading the film's script... which is in some ways a great deal but as literature... having already been exposed to the film's dialogue, it didn't seem all that novel. I guess what I'm saying is that from my experience with Hammett, most of his literary technique (at least in Maltese) seems to be in the dialogue itself, while everything else seems to exist as a minimalistic backdrop for the dialogue to play itself out upon. I attempted Hammet after devouring a whole series of Raymond Chandler novels... and Maltese Falcon came off as quite dull (in both content and style) in comparison.

Probably not fair to Hammet, but that's what happened.

[lovejuice]

I attempted Hammet after devouring a whole series of Raymond Chandler novels... and Maltese Falcon came off as quite dull (in both content and style) in comparison.

Probably not fair to Hammet, but that's what happened.

my experience is similar to you, but in reverse. i came upon hammet first before moving on to chandler. cannot finish the big sleep and dicide that noir is definitely not for me.

[megladon8]

This book "The World Without Us" by Alex Weisman (http://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Us-Alan-Weisman/dp/0312347294/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201754395&sr=8-1) sounds fascinating.

[D_Davis]

This book "The World Without Us" by Alex Weisman (http://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Us-Alan-Weisman/dp/0312347294/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201754395&sr=8-1) sounds fascinating.

The History Channel just aired a show called Life After People, in which they tackled the same subject. They even interviewed some sci-fi authors, like David Brin.

It was pretty good.

[Qrazy]

So I didn't get a response the first time around so I'll check again... Richard Dawkins? Yay or Nay? Some of my friends cite him quite a bit, but my initial impression prior to reading anything (seen one interview) is that he seems kind of like rhetoric-centric philosophy-lite... yes, no?

[Kurosawa Fan]

The History Channel just aired a show called Life After People, in which they tackled the same subject. They even interviewed some sci-fi authors, like David Brin.

It was pretty good.

I'm pretty sure that show was based on Weisman's book. I'm looking forward to reading it. He was on The Daily Show and had some interesting things to share about the book.

[megladon8]

I've never watched the History Channel, so I did not know about this.

I have a hard time finding truly "good" non-fiction - I find quite often they're either dumbed down terribly to be more entertaining, or are so dry it's like reading a text book.

Carl Sagan was great with writing books which were both factual and informative, and easy to read and understand.

[Sycophant]

Anyone hear about this handwritten and -illustrated book of fairy tales (http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html/ref=gw_cto_rarebook?ie=UTF8&docId=1000179911&pf_rd_p=343120901&pf_rd_s=left-nav-2&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_i=507846&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=05QEZ116P9AM2695DHRA) by J.K. Rowling that Amazon bought for something like 4 million dollars? It's pretty neat, actually.

[D_Davis]

So I didn't get a response the first time around so I'll check again... Richard Dawkins? Yay or Nay? Some of my friends cite him quite a bit, but my initial impression prior to reading anything (seen one interview) is that he seems kind of like rhetoric-centric philosophy-lite... yes, no?

We're actually having a big discussion on him and a/theism over at Icine...

http://icine.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=13998

[D_Davis]

I'm pretty sure that show was based on Weisman's book. I'm looking forward to reading it. He was on The Daily Show and had some interesting things to share about the book.

Yeah, reading the synopsis led me to believe that it must have been. I should track down his DS appearance.

[SpaceOddity]

Last read was Italo Calvino's Invisible Cities.
T'was wank.

[Duncan]

So I didn't get a response the first time around so I'll check again... Richard Dawkins? Yay or Nay? Some of my friends cite him quite a bit, but my initial impression prior to reading anything (seen one interview) is that he seems kind of like rhetoric-centric philosophy-lite... yes, no?

I wrote a review of The God Delusion for a school magazine. It's on page 21 (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/csr/issues/Spring07issue.pdf).

Looking back, I find him much more interesting from a sociological standpoint. The book is quite a vehement reaction to post-9/11 thinking and the rise of fundamentalism. Don't go in expecting a new, profound philosophy. Instead, consider the book in its broader context and you might find it worthwhile.

[monolith94]

Meg- the most interesting non-fiction book I've read recently was The Hellenistic Age, by Peter Green.

[Spinal]

I found much about Dawkins' The God Delusion that was exciting and informative, particularly his assertion that bringing children up in organized religion is essentially a form of child abuse. I think I prefer Sam Harris though when it comes to systematic dismantling of the supposed benefits of religion. Definitely worth reading. The End of Faith is better.

Been reading The Golden Compass to my kid and I've found it thoroughly engrossing. Naturally a lot of it flys over his head, but we discuss the basic storyline and what has happened in each chapter.

[D_Davis]

So all of you non-sci-fi people should definitely check out Theodore Sturgeon's Some of Your Blood. I can't imagine too many readers not loving it. It is quite brilliant, and still in print! Bonus. It is powerful fiction of the likes I've only encountered a few times.

[Melville]

The End of Faith is better.
I got that for Christmas. Good to know it's worth reading.

[Qrazy]

I wrote a review of The God Delusion for a school magazine. It's on page 21 (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/csr/issues/Spring07issue.pdf).

Looking back, I find him much more interesting from a sociological standpoint. The book is quite a vehement reaction to post-9/11 thinking and the rise of fundamentalism. Don't go in expecting a new, profound philosophy. Instead, consider the book in its broader context and you might find it worthwhile.

I know what you look like now! You played right into my hands! Muahahahhahaha!!!

ps Thanks for the review.

[Qrazy]

I found much about Dawkins' The God Delusion that was exciting and informative, particularly his assertion that bringing children up in organized religion is essentially a form of child abuse. I think I prefer Sam Harris though when it comes to systematic dismantling of the supposed benefits of religion. Definitely worth reading. The End of Faith is better.


Hmmm... every interview or round-table discussion I've seen with Harris he seems like one of the least intelligent people in the room... but obviously I can't and won't judge his books based on that.

[Qrazy]

We're actually having a big discussion on him and a/theism over at Icine...

http://icine.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=13998

The Four Horsemen discussion was worth a watch, although for cultural revisionists all four of them opt for incredibly absolutist moral stances.

[Llopin]

So, the stuff I read last month...

Thinks... (Lodge) **1/2
La Pell del Brau (Espriu) ****
Cementiri de Sinera (Espriu) ***
Mrs. Death (Espriu) ***
Primera Història d'Esther (Espriu) ***1/2
Estrella Distante (Bolaño) ****
The Logics of Delusion (Bodei) ***
El Hacedor (Borges) ***1/2
Els Vençuts (Benguerel) **1/2
The Decay of Lying (Wilde) ****
Invisible Cities (Calvino) ****
Watermark (Brodsky) ***1/2
Baal (Brecht) ***1/2
In the Jungle of Cities (Brecht) ***
Drums in the Night (Brecht) ***
Les Choses (Perec) ***1/2
Formas Breves (Piglia) **1/2

[Duncan]

So, the stuff I read last month...

Thinks... (Lodge) **1/2
La Pell del Brau (Espriu) ****
Cementiri de Sinera (Espriu) ***
Mrs. Death (Espriu) ***
Primera Història d'Esther (Espriu) ***1/2
Estrella Distante (Bolaño) ****
The Logics of Delusion (Bodei) ***
El Hacedor (Borges) ***1/2
Els Vençuts (Benguerel) **1/2
The Decay of Lying (Wilde) ****
Invisible Cities (Calvino) ****
Watermark (Brodsky) ***1/2
Baal (Brecht) ***1/2
In the Jungle of Cities (Brecht) ***
Drums in the Night (Brecht) ***
Les Choses (Perec) ***1/2
Formas Breves (Piglia) **1/2

I'm sure some of these are plays or shorter works, but still, how does one accomplish this? How on earth do you have time to sit down and read over half a book per day, every day?

[Spinal]

Hmmm... every interview or round-table discussion I've seen with Harris he seems like one of the least intelligent people in the room... but obviously I can't and won't judge his books based on that.

I wholeheartedly disagree.

[lovejuice]

Invisible Cities (Calvino) ****


glad you like it this much. unfortunately as much as i adore calvino, i have never gotten into his more poetry-like work.

[D_Davis]

I ordered Dawkin's The God Delusion, and Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life by Alister McGrath, a "rival" professor, theologian, biophysicist at Oxford. I intend to read them both. Should be good.

[Milky Joe]

Sam Harris is definitely awesome. I remember one debate he had with some guy on the internet where he totally dismantled him. It was great. Guy is like a laser.

[Llopin]

I'm sure some of these are plays or shorter works, but still, how does one accomplish this? How on earth do you have time to sit down and read over half a book per day, every day?

Well it mostly depends on how I feel. I read the three Brechts in one single day, for instance, since I got into this spree. I'm very irregular, mind me, but happen to spend entire days to reading, just for the sake of it, just 'cause that's what I feel like doing. And you can read quite a lot in two dozen hours. It also depends on circumstances, last month I was quite bored and had loads of time, but now I'm all drowned in exams and projects and work to do (since I always wait until the very last moment) and I'm barely able to read...



glad you like it this much. unfortunately as much as i adore calvino, i have never gotten into his more poetry-like work.

Have you read it? I guess you could tag it "lyrical prose", but it didn't specially remind me of poetry. It's just dozens and dozens of imagined cities, wonderfully evoked and thought up, described in a mere two pages each. And some interludes featuring dialogues between Marco Polo and the Kublai Khan which are just marvelous. As always Calvino manages to conjure an amazing
imagination which made me think quite a bit, in a psedo-existential way, even. The concept is genius, the excecution matches it seamlessly.

[lovejuice]

Have you read it? I guess you could tag it "lyrical prose", but it didn't specially remind me of poetry. It's just dozens and dozens of imagined cities, wonderfully evoked and thought up, described in a mere two pages each. And some interludes featuring dialogues between Marco Polo and the Kublai Khan which are just marvelous. As always Calvino manages to conjure an amazing imagination which made me think quite a bit, in a psedo-existential way, even. The concept is genius, the excecution matches it seamlessly.

indeed, "lyrical prose" is a better tag name for it. i use "poetry" in priase of its concise-ness, as opposed to his more novelly or short-story-like pieces. have you ever read the castle of crossed destinies? the concept is pure genius. i think you'll love it.

[D_Davis]

I just finished Godbody by Theodore Sturgeon. I am mentioning it here because it is most definitely not science fiction. Out of all of his stuff I've read, I would classify only a small percentage of it by the limitations set forth by science fiction conventions, and this one is the furthest away from those yet.

If I've ever read a fictional book that could change the world, for good, this is it. It is, at first, ridiculously pornographic. It is the most sexually explicit and erotic book I've ever read. It was a challenge to finish, because I am usually not interested in reading such material.

The final two chapters are extraordinary, and the religious allegory is strong and righteous. It ends with a sermon by a pastor who has discovered the true meaning of God's love. He details the history of the Church and how it has divorced itself from Christ's true message by lathering on erroneous dogmatic law and damning healthy sexual relationships. If we all just loved one another, there would be no need for any other rules or laws. God gave us sex, and we should use it as an expression of love and as an expression of worship towards the God that gave it to us. Sturgeon says that God must love flesh, because he sure did give us a lot of it.

Theodore Sturgeon spent his entire life writing to us about love and compassion, and that his most didactic and candid book would be published after his death possesses a strange kind of irony. He was never around to hear the ensuing gasps of shock, the backlash from those who were offended, or the feelings of pure joy from those who received his message.

Just as his final creation, the messianic Godbody, died before the message was spread, so to did Sturgeon. I am not comparing Sturgeon to a Christ-like figure, or declaring him to be some kind of prophet. This would be a crass and irresponsible declaration. But it is odd to me that Sturgeon would die before the publishing of his most heartfelt love letter to his readers. I would give anything to hear him talk about how the book has been received.

Strangely enough though, I cannot recommend this book to a Sturgeon neophyte. I am afraid that it would forever scare away all but the most amazingly liberal of readers, or that Sturgeon's message might be lost on those who have not already spent some time with this author. I am also, stranger still, not prepared to declare it a great novel. It is extremely well written, and written with passion and a master's understanding of the English language, but it hardly contains a narrative at all.

It represents the summation of all that Sturgeon believed in, and it is, perhaps, the most perfect way an artistic life such as his could be punctuated. Sturgeon is speaking directly though Godbody, he's calling all of us to wake up, open our eyes, and love each other. This is a message worth living for and a message worth dying for.

[Duncan]

Finished To the Lighthouse today. Hated it.

[krazed]

I just read the first 50 pages in No Country for Old Men and I am astounded at how fantastic McCarthy's style is. So excited to finish reading this and start on The Road.

[Horbgorbler]

Finished To the Lighthouse today. Hated it.

:eek:

[lovejuice]

Finished To the Lighthouse today. Hated it.

someone call jesse. this should be good. :twisted:

[Ezee E]

I just read the first 50 pages in No Country for Old Men and I am astounded at how fantastic McCarthy's style is. So excited to finish reading this and start on The Road.
Yep. You shall love it. Is Blood Meridian in the same style?

[Duncan]

I suppose I have more thoughts on To the Lighthouse than "Hated it."

Obviously, there is very little plot to the novel. It is instead largely about the way people perceive the world. Now, maybe some people's experiential existence is similar to the way Woolf describes it, but I can say with certainty that this book does not reflect my personal interaction with the world. That is a fairly huge failing, considering its main goal. Extracting a rather summative quote:

"One must hold the scene - so - in a vice and let nothing come in and spoil it. One wanted, she thought, dipping her brush deliberately, to be on a level with ordinary experience, to feel simply that's a chair, that's a table, and yet at the same time, It's a miracle, it's an ecstasy."

I agree that this is an admirable goal for an artist: to narrow the gap between transcendental and quotidian. I just didn't feel that she approached this problem in an effective way. One thing that bothered me was how the characters were so often drifting from one emotional extreme to another. Person A dislikes person B in one moment, but B says something relatively inconsequential and suddenly A likes - even loves - B. Then a paragraph later A hates B again. Who the hell thinks this way? People make small gestures that make small impacts on my opinion of them. I don't violently seesaw like this over innocuous comments.

I have considered the fact that it may be a gender issue, but I don't think this is really the case. As far as I can tell, most of the women I know don't think this way either. Then again, it is entirely possible that I have no idea how most women think. Still...

I think another failing of the book is that it doesn't do a good enough job fulfilling the "yet at the same time" part of that quote. Woolf juxtaposes sentences showing that things are just things, and that they are also miraculous, but these juxtapositions subvert her intentions. Again, we are taken from one extreme to the other without continuity just like in those conversations I talked about earlier. When I read someone like Henry David Thoreau describing a pond I am elevated because I've looked into comparable waters, seen the waters, and also seen through them to something else. His descriptions, which seem minimalist next to Woolf's prose, are themselves infused with that duality. I rarely got that out of To the Lighthouse.

The one positive for me was the short section called Time Passes. Here we are not so mired in false forms of subjective experience and are just looking at water damage on a wooden floor. It's revelatory because Woolf doesn't have to say things like "So and so felt sad about the water damaged floor." That feeling is inherent in the image. It reminded me very strongly of the ending of Antonioni's film L'Eclisse. This method of representation comes much closer to mirroring how I experience life.

[SpaceOddity]

I have considered the fact that it may be a gender issue, but I don't think this is really the case. As far as I can tell, most of the women I know don't think this way either. Then again, it is entirely possible that I have no idea how most women think. Still...


I oscillate between ecstasy and fury. *shrug*

[Melville]

I suppose I have more thoughts on To the Lighthouse than "Hated it."

Obviously, there is very little plot to the novel. It is instead largely about the way people perceive the world. Now, maybe some people's experiential existence is similar to the way Woolf describes it, but I can say with certainty that this book does not reflect my personal interaction with the world. That is a fairly huge failing, considering its main goal.
I agree completely. The wild oscillations in mood and relationships don't strike me as unrealistic, but they did seem a bit too "pure"—there didn't seem to be enough ambiguity within the extremes. In general, the depiction of characters' thoughts seemed to be far too schematic and clean.

[lovejuice]

I suppose I have more thoughts on To the Lighthouse than "Hated it."


good review. based on the two i've read i really like woolf, and this one has been sitting on my shelf far too long. so no, i don't think you dis-persuaded me from actually reading it. your review though help preparing me for the mood seesawing. perhaps that'll help me appreciating the book more.

[megladon8]

FINALLY finished "Lamb".

It was wonderful, and it made me re-think a lot of my notions regarding Christianity.

It finds a great balance between giving explanations of some of the miracles Jesus performed, while also keeping a lot of mystery and a sense of the supernatural at work.

I really liked the episodic nature of the book, as Jesus and Biff travel around the known world learning about Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. and using elements of all of them to create Christianity.

"Sometimes, we just need to eat bacon." :)

Wonderful book, I recommend it whole-heartedly to all.

Up next is Theodore Sturgeon's "Some Of Your Blood".

[D_Davis]

FINALLY finished "Lamb".

It was wonderful, and it made me re-think a lot of my notions regarding Christianity.

...

Up next is Theodore Sturgeon's "Some Of Your Blood".


That sounds awesome man. I really need to read Lamb, soon.

I can't wait to hear what you think of Some of Your Blood.

[megladon8]

That sounds awesome man. I really need to read Lamb, soon.

It was great!

It may sound silly, but some of the parts actually made me start to feel like I was gaining a bit of faith.

It's inspiring and funny, and it has some very touching moments.

I hope you enjoy it.



I can't wait to hear what you think of Some of Your Blood.

Oh, me either I'm really excited.

[D_Davis]

It was great!

It may sound silly, but some of the parts actually made me start to feel like I was gaining a bit of faith.

It's inspiring and funny, and it has some very touching moments.

I hope you enjoy it.



I don't think it sounds silly at all. I often find my faith bolstered by creative works.

Theodore's Godbody is a recent example of this.

[Qrazy]

I don't think it sounds silly at all. I often find my faith bolstered by creative works.

Theodore's Godbody is a recent example of this.

Penile flippancy is certainly faith rousing.

[D_Davis]

Penile flippancy is certainly faith rousing.

You got that right.

[megladon8]

I'm totally sucked into the world of "Some of Your Blood" - or, to be more accurate, the character of George Smith.

I've just finished learning about his bittersweet relationship with Anna, and while it's apparent from the beginnings of the book that the guy is a complete nutjob, I can't help but feel very sorry for him for having had such a dreadful life.

[D_Davis]

I'm totally sucked into the world of "Some of Your Blood" - or, to be more accurate, the character of George Smith.

I've just finished learning about his bittersweet relationship with Anna, and while it's apparent from the beginnings of the book that the guy is a complete nutjob, I can't help but feel very sorry for him for having had such a dreadful life.

Just wait. It gets even better. If you're like me, pretty soon you're going to go back and re-read his story.

Isn't it just a masterfully written book? One of the most brilliant character studies I've ever encountered. Sturgeon simply works on a different level when it comes to his understanding of humanity and his ability to translate this to the page.

[megladon8]

Just wait. It gets even better. If you're like me, pretty soon you're going to go back and re-read his story.

Isn't it just a masterfully written book? One of the most brilliant character studies I've ever encountered. Sturgeon simply works on a different level when it comes to his understanding of humanity and his ability to translate this to the page.


I'm really enjoying Sturgeon's incredible style - his ability to convey lots of information regarding the plot through those first few letters, but without making them feel like a simple gimmick - they actually read like real letters. It may not sound like a huge feet, but all too often I find books including letters written between characters make them feel like basic exposition with a "To" and "From" on either end.

He's got a very succinct prose style, and he obviously has a great grasp on the English language, because he seems to choose the perfect words for descriptions - especially, as you said, when it comes to human emotion.

/splooging

[D_Davis]

He's got a very succinct prose style, and he obviously has a great grasp on the English language, because he seems to choose the perfect words for descriptions - especially, as you said, when it comes to human emotion.


Funny you should mention this. Other authors have noted that they often study Sturgeon because of his uncanny ability to always choose the right words. I think it was Heinlein who mentioned a quote by Mark Twain, in which he illustrated the importance of this, and equated it to the difference between "lightning," and a "lightning-bug." The difference between one word and another can be the difference between a hack and a master, and Sturgeon was always able to pick exactly the right words.

He is also able to convey the personalities of his characters in amazing ways. In Godbody, each chapter is told from the 1st person POV and a different character, and from the first sentence of each it is clear to tell that we are in the head of a different character. And he does so without lazy characterization.

Just thinking about Sturgeon's writing energizes me. The dude is just untouchable. The insight I get from him stories is practically religious.

[megladon8]

Funny you should mention this. Other authors have noted that they often study Sturgeon because of his uncanny ability to always choose the right words. I think it was Heinlein who mentioned a quote by Mark Twain, in which he illustrated the importance of this, and equated it to the difference between "lightning," and a "lightning-bug." The difference between one word and another can be the difference between a hack and a master, and Sturgeon was always able to pick exactly the right words.

You posted this comparison a while ago (a few days maybe?) and I didn't really understand it until I started reading this.

I started it this afternoon on the busride home and I'm already more than halfway done.

I also like that, despite the allusions to vampirism, I wouldn't really call it a horror story (at least not yet - maybe it becomes one?). It reminds me of "I Am Legend" in that it takes a subject which is a fairly standard genre convention, and turns it into a deep character study.



He is also able to convey the personalities of his characters in amazing ways. In Godbody, each chapter is told from the 1st person POV and a different character, and from the first sentence of each it is clear to tell that we are in the head of a different character. And he does so without lazy characterization.

Yes!

Even those 1-2 page letters have so much characters, from the intentional errors in grammar to the way they retell events.

And the segments written by George Smith are just as telling of his character. He so easily speaks of hunting and violence and the horrible things which happened in his life involving "the father" - yet when it comes to emotions and truly letting the reader see his humanity, he often goes off on tangents, obviously trying to avoid that personal connection.

This is what made the segment with Anna even harder, because that is the closest he's come to a true human-to-human connection.

[D_Davis]

I love how George says "the father," "the mother." It adds an element of total disconnection, and really illustrates his perception.

Sturgeon shows the abuse George suffers so well. I've never read another author who conveys emotional abuse like Sturgeon does. This is what first gripped my a few years ago when I read The Dreaming Jewels. I was shocked at how well he conveyed the mental and physical torture of his characters. And that he twists it around to finally illustrate humanities capacity to love is just brilliant.

I am going to bump I Am Legend up in my queue.

[Saya]

Last night I finished the first book from the A Song of Ice and Fire series, A Game of Thrones. Loved it. I can't believe how consistent and engrossing it was. I thought each character was interesting, some a bit more than others of course, but they all felt real.

I'll start the second book, A Clash of Kings, tonight.

[D_Davis]

Last night I finished the first book from the A Song of Ice and Fire series, A Game of Thrones. Loved it. I can't believe how consistent and engrossing it was. I thought each character was interesting, some a bit more than others of course, but they all felt real.

I'll start the second book, A Clash of Kings, tonight.


I've heard good things. If I were into high, epic fantasy, I would definitely check these out. Between Martin and Erikson, it sounds as if fantasy fans are being taken care of these days.

[Ezee E]

I'm reading through my first Kafka, Metamorphosis and I'm not too impressed. It's a bit... silly. Does it change?

And I'm also struggling with Suttree to where I may give up on it. Wordy McCarthy isn't the best. When it gets into dialog between characters, it's as good as anything else, but that seems to be rare. It's pretty funny though for why Suttree goes to jail... He fucks watermelons

[Saya]

I've heard good things. If I were into high, epic fantasy, I would definitely check these out. Between Martin and Erikson, it sounds as if fantasy fans are being taken care of these days.

Same here, I heard the praise for this series and decided to check it out.

I'm not really familiar with the fantasy genre, so I don't know how this series stacks up to other fantasy books. I've read LoTR, The Hobbit, The Silmarillion , Harry Potter and that's it. I like those books, but A Game Thrones couldn't be more different. It's more of a medieval political fantasy. There's hardly any supernatural stuff going on the thing I like the most is that the cast of characters is just huge and there are no good guys or bad guys. Everyone is in this gray area.

[D_Davis]

I just started reading The Iron Dragon's Daughter, a steam-punk fantasy. It's pretty good so far. It's about a bunch of kids who are kidnapped and forced to work in these forges and factories where they make robotic dragons. It is very bleak, violent, and crass, and it is also pretty damn entertaining so far. It has a mix between magic and machinery, kind of Warhammer 40k vibe.

[Thirdy]

I shall be finishing Middlemarch in one or two days...

[SpaceOddity]

I shall be finishing Middlemarch in one or two days...

How did you find Dorothea?

*snores*

[Melville]

I'm reading through my first Kafka, Metamorphosis and I'm not too impressed. It's a bit... silly. Does it change?
:confused:

[Qrazy]

:confused:

Kids today... *weeps uncontrollably*

I read Junky (Burroughs) last night. It was sparse, lean and amoral. Worth a read.

[Sven]

5 Best books I've ever read:

1 Moby Dick
2 Doesn't really matter
3 see above
4 see entry #2
5 Moby Dick... oh, wait.

Overpowering, dense, immense. It's astonishing, really, and I cannot wait to dive into the world of Moby Dick scholarship to read more about it. This book is comprised of nothing but beautiful passage after beautiful passage, extrapolating on everything under the sun: religion, psychology, culture, friendship, life and love. The language Melville uses is uncanny and lyrical (I loved to read a lot of it out loud, just to hear the words spoken), if quite byzantine at times, but it's all the more reason to read it again. I can't wait.

It took me a while to finish (the last 300 pages have taken more than a month, though the last 100 I knocked out just today), but in the meantime I've finished, like, 5 other books. Terrible habit of mine, reading a handful of things at once.

[transmogrifier]

It was funny that I spent the first third of Atonement mentally complaining about the overly-flowery tone of the writing, the never-ending, samey recreations of inner perception.

The book could still have done without the very final chapter. Simply ending with BT, London 1999, and making the change in the writing style a little more explicit would have been a way ballsier move. Instead, it come across more like a Shyamalan-type rug pull.

[Ezee E]

:confused:
Guess not.

But I liked Junky from Burroughs, I should read more of his stuff.

[SpaceOddity]

I'm reading through my first Kafka, Metamorphosis and I'm not too impressed. It's a bit... silly. Does it change?


*was forced to read it in German*

*shakes fist at education system*

[Melville]

5 Best books I've ever read:

1 Moby Dick
2 Doesn't really matter
3 see above
4 see entry #2
5 Moby Dick... oh, wait.

Overpowering, dense, immense. It's astonishing, really, and I cannot wait to dive into the world of Moby Dick scholarship to read more about it. This book is comprised of nothing but beautiful passage after beautiful passage, extrapolating on everything under the sun: religion, psychology, culture, friendship, life and love. The language Melville uses is uncanny and lyrical (I loved to read a lot of it out loud, just to hear the words spoken), if quite byzantine at times, but it's all the more reason to read it again. I can't wait.

It took me a while to finish (the last 300 pages have taken more than a month, though the last 100 I knocked out just today), but in the meantime I've finished, like, 5 other books. Terrible habit of mine, reading a handful of things at once.
:pritch:

[Melville]

*was forced to read it in German*

*shakes fist at education system*
That sounds awesome.

[D_Davis]

...I loved to read a lot of it out loud, just to hear the words spoken...

I do this all the time with Sturgeon and Bester.

[lovejuice]

It was funny that I spent the first third of Atonement mentally complaining about the overly-flowery tone of the writing, the never-ending, samey recreations of inner perception.

The book could still have done without the very final chapter. Simply ending with BT, London 1999, and making the change in the writing style a little more explicit would have been a way ballsier move. Instead, it come across more like a Shyamalan-type rug pull.

have you watched the movie? do you prefer it that way? if i have to take side, i think the treatment of the last chapter is more fulfilling in the novel than in the adaptation.

[transmogrifier]

have you watched the movie? do you prefer it that way? if i have to take side, i think the treatment of the last chapter is more fulfilling in the novel than in the adaptation.

No, I haven't seen the movie yet. I can't imagine it being any more effective on film, though.

[SpaceOddity]

That sounds awesome.

I loathed French and German. Favoured Latin.

*likes 'em dead*

[Thirdy]

How did you find Dorothea?

*snores*

Lydgate is my favourite character, without a doubt.

Dorothea's somewhat silly and immature, although she has her charms.

[Thirdy]

Oh, and I bougth these books in the past few days:

Le Rivage des Syrtes - Julien Gracq
Austerlitz - W. G. Sebald
First Love - Ivan Turgenev
In Search of Lost Time vol.1: Swann's Way - Marcel Proust
Journal d’Hirondelle - Amélie Nothomb
Night Patrol - Mikhail Kuraev

[Melville]

*likes 'em dead*
Well, it certainly simplifies things.

[SpaceOddity]

Well, it certainly simplifies things.

Well, you're delivered from mundanities.
Directions in Latin must lead to the Underworld.

[SpaceOddity]

Oh, and I bougth these books in the past few days:

First Love - Ivan Turgenev
In Search of Lost Time vol.1: Swann's Way - Marcel Proust


*yays*

[SpaceOddity]

Lydgate is my favourite character, without a doubt.

Dorothea's somewhat silly and immature, although she has her charms.

Have you read Daniel Deronda? Tis superior.

[Qrazy]

What are Simenon's greatest works and/or a good starting place?

[lovejuice]

reading conrad's HoD and other stories. in the middle of the secret sharer. very interesting.

[Spun Lepton]

In the middle of The Road by Cormac McCarthy. Terrific book.

[Duncan]

I finished Narcissus and Goldmund last night. I found the experience rather shattering, and, I admit, I wept profusely afterwards. Mostly out of terror at Goldmund's closing words. Strange how some books can wield such violent power over us.

[megladon8]

I finished Narcissus and Goldmund last night. I found the experience rather shattering, and, I admit, I wept profusely afterwards. Mostly out of terror at Goldmund's closing words. Strange how some books can wield such violent power over us.


Wow - it really is great to find a book that touches you this deeply.

I think the last time I experienced that was with "The Road".

[lovejuice]

I finished Narcissus and Goldmund last night. I found the experience rather shattering, and, I admit, I wept profusely afterwards. Mostly out of terror at Goldmund's closing words. Strange how some books can wield such violent power over us.

that's my favorite hesse's. too bad, i didn't remember much , except i think this is the book in which his philosophy and writing style comes together in the most constructive manner.

[Melville]

I finished Narcissus and Goldmund last night. I found the experience rather shattering, and, I admit, I wept profusely afterwards. Mostly out of terror at Goldmund's closing words. Strange how some books can wield such violent power over us.
You've just determined the next novel I read.

[D_Davis]

http://hbpub.vo.llnwd.net/o16/jackets/258H/9780765319111.jpg

Okay - this book is bad-ass. I mean, really bad-ass. I am almost done with it and I have loved every single moment. It's fast paced, unrelenting, and entertaining as hell. The story is totally absurd (every year, a pumpkin-headed monster, with a body stuffed full of candy, rises from the ground and challenges the town's teenage boys to a game of tag - loser dies), and the way Partridge handles it is sublime. It could have been written as a send-up, or a parody/comedy of the horror genre, but Partridge plays it straight and delivers a tale of terror and horror wrapped around a coming of age story neck deep in Old Town Americana.

Highly recommended, especially to fans of Lansdale.

[megladon8]

That one sounds really awesome, D.

And it had wicked cover art :)

[D_Davis]

Dark Harvest is amazing. Simply amazing. The ending is one of the greatest things I've ever read. Wow. Partridge pulls off this amazing paradigm shift, one that feels totally natural, and completely turns the narrative, and the horror genre, on its head. It's brilliant.

The transitions between scenes and characters are stunning. Partridge handles these like a master filmmaker, and we float from one POV character to another with a master's eye for editing. It's flawless. And because it is written in the present tense, 2nd person narrative, it's like being led by a director and a camera to each of the important aspects of the narrative.

I now understand why Publishers Weekly declared this one of the top 100 novels of 2006, and why Partridge's name is spoken along side Lansdale's. This is genre fiction at its finest.

[megladon8]

Sounds great, D...I love the concept, and I'll definitely keep an eye out for it.

[Duncan]

that's my favorite hesse's. too bad, i didn't remember much , except i think this is the book in which his philosophy and writing style comes together in the most constructive manner.

I think I still like The Glass Bead Game best, but it's been some years since I read that one. I'd like to revisit it in a couple years.


You've just determined the next novel I read.

Hope you like it. Obviously, my reaction was a very personal one. The novel addressed many of the uncertainties I currently face, and I found its conclusions very unsettling. Have you read much Hesse? All of his books speak very directly to me.

In other news, I've decided to begin reading Being and Time. That'll be my stay at home book that I work away at in my free time, and Ovid's Metamorphoses will be my pocket book. I'm familiar with bits of that one, but I've never read it straight through.

[lovejuice]

I think I still like The Glass Bead Game best, but it's been some years since I read that one. I'd like to revisit it in a couple years.


GBG is among the few of his left i have yet read. its length deters me a bit, but i'll eventually get to it.

my three favorite of HH is N&G, Steppenwolfe, and Siddhartha. i also really like Knulp, but have a hard time getting into Damien.



In other news, I've decided to begin reading Being and Time. That'll be my stay at home book that I work away at in my free time, and Ovid's Metamorphoses will be my pocket book. I'm familiar with bits of that one, but I've never read it straight through.

i just finished heidegger's "essay concerning technology" or something. a wonderful read. what i like most is compared to other philosopher's, heidegger's work seems most relevant to the society.

[Lucky]

You've just determined the next novel I read.

Same here. I just looked it up on amazon and a user described it as very Jungian. After Fifth Business my appetite has been whet for another story like that.

[lovejuice]

Same here. I just looked it up on amazon and a user described it as very Jungian. After Fifth Business my appetite has been whet for another story like that.

i'm not too familiar with philosophy, but how is fifth business jungian? its sequel, the manticore, mentions the jungian concept many times though.

[SpaceOddity]

i'm not too familiar with philosophy, but how is fifth business jungian? its sequel, the manticore, mentions the jungian concept many times though.

The characters embodied Jungian archetypes.

Tis ironic. He both laments and complies with mystery's demise.

*shrug*

[lovejuice]

The characters embodied Jungian archetypes.

Tis ironic. He both laments and complies with mystery's demise.

*shrug*

you are in the mood to explain more?

[SpaceOddity]

you are in the mood to explain more?

He mourns the expiration of mystery whilst utilising psychology which contributes to this absence.

[SpaceOddity]

Since you own it you should read it. I can see strong reactions to the Zenobia/Priscilla dichotomy, but I can't quite figure out in which direction. In a love or loathing sense, I mean.

*read it*

I rooted for the ethereal girl.

[Lucky]

you are in the mood to explain more?

Here's a quote from an article about the novel..


Like his protagonist in Fifth Business, Davies was raised in the Presbyterian Church. Although he eventually rejected its particular doctrines, he retained a strongly religious temperament. His spiritual explorations ultimately found resonance in the works of Carl Gustav Jung. "Orthodox Christianity has always had for me the difficulty that it really won't come . . . to grips with the problem of evil," Davies said. "What looks good can be pushed to the point that it becomes evil, and . . . evil very frequently bears what can only be regarded as good fruit." Jung had portrayed God as a psychological reality that embraced polarities of good and evil, light and shadow; the devil is an inextricable part of him. One had to confront this shadow face-to-face in order to live a moral life. "The devil is the unexamined side of life," Davies said, "and the great evils spring from acting without knowledge of your subconscious intentions."

I can't remember which character actually says it, but someone tells Ramsay that he has encountered the devil and that devil is Leisl. The entire climactic sequence when Ramsay first verbally then physically confronts Leisl is symbolic for him overcoming his own personal 'demon' and fulfilling the role of his life. Only then do the events at the end unfold. The Jungian elements are what really made the novel reach greatness to me.

[lovejuice]

The Jungian elements are what really made the novel reach greatness to me.

indeed. i'm very unfamiliar with jungian philosophy, but always find davies' work enchanting.

[Melville]

Hope you like it. Obviously, my reaction was a very personal one. The novel addressed many of the uncertainties I currently face, and I found its conclusions very unsettling. Have you read much Hesse? All of his books speak very directly to me.
This will be the first thing I've read by Hesse.


In other news, I've decided to begin reading Being and Time. That'll be my stay at home book that I work away at in my free time, and Ovid's Metamorphoses will be my pocket book. I'm familiar with bits of that one, but I've never read it straight through.
Being and Time is amazing; it's definitely my favorite philosophy text. Metamorphoses isn't too bad either.

[lovejuice]

heart of darkness is a curious affair. i really like it uptil the meeting between kurtz and marlow. obviously i'm spoiled by coppola's vision, but conrad's kurtz is more an anti-climax. while brando's is large-than-life, conrad's portrayal of kurtz aims perhaps toward a shadow being. it really adds up to brando's credit how well he breath life and existence into the character. in fact, judged on how little he can work with from the original material, i'll say, this is brando's finest acting. (williams and puzo on the other hand give him enough, but not to say any actor can carry such "weight".)

[trotchky]

I'm about a hundred pages into Glamorama and it kind of sucks so far; should I keep going? Considering how wildly Bret Easton Ellis' books vary in quality (from The Informers and Less than Zero broaching near-masterpiece territory to The Rules of Attraction and Lunar Park broaching the realm of total shit) I'm both leery of where this is heading and curious where it falls on the Ellis spectrum.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I'm about a hundred pages into Glamorama and it kind of sucks so far; should I keep going? Considering how wildly Bret Easton Ellis' books vary in quality (from The Informers and Less than Zero broaching near-masterpiece territory to The Rules of Attraction and Lunar Park broaching the realm of total shit) I'm both leery of where this is heading and curious where it falls on the Ellis spectrum.

No. I read 250 pages of that waste of paper and it never got any better. I didn't finish it, and if you already think it sucks, just stop now. Ellis is a poor writer who struck gold on occasion. I haven't read The Informers, but Less Than Zero is one of the best books I've read. Nothing else he's written has come close for me.

[Melville]

heart of darkness is a curious affair. i really like it uptil the meeting between kurtz and marlow. obviously i'm spoiled by coppola's vision, but conrad's kurtz is more an anti-climax. while brando's is large-than-life, conrad's portrayal of kurtz aims perhaps toward a shadow being. it really adds up to brando's credit how well he breath life and existence into the character. in fact, judged on how little he can work with from the original material, i'll say, this is brando's finest acting. (williams and puzo on the other hand give him enough, but not to say any actor can carry such "weight".)
I actually prefer the shadowy Kurtz in the novel. He verged on hokeyness in the movie.

[Benny Profane]

Ask the Dust by John Fante.

Apparently this author was Bukowski's biggest inspiration, and from the first 25 pages you can easily see why.

[D_Davis]

Ask the Dust by John Fante.

Apparently this author was Bukowski's biggest inspiration, and from the first 25 pages you can easily see why.

Yep, and yep.

Haven't read any of these guys since high school, but it was a fun time.

[Benny Profane]

Yep, and yep.

Haven't read any of these guys since high school, but it was a fun time.

The title is so cool, I'd read it no matter who wrote it.

[D_Davis]

I thought of this, this morning:

Call “urban fantasy,” “magical realism,” and you get shelved in a different, more respectable section of the book store.

And then I found this article:

http://www.writing-world.com/sf/realism.shtml

This is a great essay on magical realism.

[D_Davis]

The title is so cool, I'd read it no matter who wrote it.


Yeah. My friends and I used to drool over everything Black Sparrow Press published.

We even took a trip once to So Cal, to go to Red's book store, the book store owned by Bukowski's "only friend." He's a total jerk. You have to knock to get in, and then he berates you the entire time. It was awesome. We saw a bunch of Bukowski's hand-written letters, napkin-drawings, and a bunch of other stuff.

[D_Davis]

Coolest bookshelf ever.

http://gizmodo.com/358636/stairs-bookcase-actually-makes-me-want-to-move-to-london

[megladon8]

Coolest bookshelf ever.

http://gizmodo.com/358636/stairs-bookcase-actually-makes-me-want-to-move-to-london


That is so awesome.

And it'd be easy to do if you have some carpentry skills.

I believe whenever I own a home, I'll contract my dad to help me do that.

[lovejuice]

I thought of this, this morning:

Call “urban fantasy,” “magical realism,” and you get shelved in a different, more respectable section of the book store.

And then I found this article:

http://www.writing-world.com/sf/realism.shtml

This is a great essay on magical realism.

i have never thought of the distinction thoroughly, but it seems pretty obvious to me which one is which one. still the essay really hits home how to distinguish the two.

i'm actually more interested in your reaction, D. judged from your post, you seem to think it's enough to call any "urban fantasy" "magical realism." does this article convince you otherwise?

[D_Davis]

i'm actually more interested in your reaction, D. judged from your post, you seem to think it's enough to call any "urban fantasy" "magical realism." does this article convince you otherwise?

It is a good article.

I think the distinctions are silly, and they do more to appease potential audiences than anything.

Beyond marketing reasons, I really don't understand the need for a lot of genre classifications in literature. I think it just builds walls and sets artificial limits.

I'm working on an article about this now, I'll post it when it is done.

[lovejuice]

Beyond marketing reasons, I really don't understand the need for a lot of genre classifications in literature. I think it just builds walls and sets artificial limits.

I'm working on an article about this now, I'll post it when it is done.

i'll wait for your article, but for now, what i can say is we all live in a capitalistic society. marketing reason alone is enough.

[D_Davis]

i'll wait for your article, but for now, what i can say is we all live in a capitalistic society. marketing reason alone is enough.

Truth.

[D_Davis]

I've often wondered why authors like Kafka, Orwell, and Vonnegut get a "literary pass," when there are so many authors who have worked in the same realms and tackled the same themes, but are shoved off into the ghettos of genre.

It just seems really odd to me, and totally artificial.

And then there is Ray Bradbury. Many stores stock F-451 in the lit section, but they put The Martian Chronicles in the sci-fi section.

And then what about PKD? Why is The Man in the High Castle in the sci-fi section when it is clearly not science fiction, and when books like F-451, Slaughterhouse Five, and The Metamorphosis are shelved in the lit section?

If I believed in conspiracies I would raise my tin foil hat here. It's almost as if someone, or some group, is trying to keep certain authors in the ghetto.

[megladon8]

I love Kurt Vonnegut.

"Cat's Cradle" is one of the best books I've ever read. Ever.


EDIT: Oh yeah, and I completely agree, D.

That's why I rarely take a book's genre classification (or even critical reception) seriously.

[Sycophant]

Publishers decide where they think it will sell. I'm sure there are people who would say the same thing about crime fiction, real crime writers, romance novels, travelogue writers, etc. Is it always fair? No, probably not. That's why some things get lucky and get rebranded.

[megladon8]

Publishers decide where they think it will sell. I'm sure there are people who would say the same thing about crime fiction, real crime writers, romance novels, travelogue writers, etc. Is it always fair? No, probably not. That's why some things get lucky and get rebranded.


Did you know that when Bantam (I believe that's the publisher who does this) is reading over a book to be published, if the editor has to look up three words in the dictionary, it is then labelled as "literature"?

[lovejuice]

Publishers decide where they think it will sell. I'm sure there are people who would say the same thing about crime fiction, real crime writers, romance novels, travelogue writers, etc. Is it always fair? No, probably not. That's why some things get lucky and get rebranded.

yep! it hurts me to think that my beloved christie's are on the same shelf as...say...sue grafton. (to be fair, i just drop a random name. never read any of grafton's work. it might be good.)

[SpaceOddity]

They should categorise books by colour. When I worked in a bookshop I had endless customers who couldn't remember titles or authors but recollected shades.

*remembrance eye-rolling*

And crime section was where the shop-lifters congregated.

*serious*

[Sycophant]

Did you know that when Bantam (I believe that's the publisher who does this) is reading over a book to be published, if the editor has to look up three words in the dictionary, it is then labelled as "literature"?Is that... true? I've heard that before, probably here. But it sounds distorted at the very least.

[megladon8]

Is that... true? I've heard that before, probably here. But it sounds distorted at the very least.


Yeh it's true.

The woman who wrote in the introduction for "A Canticle for Liebowitz" talked about it on the first page or so, and how this leads to many important works being categorized incorrectly.

The same thing happens with books that are translated from other languages into English. Regardless of the quality or genre, they become "literature".

[Sycophant]

Yeh it's true.

The woman who wrote in the introduction for "A Canticle for Liebowitz" talked about it on the first page or so, and how this leads to many important works being categorized incorrectly.

The same thing happens with books that are translated from other languages into English. Regardless of the quality or genre, they become "literature".Okay, gotcha. Didn't mean to doubt, I'm just always suspicious of reports of transparently inane practices at companies like this, because it's just too easy.

[megladon8]

Okay, gotcha. Didn't mean to doubt, I'm just always suspicious of reports of transparently inane practices at companies like this, because it's just too easy.


Oh no, I totally understand.

I found it rather hilarious, to be honest. I know to the writers it isn't too hilarious, but just the fact the guidelines for "literature" are so shallow yet the label itself exudes an aura of intelligence and depth is pretty ironic.

[lovejuice]

I know to the writers it isn't too hilarious, but just the fact the guidelines for "literature" are so shallow yet the label itself exudes an aura of intelligence and depth is pretty ironic.

i, on the other hand, think that nowadays an acceptance of a particular book to a status of "literature" is, if anything, too easy. so easy in fact that it renders the term meaningless. now if your work cannot be categorized into any specific genre, it seems suddenly to be elevated to the status of "literature".

put it this way, name me one non-genre book that is not "literature."

[megladon8]

i, on the other hand, think that nowadays an acceptance of a particular book to a status of "literature" is, if anything, too easy. so easy in fact that it renders the term meaningless. now if your work cannot be categorized into any specific genre, it seems suddenly to be elevated to the status of "literature".

put it this way, name me one non-genre book that is not "literature."


"Literature" is the "drama" of the book world.

So I agree with you, but I don't think it's a bad thing. If it doesn't fit into a genre, then there's not really anywhere else to put it in the book store other than "literature".

And while it would be nice for some of us if they had 50 different sections with all the different sub-genres and whatnot so we know exactly where to go to find something, in reality, most people would find that way too confusing.

[D_Davis]

I think that article I posted above has a great definition of literature.

Literature is non-escapist.

Unfortunately, this renders a lot of things in the "lit" section invalid (Three Musketeers is about as escapist as it gets!) , and demands that a lot of stuff in the genre sections to be reshelved.

But what's more important, and this is where I start to care, is this: what do our institutions of education deem "important" enough to teach? It is my thought that they are too quick to hold on to tradition and are, in fact, using books that are out dated, while shunning more modern stuff that is far more relevant to today's generations. This is my problem with, "the classics." Far too often, great modern literature gets overlooked because of the focus on the past.

This is really where the dangers of genre are.

[Melville]

Hey SpaceOddity, have you read The French Lieutenant's Woman? I just watched the movie, and it had a pretty interesting post-modern take on the archetypal mysterious, self-loathing "fallen woman" of 19th century literature. It seems like a novel might be able to explore that archetype more successfully, so now I'm wondering if the book is worth reading.

[SpaceOddity]

I think that article I posted above has a great definition of literature.

Literature is non-escapist.

Unfortunately, this renders a lot of things in the "lit" section invalid (Three Musketeers is about as escapist as it gets!) , and demands that a lot of stuff in the genre sections to be reshelved.

But what's more important, and this is where I start to care, is this: what do our institutions of education deem "important" enough to teach? It is my thought that they are too quick to hold on to tradition and are, in fact, using books that are out dated, while shunning more modern stuff that is far more relevant to today's generations. This is my problem with, "the classics." Far too often, great modern literature gets overlooked because of the focus on the past.

This is really where the dangers of genre are.

Actually, the British education system recently intended to remove all pre- first world war works (with the exception of Shakespeare) from the syllabus.

[SpaceOddity]

Hey SpaceOddity, have you read The French Lieutenant's Woman? I just watched the movie, and it had a pretty interesting post-modern take on the archetypal mysterious, self-loathing "fallen woman" of 19th century literature. It seems like a novel might be able to explore that archetype more successfully, so now I'm wondering if the book is worth reading.

I've not read anything by him.

*hides*

[Melville]

I've not read anything by him.

*hides*
I haven't either. But the movie was focused on ideas that seem right up your alley (although I don't know if you'd like the postmodern spin on them), so you should check it out (either the book or the movie).

[Qrazy]

Actually, the British education system recently intended to remove all pre- first world war works (with the exception of Shakespeare) from the syllabus.

That's fairly stupid in my opinion. Classics are classics for a reason. I'm not saying the canon can't be revised but it certainly has value.

[D_Davis]

Actually, the British education system recently intended to remove all pre- first world war works (with the exception of Shakespeare) from the syllabus.

I think this is a good move. It's about time to let some other, newer books get the serious consideration and study they deserve.

Classics are classics because they are old and the establishment is run by people afraid to embrace modernity. It's time for a change.

At one time, these "classics" were new and modern - if no one had ever given them the serious chance they received, they would have been forgotten by now. We need to do the same thing to newer books, and expand the horizons of literature.

[Sycophant]

I'm with Qrazy on this one. I'm all for infusing more modern literature, but there's a lot of essential material to be considered in the "classics."

My high school education actually did a pretty good job of mixing our Shakespeare, Twain, and Dickens with a little Kingsolver, Rand, Vonnegut, and even Art Spiegelman.

Also... it depends on the aims of the system.

[Qrazy]

I think this is a good move. It's about time to let some other, newer books get the serious consideration and study they deserve.

Classics are classics because they are old and the establishment is run by people afraid to embrace modernity. It's time for a change.

At one time, these "classics" were new and modern - if no one had ever given them the serious chance they received, they would have been forgotten by now. We need to do the same thing to newer books, and expand the horizons of literature.

I'm all for mod. lit but classics are classics because they stand the test of time. How can you know if something stands the test of time if you don't give it the time to stand the test on? A lot of mod. lit. is lacking that foundation of decades and even centuries of critical review. Plus there's the historic value in seeing where lit. has come from and it's evolution as well.

But yeah my high school was similar to Syc's. Aside from Brit lit and Ameican lit. We had a future lit. course and read Rand, Orwell, McCammon, Huxley and Vonnegut. Twas good times.

[Melville]

I think this is a good move. It's about time to let some other, newer books get the serious consideration and study they deserve.

Classics are classics because they are old and the establishment is run by people afraid to embrace modernity. It's time for a change.

At one time, these "classics" were new and modern - if no one had ever given them the serious chance they received, they would have been forgotten by now. We need to do the same thing to newer books, and expand the horizons of literature.
I cannot express how much I disagree with these statements. I'm not sure what establishment you're criticizing, but the canon wars have already been fought and won. The idea of focusing on new or unappreciated books is already firmly entrenched in university curricula across North America (I don't know about Europe). Here are a couple even-handed articles about the shifting emphasis: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/16/books/review/Donadio-t.html
http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0102/features/index.htm

And classics are not classics because they are old: they are classics because they have endured through time, because they have been consistently acclaimed, read, and loved by academics and authors. As Qrazy noted, the canon has obvious value, both as a source of reliable recommendations and as a window into our cultural and literary history. The notion of completely ignoring great books simply to "expand literature's horizons" is frankly ridiculous. Certainly newer books should be included in a university course if they suit the subject of that course, but one simply cannot learn about literature if one completely rejects literary history.

Edit: Sycophant and Qrazy already made the same points.

[D_Davis]

You guys totally missed my point.

At one time, the classics were not old - they were contemporary, modern fiction. At one time, your classic Moby Dick was a brand, spankin' new book.

But at some point, people paid attention to them, and accepted them as great literature. At some point, someone said, "hey, this Moby Dick book is pretty good. Maybe more people should have a chance to read it. Let's make sure it stays in print and is well recognized."

People who mattered gave them the chance to stay in print, be read, studied, and loved.

If we don't do the same to contemporary fiction today, great books that deserve to be canonized, that deserve to be studied in the halls of education, and that deserve to never go out of print will be lost for good.

We need to expand our ideas of what "great literature" is and begin to tear down the walls of genre stereotyping and stigmas.

I like to read to gain insight into humanity, and to have a good and thoughtful time while doing it. I just so happen to get these things from books that are not deemed "great, important, works of classic literature," and so I am a champion of the things I read.


they are classics because they have endured through time, because they have been consistently acclaimed, read, and loved by academics and authors. .

If books are not given the chance to stay in print, this will not happen.

If in 50 years time, the great literature of authors like Philip K Dick and Alfred Bester and other authors are not in print because they are still deemed "genre fiction," and not "great literature," than humanity has lost treasures of great value.

And this has happened before. Throughout most of the 1980s, many of Dick's books were OOP, mainly because no one important enough took the time to read past the stigma of the genre ghettos.

Part of my battle is a selfish one - I want the great books that I love to be considered great literature because they are in fact just that. I also want these books to stay in print so future generations can enjoy them. And sadly, unless a book is read enough, and deemed important enough by the right people and institutions, these kinds of books vanish from the shelves.

(I'm just using Dick as an example, I am not arguing directly in favor of only his work. I am using the troubled publishing past of his books as an example of what happens with books that aren't deemed important by enough people. Books that aren't given the chance to shine because they are not, yet, classics)

[D_Davis]

I am, of course, very biased here. I am practically anti-classic because I get almost nothing from most of these books. I also dislike the air of importance that surrounds the classics and those who continue to deem them the utmost examples of important literature.

And because I don't get them, I champion the other stuff. I'm a champion of fiction that many others think is trite, or just escapist entertainment, when in fact it is not.

It's very reactionary, I know, and I've been this way since I was a little kid.

:)

I always asked my teachers/professors why we had to read certain books. Who were they to tell me what was worth my scholarly time. For every book they made me read, I could name more that offered me more insight into humanity, and more that I think are better written. It's just the way I am I guess.

To me, calling a group of books "classics" is quite limiting, and narrows the scope of what people think is worth their time.

Part of this has to do with semantics. The word "classic" should mean something that is old and has stood the test of time, but we also use it now to mean something that is just really good.

People say that things five years old are "classic," like they are just saying something is "awesome." People hear the word "classic" and they automatically think that it is worth their time, and sometimes they turn away from other literature that they may get more out of.

And hey, some people are exactly the opposite of me - no big deal.

Some people like classics and modern - very cool.

It's the same thing I get with movies all the time. Many people think martial arts cinema is just brainless, escapist, cheep-o entertainment, and people like me who know better have to stand up and make our voices heard. I think it is quite telling that it took nearly 40 years for most of the Shaw Brothers' great films to get treated to subtitled, unedited versions released in the United States.

If people like me didn't stand up and say, "Hey, some of these films you guys call "chop sockey" films are actually examples of fine cinema and deserve to be in print, sold, watched, studied, and loved." If no one did this, these films would be lost to all except the most die hard of film fans.

Another good film example is Criterion. I like what they do, but damn have they missed a ton of boats. for the most part, older Japanese cinema is deemed more important by more people than older Hong Kong cinema. Criterion has no problems releasing Kurosawa's samurai films, or other chambara films, but I wonder...where are their King Hu films? Where are their Chang Cheh films? Where are their great HK martial arts films?

Only 1 or 2 of Hu's films have ever been remastered and properly released on DVD. It is my belief that A Touch of Zen is much better than any of the samurai films Criterion has released. But, because this film is considered a "martial arts" film from a country whose genre films are considered by many to be cheep and unworthy, this film stands a very good chance of being lost. Because these films are considered to a part of a genre that doesn't have much to offer, they are over looked by the people who stand to make a difference.

I don't want this to happen to the films I love nor to the books I love, and so I fight, in my limited ways, battles such as this.

[D_Davis]

Sorry those rants are so long and rambling. I hope I said something worthwhile.

[SpaceOddity]

I think this is a good move. It's about time to let some other, newer books get the serious consideration and study they deserve.

Classics are classics because they are old and the establishment is run by people afraid to embrace modernity. It's time for a change.


I disagree. The British education system omitting classics (which in this case means mainly 19th century realist novels) is the equivalent of the German education system removing classical and romantic composers from its music syllabus.

[D_Davis]

I disagree.

Join the club!

;)

Some stuff is gonna get read, some stuff isn't. I just happen to think that maybe it's time for some new stuff to get its chance to shine. If this has to happen at the expense of some classics, so be it.

[Duncan]

Moby Dick got mostly negative/mediocre reviews when it first came out. It wasn't until the early 20th century that it began to be widely considered a great novel.

The cream of Shaw Bros. films are now fairly widely available.

If a work of art is good enough to connect deeply with a core group of people, it will be carried on and promoted. Obviously, some great art will be left by the wayside, but I think the system does a reasonably good job.

[SpaceOddity]

Join the club!

;)

Some stuff is gonna get read, some stuff isn't. I just happen to think that maybe it's time for some new stuff to get its chance to shine. If this has to happen at the expense of some classics, so be it.

The problem with this is a system that confines itself to current works preserves nothing. 'Modern works' would be automatically discarded when they ceased being modern.

[D_Davis]

The cream of Shaw Bros. films are now fairly widely available.


Because the right people stood up and demanded that they be taken seriously. It tool Celestial/IVL to make a difference. And this was only a few years ago.

And if people like me don't do this with great genre lit, books that deserved to be canonized will go out of print and will be lost. Unfortunately, I don't have any say nor do I think I will ever be important enough to make a difference. I can only hope that someone who is will hear my cries.

[D_Davis]

The problem with this is a system that confines itself to current works preserves nothing. 'Modern works' would be automatically discarded when they ceased being modern.

Right. But if the pendulum is going to swing, let it swing too far in the other direction for a while before it comes back to rest in a more realistic center.

[Duncan]

Actually, Davis, I don't really know what you're talking about. Sorry. My high school curriculum was full of 20th century literature. Hemingway, Orwell (genre writer), Salinger, Vonnegut (genre writer), Burgess (genre writer), Heller, McCourt, Huxley (genre writer), Fitzgerald, etc. Even Life of Pi was in there. That was published in 2001. I really, really don't think the high school curriculum is hurting for new books.

I think this is more about your "genre ghettos." I think Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is a much better novel than Life of Pi. I read it on my own, and it was interesting. However, I think you attach a great personal value to his books, whereas that, in terms of future visions, the general consensus is that people like Orwell, Huxley, and Burgess might be more worthwhile. You seem to disagree with that, which is fine. But I find the argument that genre books are not represented in the curriculum outright false.

[Duncan]

Because the right people stood up and demanded that they be taken seriously. It tool Celestial/IVL to make a difference. And this was only a few years ago.

And if people like me don't do this with great genre lit, books that deserved to be canonized will go out of print and will be lost. Unfortunately, I don't have any say nor do I think I will ever be important enough to make a difference. I can only hope that someone who is will hear my cries.

Right, people care about the books/films enough to make them widely seen. What's the problem? I don't think it's really reasonable to expect Americans school boards everywhere to immediately adopt new books as canonical when some of them are still reluctant to teach evolution. Things like this take time.

[D_Davis]

Moby Dick got mostly negative/mediocre reviews when it first came out. It wasn't until the early 20th century that it began to be widely considered a great novel.


It must have been rediscovered by the right people.

I just hope the right people today are able to get over the genre stigma to rediscover some modern works of literature when it comes time to expand the canon.

[D_Davis]

I think this is more about your "genre ghettos." I think Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is a much better novel than Life of Pi. I read it on my own, and it was interesting. However, I think you attach a great personal value to his books, whereas that, in terms of future visions, the general consensus is that people like Orwell, Huxley, and Burgess might be more worthwhile. You seem to disagree with that, which is fine. But I find the argument that genre books are not represented in the curriculum outright false.

You're totally right. This is my own selfish fight. I stated as such above.

I'm totally crazy for the stuff I love, and I think it is worthy of the same amount of critical and scholarly praise as anything else.

I am also selfish in the fact that I want the things that have impacted me on this level to be around for generations to come so they can impact others.

Genre works are represented, but I want them represented more.

I've gotta stand up for the things I love because they are so rarely spoken about in any kind of capacity beyond basic fandom.

I totally recognize that I am totally crazy in this regard. And I wouldn't want it any other way.

I mean, why else would I spend dozens of hours every week writing reviews for a website that I don't get paid for, that I actually pay for? I am working a second, part time job for free, just to bring attention to these things. It must be important enough to me to do so.

[Qrazy]

Right, people care about the books/films enough to make them widely seen. What's the problem?

This is what I see as well. I think we lose far, far more by abandoning the historicity of literature and by ignoring the great works of the past than we are by focusing on them. And as has been said, curriculums aren't even focusing on them anymore. It's about half and half.

I hope to hell there never comes a time when my kids have to read Dick, Rand and Martel over Dostoyevsky, Shakespeare and Chaucer.

[D_Davis]

I think one of the biggest problems surrounding genre stuff is the fandom that surrounds it. They hardly ever take the time to critically analyze the things they like, and thus they blindly read/watch anything that is thrown their way because it happens to be in the genre they love. There is very little critical thinking associated with fandom, and this is why I try to never call myself a fan of anything. I hate the word "fan," it conjures images of blindly following something whether it is good or not. Fandom tends to champion the most mediocre examples of the various genres.

[D_Davis]

I hope to hell there never comes a time when my kids have to read Dick, Rand and Martel over Dostoyevsky, Shakespeare and Chaucer.

I wonder who the authors were that people said this about before Dostoyevsky, Shakespeare and Chaucer were canonized?

Those damn kids and their new fangled thing-a-majigs!

I just hope we see a future where the deserving things of all time periods and genres are given the proper respect and analysis they deserve, and that stuff that has typically gone out of print stays in print for future generations.


When I was in elementary school and I saw Blade Runner for the first time, mid 80s, I wanted to read Dick. I went to the store and bought Do Androids... After I finished it, I wanted more. Well, I soon found out that almost all of Dick's books were either out of print or nearly impossible to find. I think it is really sad that an author as brilliant as Dick would see his or her books go out of print. Part of the reason this happened was because Dick was not respected outside of genre circles. I pretty much forgot about him until the mid '90s when Vintage started to republish his body of work. I am fighting for this to change with other authors.

[D_Davis]

One of the problems I have with the education system is how genre fiction is taught. I took classes on science fiction in high school and in college. But herein lies the problem: this genre was broken out as a separate entity away from general literature. The people who signed up for these classes typically did so because they were already into the genre.

The institution set up a wall, a barrier that limited the exposure to what I, and many others, consider to be works of literature with as much relevance as anything else. I think it would be far more beneficial to our culture, and to the art of fiction in general, if great works of genre fiction were taught right along side other forms of literature. More people would get exposed to these books and maybe some of the stereotypes of genre would be broken down.

Except for a few examples like Orwell, or Vonnegut, or Huxley, many people still consider sci-fi as a genre typified by boys, and Star Trek and Star Wars fans, populated with stories about lasers, space ships and action. People who read sci-fi, and really study it, and dig deep into the library, know that this is simply not true. Authors like Sturgeon, LeGuin, Ballard, Bester, Asimov, Lem, and Dick have just as much to say about humanity as any other great author - they've just chosen to do so that utilizes a method unbridled by anything except for the power of their imagination.

Let's say you're an author, and you want to write a story about humankind's ability and capacity to live with other life or with nature. Yes, you could write about Earth-bound nature, perhaps a safari story, or a story of discovery at sea, or along the shores of a great river. But, you just really want to get creative. You really want to push the boundaries of your theme, and explore uncharted territories. You want to do something out of the norm. You really want to dig deep within the psyche of humanity and discover the limits of your characters. You want to examine an underlying truth, but you want to do so without any narrative limitations.

And so you decide to speculate about mankind's encounter with another race, and you use this speculation to say something profound and topical about modern man and society.

Well, in doing so, in choosing to tackle your theme with a method not tethered to our present reality, your book is automatically shoved off into the ghettos of genre and it has a much harder time being taken seriously as a work of great literary merit.

Why do we have a system that sets these artificial boundaries? Why put limits on a method of exploration? Why is a story about about a whale and man any more important or relevant than a story about a man and a non-human entity, or a machine? If both are well written, and both have something serious to say about humanity, why should one be "literature" and taught in "normal" classes, while the other is considered a lesser form of "genre fiction," and typically only taught in genre-centric classes to people who are already into the genre?

To me, this just doesn't make any sense, and I think it limits our capacity to think critically about kinds different things.

[trotchky]

No. I read 250 pages of that waste of paper and it never got any better. I didn't finish it, and if you already think it sucks, just stop now. Ellis is a poor writer who struck gold on occasion. I haven't read The Informers, but Less Than Zero is one of the best books I've read. Nothing else he's written has come close for me.

300 pages in and I'm enjoying it a lot more. The meta elements immediately make it more layered than Ellis' past work; also, his apparent fatalism about his own writing is as interesting as it is fitting.

[Melville]

Damn. I missed most of the conversation. Needless to say, I agree with everything that Qrazy, Duncan, and SpaceOddity have said. It doesn't seem any better to me to let great old books go out of print than to let great new books go out of print. The canon is in continual flux, and something is always being sacrificed. Many canonical books have been out of print for decades at a time—but then people champion them, they receive renewed interest, and they get back into print. As Duncan said, what's the problem? And as we've all said, new and unappreciated authors are constantly being introduced into curricula, to the point where the English majors I know have startlingly little knowledge of literary history.

You're probably right that a lot of your favorite authors are currently relegated to genre-specific courses, most likely because academia is interested in studying genre in its own right, as a structured set of narrative and stylistic conventions. But that doesn't seem like a problem: genre qua genre seems like an interesting subject, rather than something that should be discouraged in favor of making genre authors more "respectable". And such courses will still focus critical attention (at least amongst some students and professors) on your favored genre authors, which will lead to some of those authors being analyzed in a non-genre-specific way. Both of these types of studies should eventually result in a broader, more critical academic readership for those authors. So it seems like you should be perfectly satisfied with the situation.

Another thing that you have to consider is that the majority of people in academia might simply disagree with you about the merits of your favorite authors, regardless of their genre. Academics might read your favorite books with completely open minds and simply think that they aren't great books. I haven't read any of the authors that you've mentioned, so I'm certainly not suggesting that their books are bad, but I think you need to realize that it might not just be a systematic bias against genre authors that keeps your favorites from being recognized: it might simply be a difference of opinion. Certainly your dislike of the "classics" might suggest that the people who champion them will dislike the books that you champion. Returning to movie examples, you often claim that your favorite martial arts movies are simply great movies that are neglected because of their genre. But I know that our taste wildly differs when it comes to non-martial arts movies, so I think it's a safe bet that I will disagree with your estimation of your favorite martial arts movies as well. Genre has nothing to do with my passive avoidance of those movies. Sorry, that's a bit of a tangent, but I think about it almost every time that you start talking about genre ghettos.

[Qrazy]

I wonder who the authors were that people said this about before Dostoyevsky, Shakespeare and Chaucer were canonized?


I wonder too, perhaps Homer, Hesiod and Plato. Maybe it would be good if they were in the canon and we were to read them in school. Oh wait, they are and we do.

[Qrazy]

Why do we have a system that sets these artificial boundaries? Why put limits on a method of exploration? Why is a story about about a whale and man any more important or relevant than a story about a man and a non-human entity, or a machine? If both are well written...

Because it's better written than the stories of the non-human entities and machines. Have you read Moby Dick?

[SpaceOddity]

One of the problems I have with the education system is how genre fiction is taught.

why should one be "literature" and taught in "normal" classes, while the other is considered a lesser form of "genre fiction," and typically only taught in genre-centric classes to people who are already into the genre?


Actually, 'classics' are also studied as a form of 'genre fiction'.

[D_Davis]

Have you read Moby Dick?

Yes. It was one my least favorite books I've ever read.

I think it is terribly written, comprised of more infodump than the worst science fiction, I didn't connect with any of the characters, and it just did nothing for me.

I read because I had to in school, and then I tried to read it again for pleasure years later. I couldn't get more than 1/2 way through it. I totally fail to see the relevance of MD.

[Melville]

Have you read Moby Dick?
He has, and he dislikes it. We had an argument about it at the old site: http://matchcut.org/viewtopic.php?t=3107&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=moby+dick&start=1920
(The argument starts toward the end of the page.) That's one of the reasons why I suggested that he should take into account that his idiosyncratic taste just might not jive with that of the academics and authors who largely determine the canon. (Although Moby Dick is admittedly a pretty divisive book even in academia.)

I should clarify that I think Davis' championing of under-appreciated art is great, and I agree with him that such championing is necessary to keep the canon vital. But I don't see why we need (or should want) any other process to canonize his favorite authors.

Edit: whoops, I somehow missed Davis' last post.

[Melville]

Actually, 'classics' are also studied as a form of 'genre fiction'.
That's a good point. I've never heard of 'classics' as a whole being studied as a single genre (unless you're referring to Greek and Roman literature), but classics are frequently divided into genres in order to study groups of books as a larger structure. Byronic Romance, Southern Gothicism, British Modernism, etc. Academics love to subdivide things and look for large structures that unify parts of their field.

[D_Davis]

Another thing that you have to consider is that the majority of people in academia might simply disagree with you about the merits of your favorite authors, regardless of their genre. Academics might read your favorite books with completely open minds and simply think that they aren't great books. I haven't read any of the authors that you've mentioned, so I'm certainly not suggesting that their books are bad, but I think you need to realize that it might not just be a systematic bias against genre authors that keeps your favorites from being recognized: it might simply be a difference of opinion. Certainly your dislike of the "classics" might suggest that the people who champion them will dislike the books that you champion. Returning to movie examples, you often claim that your favorite martial arts movies are simply great movies that are neglected because of their genre. But I know that our taste wildly differs when it comes to non-martial arts movies, so I think it's a safe bet that I will disagree with your estimation of your favorite martial arts movies as well. Genre has nothing to do with my passive avoidance of those movies. Sorry, that's a bit of a tangent, but I think about it almost every time that you start talking about genre ghettos.

Good paragraph.

But I think that genre does have something to do with it simply because of the stigma people often associate with it. It prevents them from seeing through the conventions, into the heart of the film/book. I've seen it happen far too many times. Mention martial arts cinema to a general film fan and they immediately think of bad dubs, cheesy sounds, funny dialog, lame plots, paper-thin characters, and so on. Why? Because these are the films that they've been exposed to.

These are the films that have been chosen to represent the genre and the films that are widely available. The good stuff, the "real" stuff is often cast aside and OOP. But once you get a layer or two deeper, you start to realized that certain films by Chang Cheh, or King Hu, or Lau Kar Leung, have just as much to say about humanity than any other film from any other director. But you have to be able to look past the stigmas that have been built for decades by people who really don't understand what the genre is all about.

The same is true with books. But what's worse is that people often think "science fiction" and they don't think of book examples, but instead they think of film or TV examples. What passes for sci-fi in film and television has very little to do with the literary genre. The fact that you will find a Star Wars adaptation sitting in the same section as a Sturgeon or Ballard novel says volumes on this subject.

But also, as I said early, a lot of the stereotypes associated with genre are also birthed by the genre's fandom. I know this is true, and it irks me. There is nothing more detrimental to a genre than rabid fandom of uncritical, blind followers. That we have science fiction conventions filled with Xena the Warrior Princess, LARPing, and Stargate SG-1, when in the past they would be filled with authors like Asimov, Clarke and Bradbury who would actually be talking about science and speculating on humanity's role in the universe is pretty sick. Fandom kills any chance a genre has more quickly and more efficiently than any amount of academia or avoidance.
(I like the above sentence!)

And so I feel it is up to people like me to spread the word.

However, I know it is a meaningless fight, and in the grand scheme of things it doesn't mean anything. It really is pointless and fruitless, especially since I am a nobody who will probably never reach anyone who really matters.

But, I can dream! :)

[D_Davis]

That's one of the reasons why I suggested that he should take into account that his idiosyncratic taste just might not jive with that of the academics and authors who largely determine the canon. (Although Moby Dick is admittedly a pretty divisive book even in academia.)


You got me here! :)

I just want you to know, I don't set out, or try to be different and whatnot.

[Melville]

I just want you to know, I don't set out, or try to be different and whatnot.
:)

I would never suspect otherwise. You seem to be nothing if not genuine.

[Melville]

But I think that genre does have something to do with it simply because of the stigma people often associate with it. It prevents them from seeing through the conventions, into the heart of the film/book. I've seen it happen far too many times. Mention martial arts cinema to a general film fan and they immediately think of bad dubs, cheesy sounds, funny dialog, lame plots, paper-thin characters, and so on. Why? Because these are the films that they've been exposed to.
I think everybody on here would agree with this. (Well, maybe not baby doll.) I'm just suggesting that there's more to it than that... and that scrapping centuries of brilliant, influential literature isn't the right way to bring your favorite authors recognition. And as Duncan noted, focusing on newer literature would still leave your favorite authors in their genre ghetto.

[D_Davis]

I'm just suggesting that there's more to it than that... and that scrapping centuries of brilliant, influential literature isn't the right way to bring your favorite authors recognition.

You're right, and I don't want to scrap the canon that has been established. There are good reasons why it has been established. I don't even really want to simply expand it. What I want is to expand the definition and perception of what people consider to be "great literature." I want people to be able to see past their stigmas and the stereotypes surrounding certain books and genres.

Unfortunately, there are lot of barriers preventing this, including the frustrating fandom that surrounds many of these genres.

[lovejuice]

But I think that genre does have something to do with it simply because of the stigma people often associate with it. It prevents them from seeing through the conventions, into the heart of the film/book. I've seen it happen far too many times. Mention martial arts cinema to a general film fan and they immediately think of bad dubs, cheesy sounds, funny dialog, lame plots, paper-thin characters, and so on. Why? Because these are the films that they've been exposed to.



I think everybody on here would agree with this. (Well, maybe not baby doll.) I'm just suggesting that there's more to it than that... and that scrapping centuries of brilliant, influential literature isn't the right way to bring your favorite authors recognition. And as Duncan noted, focusing on newer literature would still leave your favorite authors in their genre ghetto.

hey hey hey...i'm just about to mention his name. If baby doll frequents this thread, he probably chimes in and says something to the effect that actually it's capitalistic ideology that makes something more widely read or seen than the others. and here i agree with him. genre-izing art might be partly responsible, but if you have to blame something, blame it on the market.

besides, d, i want to point out i don't think your favorite books or authors are in any danger of not being read or reprinted. with the internet nowadays, along with technology and god-bless-the-capitalist market, i can safely assume there are already way too much art circulated. as everyone know, 90% of everything is crap. even half the literature wing in all libraries in the US can be burned down, and i don't think we actually lose anything significant. (well...assume it's the corret half that get burn.)

my point is, craps always get produced: actual craps, craps that only you think it's masterpiece, craps that anyone but you think. unfortunately craps might not get studied in a serious university class. it's their loss.

[Qrazy]

my point is, craps always get produced: actual craps, craps that only you think it's masterpiece, craps that anyone but you think. unfortunately craps might not get studied in a serious university class. it's their loss.

I find this paragraph mind boggling to decipher.

[lovejuice]

I find this paragraph mind boggling to decipher.

:P :lol: sorry, what i mean is people should not be afraid that what they consider a masterpiece -- but most people think it's crap -- won't be printed or written. only because a book is not considered intellectual enough to be taught in a university doesn't mean such book will not be printed. thank to internet, globalization, and printing technology, there will always be sci-fi, fantasy, romance, detective, and what not to satisfy all kind of readers and fans.

[Ezee E]

I've begun my first Dickens novel...

David Copperfield.

This will take a bit.

[Qrazy]

:P :lol: sorry, what i mean is people should not be afraid that what they consider a masterpiece -- but most people think it's crap -- won't be printed or written. only because a book is not considered intellectual enough to be taught in a university doesn't mean such book will not be printed. thank to internet, globalization, and printing technology, there will always be sci-fi, fantasy, romance, detective, and what not to satisfy all kind of readers and fans.

Ahhh got ya.

Hey Melville, did you know Heidegger was a nazi? I just found this out a few days ago. It saddened me a great deal and cast a completely new light upon his Letter on Humanism.

[Duncan]

I think people can be brilliant but weak. I haven't read a lot of Heidegger, but what I have read I have done so with the knowledge that he was a member of the Nazi party. It is difficult to reconcile the writing with the personal history.

[Qrazy]

I think people can be brilliant but weak. I haven't read a lot of Heidegger, but what I have read I have done so with the knowledge that he was a member of the Nazi party. It is difficult to reconcile the writing with the personal history.

I try to separate the work from the artist as well and even with his past, his work in metaphysics is absolutely essential. However, this new knowledge manifests some pragmatic reality in relation to his ethical and/or lack of an ethical theory. The problem of valuing as a shadowing of the thing and not letting the thing simply be, while still of conceptual interest, becomes transported to a completely different interpretation. In terms of application, the horrifying realities of actually abstaining from value judgment in the historical context of the thinker, provides a heavy counter argument for passing over ethics as too metaphysically complex to be properly deduced.

[lovejuice]

Hey Melville, did you know Heidegger was a nazi? I just found this out a few days ago. It saddened me a great deal and cast a completely new light upon his Letter on Humanism.

the question doesn't address me, but yep, i know. in fact he has a love affair with his protegee and another great jewish political philosopher, Hannah Arendt, who had to flee the country after nazi came into power.

[Melville]

Hey Melville, did you know Heidegger was a nazi? I just found this out a few days ago. It saddened me a great deal and cast a completely new light upon his Letter on Humanism.
Yep. His Introduction to Metaphysics includes a short defense of Nazism as a means of combating the loss of human spirit inherent in modern capitalism and communism. He later defended his position by saying that he was responding to "something in the movement that had come to power, beyond all its failings and crudeness, that was much more far-reaching and that could perhaps one day bring a concentration on the Germans' Western historical essence. It will in no way be denied that at the time I believed in such possibilities and for that reason renounced the actual vocation of thinking in favor of being effective in an official capacity."

I think his philosophy kind of went off the rails after Being & Time. His later writing has a kind of mysticism and emphasis on essence and spirit, which makes it easy to understand how he could latch onto the same emphases in the Nazi movement. And obviously his refusal to construct an ethical system makes it even easier to understand. However, despite his statements about ethics, I think his views of authenticity and Being-as-care, as expressed in Being & Time, lay strong foundations for an ethics.

[EvilShoe]

Finally read Cormac McCarthy's The Road. Loved it, especially because of how simple it kept things:
No big confrontation between the man and the cannibals, nor did it get overly sentimental with the ending. Gripping overall, wonderfully written, and heartbreaking (as the back of the book promised!).

[Ezee E]

Finally read Cormac McCarthy's The Road. Loved it, especially because of how simple it kept things:
No big confrontation between the man and the cannibals, nor did it get overly sentimental with the ending. Gripping overall, wonderfully written, and heartbreaking (as the back of the book promised!).
Yep. I'm really curious to see if the movie will take the same direction.

[D_Davis]

Cool little factoid:

In Kurt Vonnegut's introduction to Theodore Sturgeon's short story collection, A Saucer of Loneliness, he says that his character Kilgore Trout was based off of Sturgeon. Both have first names that end in "-ore" and both have fishy last names.

Pretty cool.

[Benny Profane]

Finished Ask the Dust. Most excellent. Really truly excellent.

Now reading Mason & Dixon by Thomas Pynchon. Every time I pick up a book by Pynchon I get a funny nervous excited feeling. I am obsessed.

[D_Davis]

Now reading Mason & Dixon by Thomas Pynchon. Every time I pick up a book by Pynchon I get a funny nervous excited feeling. I am obsessed.

I know the feeling. There are quite a few authors I feel this way about.

[Mysterious Dude]

Currently reading The Brothers Karamazov. Only fifty pages in, and I've already laughed and cried. :eek:

[Duncan]

Currently reading The Brothers Karamazov. Only fifty pages in, and I've already laughed and cried. :eek:

Best book ever.

[lovejuice]

Finished To the Lighthouse today. Hated it.

sorry, duncan, but my god, this book is wonderful!! about to finish it. if mrs. dalloway makes me interested in woolfe, now i'm a fan.

[ledfloyd]

Currently reading The Brothers Karamazov. Only fifty pages in, and I've already laughed and cried. :eek:
dostoevsky is, for me, one of those excited funny feeling authors.

[Qrazy]

dostoevsky is, for me, one of those excited funny feeling authors.

He is the quintessential funny feeling author.

I'm trying to shut off my computer so I can read The Waves and some Rimbaud but damn it's hard. Computer addiction. *salivates*

[lovejuice]

finish to the lighthouse. love love it. i have read the negativity discussed earlier, and think that kinda irrelevant. yes, the mood is seesawing, and the characters, at time, can be inconsistent. that's no big deal since woolfe gives us one really well-developed character, the ever-presenting father time himself. i consider to the lighthouse to be about the passage of time. here woolfe achieves something which McEwan perhaps wishes he could with atonement. (but really that novel is a whole different matter, so a comparison might not be fair.)

besides i don't think the seesawing is that bad. considered her unique stream-of-consciousness style. we are talking about a novel in which the POV jumps from one character to the next in one line.

one thing i agree with duncan and want to add is the middle section, time passes, is beautiful beyond word. and the last section, the lighthouse, is much more consistent compared to the first. there we really see, know, and understand characters. i like mr. ramsay. how his life is an ever-ending search for women's sympathy. and lily is, i think, a good portrayal of woolfe, herself, and what they have to struggle as women.

[Duncan]

finish to the lighthouse. love love it. i have read the negativity discussed earlier, and think that kinda irrelevant. yes, the mood is seesawing, and the characters, at time, can be inconsistent. that's no big deal since woolfe gives us one really well-developed character, the ever-presenting father time himself. i consider to the lighthouse to be about the passage of time. here woolfe achieves something which McEwan perhaps wishes he could with atonement. (but really that novel is a whole different matter, so a comparison might not be fair.)

besides i don't think the seesawing is that bad. considered her unique stream-of-consciousness style. we are talking about a novel in which the POV jumps from one character to the next in one line.

I didn't mind the leaps in emotion as we go from one character to another. That makes sense. I just didn't like the lack of fluidity in the thoughts and emotions of each individual. Maybe 'fluidity' is a bad word. What I'm trying to say is that moments are solutions of emotions, never pure emotions. And they're homogeneous solutions, not heterogeneous. Her novel never reflected my experience of the world. It always seemed heterogeneous.


one thing i agree with duncan and want to add is the middle section, time passes, is beautiful beyond word. and the last section, the lighthouse, is much more consistent compared to the first. there we really see, know, and understand characters. i like mr. ramsay. how his life is an ever-ending search for women's sympathy. and lily is, i think, a good portrayal of woolfe, herself, and what they have to struggle as women. Time passes was exceptional. I remember it very positively, for reasons I described earlier.

[lovejuice]

I didn't mind the leaps in emotion as we go from one character to another. That makes sense. I just didn't like the lack of fluidity in the thoughts and emotions of each individual. Maybe 'fluidity' is a bad word. What I'm trying to say is that moments are solutions of emotions, never pure emotions. And they're homogeneous solutions, not heterogeneous. Her novel never reflected my experience of the world. It always seemed heterogeneous.


are you talking about the first part of the novel? since i have a similar problem there, and yet in the last part, characters' emotion seem to be more "homogeneous."

i can argue it's woolfe's intension to build a wall or a distance between characters and readers. i see the first 120 pages as vague memory of those who survive. here again i want to bring back atonement since the contrast appears striking. atonement is about "guilt" that haunts a character through out her whole life. the memory of that guilt is so vivid -- to us and the character -- that it no longer takes the form of the past. it's an ever presenting "present." to the lighthouse, on the other hand, is about past and memory. the wall or the distance are hence necessary because past and memory are forever vague imagery.

[MacGuffin]

I couldn't find Junky at any of the bookstores near me, so I got Story of the Eye instead and hope to finish it in one week.

[D_Davis]

Finished Ask the Dust. Most excellent. Really truly excellent.

Now reading Mason & Dixon by Thomas Pynchon. Every time I pick up a book by Pynchon I get a funny nervous excited feeling. I am obsessed.

Have you read the Illuminatus! Trilogy by Shea and Wilson?

Just curious.

With your love for Pynchon, I bet you would get a kick out of this classic narrative of conspiracy.

[Benny Profane]

Have you read the Illuminatus! Trilogy by Shea and Wilson?

Just curious.

With your love for Pynchon, I bet you would get a kick out of this classic narrative of conspiracy.

Have heard about it, but not read it. It's on the to-do list.

[D_Davis]

Have heard about it, but not read it. It's on the to-do list.

Sweet.

Robert Anton Wilson was amazing. In my estimation, he was one of the greatest thinkers that ever lived. Some of his stuff is simply brilliant, really out in left field, but brilliant none the less.

He was also a renowned Joyce scholar. If you ever get a chance to listen to RAW Explains Everything, a multiple CD-spanning interview, check out the stuff on Joyce. It's fascinating, even to me, someone who has little desire to read the author.

RAW's work with general semantics is also incredible.

He believed that the word "yet" should be used more, because it leaves open the opportunity for change.

"I have not been to China, yet."

Really and truly a fascinating person.

He's got some good stuff up on Google Video as well.

[trotchky]

I'm reading Joe Hill's short story collection 20th Century Ghosts. It's good post-modern horror; most of them have meta-fictive elements, dealing with the creative process, with all its challenges and rewards, the role of horror fiction in our culture, and Hill's own anxieties as the son of one of the most famous horror writers of the 20th century. These are just my initial impressions, though; I haven't explored him in depth yet; his writing seems to be more interesting and substantial than his father's though.

[lovejuice]

I'm reading Joe Hill's short story collection 20th Century Ghosts. It's good post-modern horror; most of them have meta-fictive elements, dealing with the creative process, with all its challenges and rewards, the role of horror fiction in our culture, and Hill's own anxieties as the son of one of the most famous horror writers of the 20th century. These are just my initial impressions, though; I haven't explored him in depth yet; his writing seems to be more interesting and substantial than his father's though.

very interesting. i am always interested in a good horror story.

[D_Davis]

very interesting. i am always interested in a good horror story.

Read Dark Harvest!

[trotchky]

Is the Mysterious Skin book good? If not, can you recommend a book like Mysterious Skin? A book about sexuality with the same kind of kinetic energy and upfrontness? Do you know anything like that?

[Qrazy]

Is the Mysterious Skin book good? If not, can you recommend a book like Mysterious Skin? A book about sexuality with the same kind of kinetic energy and upfrontness? Do you know anything like that?

This doesn't exactly fit your request but Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale deals with sexual mores in various ways. I didn't particularly like it but it possesses kinetic energy and upfrontness... although bordering on exhibitionism at the expense of meaning and integrity in my opinion.

[D_Davis]

Is the Mysterious Skin book good? If not, can you recommend a book like Mysterious Skin? A book about sexuality with the same kind of kinetic energy and upfrontness? Do you know anything like that?

You might like Theodore Sturgeon's book, Godbody.

From my review:


If I've ever read a work of fiction with a premise that could change the world for good it is Theodore Sturgeon's, Godbody. It tells the story of Godbody, a messianic figure who comes to a small town to teach people how to love one another and how to express their love through passionate, healthy, and uninhibited sexual intercourse. He heals the perception towards sex of those who have been sexually mistreated, and fosters a new appreciation of coitus in those who have forgotten its joys. Each chapter is told from the point of view of a different character touched by the work of Godbody, and details how his mysterious ways shape a new kind of connectedness between love, humanity, and God.

Godbody is, at first, highly pornographic. It is the most erotic book I've ever read. Personally, it was a challenge to read at times because I am not often comfortable with this kind of material. But, then again, this kind of material often lacks real purpose beyond titillation, and through Strugeon's insight and understanding of humanity, the novel becomes something much more than a series of detailed sexual encounters. Making his readers uncomfortable was part of Sturgeon's modus operandi; he is, after all, the author that gave us a paradise of incest, defended homosexuality in the late 1940's, and presented to us physically and mentally abused characters with deep-rooted problems and broken spirits.

Or perhaps his short story, If All Men Were Brother Would You Let One Marry Your Sister.

[lovejuice]

Is the Mysterious Skin book good? If not, can you recommend a book like Mysterious Skin? A book about sexuality with the same kind of kinetic energy and upfrontness? Do you know anything like that?

lolita, if you haven't read it already.

[Ezee E]

Is the Mysterious Skin book good? If not, can you recommend a book like Mysterious Skin? A book about sexuality with the same kind of kinetic energy and upfrontness? Do you know anything like that?
I don't know, but your av scares the hell out of me.

[lovejuice]

ragtime is much better than i anticipated. even if the beginning is the best, and i like it less as the book progresses.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I forgot to post my thoughts about Brighton Rock, which I read before A Death in the Family. That book rocked my world. It has one of the best pairs of opening and closing lines ever. Pinkie is one of the most complex, fascinating, and frightening characters around. Totally without remorse, yet somehow slightly sympathetic. Chico, if you happen to read this, I know you've been luke-warm on Greene in the past, but don't let that deter you from reading this one. I think you would definitely dig it.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Oh, and I'll be reading The Little Prince today. Hopefully if I'm not distracted I can finish it quickly. I've heard many good things about it, and I'm hoping to read it with my son, but I want to read through it first by myself.

[ledfloyd]

I don't know, but your av scares the hell out of me.
i thought i was alone.

i've been reading alot of genre stuff lately, joe hill, elmore leonard, michael moorcock. some bill bryson thrown in when i need a break. i've been enjoying it all but i feel the need for something more substantial. i think i'm going to go to the library tomorrow and grab some greek tragedies and maybe machiavelli's the prince. i've also had the urge to dig deeper into some poetry.

[lovejuice]

I forgot to post my thoughts about Brighton Rock...That book rocked my world.

that's my first greene's which unfortunately i didn't like that much. however, that was long time ago, and now with my improved english, it might sing better. (besides after two more of his novels which i really adore.)

[Benny Profane]

I forgot to post my thoughts about Brighton Rock, which I read before A Death in the Family. That book rocked my world. It has one of the best pairs of opening and closing lines ever. Pinkie is one of the most complex, fascinating, and frightening characters around. Totally without remorse, yet somehow slightly sympathetic. Chico, if you happen to read this, I know you've been luke-warm on Greene in the past, but don't let that deter you from reading this one. I think you would definitely dig it.

Noted.

Now when are you going to read The Devil in the White City?

[Kurosawa Fan]

Noted.

Now when are you going to read The Devil in the White City?

Funny you should mention, it was between that and The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay for my next book. I chose the latter. I figured one Pulitzer winning novel let me down, so I'd go with another to hopefully redeem the Prize. I've already started Kavalier and Clay, but it'll be one of the next books I read. Can't promise it'll be next, because I might read a baseball book (maybe one on Jackie or God Save the Fan), but it'll be soon.

[ledfloyd]

The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay is one of my all time favorites.

I just picked up a bunch of greek stuff at the library. Euripides, Thucydides and Sophocles. I also grabbed Haruki Murakami's After Dark and Richard Price's Freedomland.

[lovejuice]

Funny you should mention, it was between that and The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay for my next book. I chose the latter.

DON'T!

sorry, ledfloyd, but i can't really get into michael chabon. my favorite of his is probably spider-man 2 screenplay.

[ledfloyd]

DON'T!

sorry, ledfloyd, but i can't really get into michael chabon. my favorite of his is probably spider-man 2 screenplay.
haha no problem, i didn't write the book. i just enjoy it voraciously. chabon is likely my favorite current author, forgoing guys like cormac who have been around for years. lethem is the only one i can think of off hand i like nearly as much.

[lovejuice]

haha no problem, i didn't write the book. i just enjoy it voraciously. chabon is likely my favorite current author, forgoing guys like cormac who have been around for years. lethem is the only one i can think of off hand i like nearly as much.

how's about you recommend me something else by chabon? does he ever write essay?

[Milky Joe]

You should read Wonder Boys. That's a fantastic novel.

[Sycophant]

Finished Haruki Murakami's short story collection The Elephant Vanishes last night. His beautiful melancholic nostalgia blends well with the naturalistic take he has on the absurd in a way that really connected with me. I'm curious to see how his style would work in a longer piece of fiction, because his first-person memoir style seems best to work in short bursts. I'm thinking about picking up one of his novels, but am also considering just skipping to his next short story collection.

Meanwhile, I started really digging into Blood Meridian again today. I've picked at it for about two months now, so I'm going to try to wrap it up in the next week, maybe two.

[lovejuice]

mel, how's ur reading the phenomenology of spirit? i'm actually dropping on and off hegel's the essential writings, and now in the middle of TPoS chapter. it's mighty interesting especially if you look at it from science perspective. in fact i can't even imagine how a non-scientist perceives this book.

[Melville]

mel, how's ur reading the phenomenology of spirit? i'm actually dropping on and off hegel's the essential writings, and now in the middle of TPoS chapter. it's mighty interesting especially if you look at it from science perspective. in fact i can't even imagine how a non-scientist perceives this book.
I haven't devoted much energy to it. I'll try to get back into it after finishing Narcissus and Goldmund. It must be strange to read selections from it, since it is constructed as a sequence of movements, with each movement relying on the whole of the sequence preceding it.

Thoughts on its relationship with science?

[lovejuice]

Thoughts on its relationship with science?

a lot about how you cannot trust observation which reminds me of the uncertainty principle along with some statistical stuff. i feel like every scientist can learn a lot by reading hegel.

[ledfloyd]

how's about you recommend me something else by chabon? does he ever write essay?
I second the Wonder Boys rec. I'm also a fan of his recent detective novel The Yiddish Policeman's Union which the Coen brothers are adapting. It got mixed reviews. His latest, Gentlemen on the Road, was a serial published in the NY Times, and I'm kinda lukewarm on it. I need to reread it.

I really loved Kavalier and Clay and then I feel in love with him reading Mysteries of Pittsburgh and Wonder Boys, both of which I feel capture college life in Pittsburgh exceptionally well.

He has a book of essays coming out in May through McSweeney's. I'm guessing it's stuff collected from articles he's done for magazines.

[D_Davis]

a lot about how you cannot trust observation which reminds me of the uncertainty principle along with some statistical stuff. i feel like every scientist can learn a lot by reading hegel.

Fun fact!

Rudy Rucker is Hegel's tripple-great grandson.

[bac0n]

Spun_Lepton got me Cormac McCarthy's The Road for me' boithday. It arrived on Friday. I finished it about 10 minutes ago.

This book is going to haunt me for years.

I can't wait to get my hands on more of McCarthy's stuff.

[D_Davis]

Started Lansdale's Lost Echoes. We're reading it for our first book podcast.

While it's not among Lansdale's best, it is still quite good. Even a poor Lansdale is better than a lot of stuff out there.

The dude can frickin' write.

[ledfloyd]

I just finished Haruki Murakami's After Dark. I loved it, I can't wait to read more of his stuff. It's the first thing I've read all year that's really left a mark on me, and I've been reading more than usual this year.

I've been dabbling around with some Greek tragedy too. Interesting stuff.

[megladon8]

Wow, my mom said "Duma Key" was one of the best King books she's ever read.

[ledfloyd]

Wow, my mom said "Duma Key" was one of the best King books she's ever read.
my mom just said the same thing the other day. i'm not very trusting in my mom's taste in literature but i might need to check this out.

[D_Davis]

Wow, my mom said "Duma Key" was one of the best King books she's ever read.

I hear it is pretty awesome.

And speaking of awesome, Lansdale's Lost Echoes is really dang good. I can't wait for this guy to become as popular as he deserves to be. How many major awards does an author need to win before people start buying his books? Although his knack for grotesque situations may prevent him from reaching uber-popularity. Even in this, a more mainstream novel, he goes places that would frighten and embarrass most authors. He is not afraid to go there, there are no lines he will not cross.

And his prose! What glorious, terse, and straightforward prose. I have a feeling that the McCarthy crowd will really get into Lansdale. From what little I've read of McCarthy (just a sampling from a couple of books), I can definitely see that he and Lansdale are at least related to a similar kindred spirit. I want to read a bunch of McCarthy to do a detailed comparison; I think it will make for a fascinating future literary study.

I don't think I'd rank Lost Echoes among Lansdale's best (namely The Bottoms and A Thin Dark Line), but it is still really good.

I think a really well made film of The Bottoms or A Thin Dark Line will catapult his career (although I can't imagine Oprah endorsing Lansdale). I'd love to see someone like Darabont or even the Coens handle a Lansdale adaptation. A few years ago, when my buddy was first getting into McCarthy and I was first getting into Lansdale, we talked about how cool it would be if the Coens made films of their books. One down, one to go!

[D_Davis]

The sci-fi blog, IO9, has a post declaring that science fiction is dead. I've decided to post this here, rather than the sci-thread, because it does make some interesting points about genre lit in general. I especially like the reason in bold.

5 Reasons to stop reading science fiction

http://io9.com/332083/5-reasons-to-stop-reading-science-fiction




Science fiction is doomed! The genre is a toothless wreck, praying to overdose on its pain meds, says a gang of critics. (Actually, they're only talking about the books, and only the books shelved under "science fiction.") The reasons why SF is obsolete or pointless or dead depend on which rant you read. But here are the main ones:
SF is now real life. "We are at last living in an SF scenario," Brian Aldiss said in a recent London Times interview. The article went on to paraphrase: "A collapsing environment, a hyperconnected world, suicide bombers, perpetual surveillance, the discovery of other solar systems, novel pathogens, tourists in space, children drugged with behaviour controllers - it's all coming true at last." It's like SF is a laundry list of predictions, and we've ticked them all off. What about colonizing Mars, though? Why do only the sucky predictions have to come true?
It's been colonized by mainstream literature. Authors like Cormac McCarthy and Kazuo Ishiguro have stolen away our precious science fictional heritage (http://www.storysouth.com/comment/2007/06/read_the_essay_before_you_join .html) and re-branded it as literary fiction. The literary establishment lavishes attention on these appropriating works, but ignore speculative fiction that has similar themes. And somehow, this will cause SF to wither into irrelevance.
It's turned into pure fantasy. People get off on the "sense of wonder" in science fiction, says Bookslut's Paul Kincaid (http://www.bookslut.com/science_fiction_skeptic/2007_12_012076.php). Think of SF as a cosmic crack dealer. But over time, the wonder has gotten bigger and bigger, and authors have given up on trying to provide a rational explanation for it. So the science has become magic, and the SF has become just another kind of fantasy.
The fanbase is ancient. "The literature of youthful, forward-looking openness... is graying," laments David Brin (http://www.nuketown.com/node/2056). At conventions, you see more retirees in scooters than kids. Is it because teh kids are too busy playing video games? Or is it that those older readers have created an impenetrable fan culture and a genre that caters to their finnicky needs? Either way, this demographic trend spells trouble in the long term.
Rackspace is shrinking. Science fiction books are doing well as trade paperbacks (the bigger kind) but are in danger of losing their prominence as mass market paperbacks (the pocket kind), says Tom Doherty (http://www.foundry01.com/macmillan/?p=12), publisher of Tor Books. That means fewer impulse buys at airports and drug stores, which convert new readers to SF.This blog likes to stir the pot, but I tend to agree with some of these ideas, if not the statement itself. Even as a huge sci-fi fan, most of the stuff I read is at least 20 years old - most of it is closer to 40 or 50 years old.

I think a certain kind of science fiction has already died, and more is to follow.


But then there is also this great essay:

http://www.depauw.edu/SFs/backissues/62/luckhurst62art.htm




How many times can a genre die? How often can the death sentence be passed down, and when do repeated stays of execution cease being moments of salvation and become instead sadistic toying with the condemned?


SF is dying; but then SF has always been dying, it has been dying from the very moment of its constitution. Birth and death become transposable: if Gernsback’s pulp genericism produces the "ghetto" and the pogrom of systematic starvation for some, he also names the genre and gives birth to it for others. If the pulps eventually give us the "Golden Age," its passing is death for some and re-birth for others. If the New Wave is the life-saving injection, it is also a spiked drug, a perversion, and the onset of a long degeneration towards inevitable death. If the 1970s is a twilight, a long terminal lingering, the feminists come to the rescue. But then the feminists are also partially responsible, Charles Platt argues, for issuing one final vicious twist of the knife. And what of cyberpunk? Dead before it was even born—or rather dead because it was named. "Requiem for the Cyberpunks" aims to finally kill the label (5). And what now? Christina Sedgewick asks "Can Science Fiction Survive in Postmodern, Megacorporate America?" A new decline, or rather a circling back: SF dying because of its re-commercialization. This is also the thrust of Charles Platt’s claim that "we find ourselves wedded to a form that was once provocative and stimulating but is now crippled, corrupt, mentally retarded, and dying for lack of intensive care" (45).

[Kurosawa Fan]

I think that point in bold is absurd and makes me completely dismissive of anything else they have to say.

[D_Davis]

I think that point in bold is absurd and makes me completely dismissive of anything else they have to say.

Why?

Also remember, these are things that critics are saying - IO9 has just compiled the top 5 arguments people make about sci-fi being dead. Some of these have been refuted in the subsequent essay I posted. This essay is from one of the most scholarly outlets for serious sci-fi criticism around. Really good stuff.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Why?

Cormac McCarthy stole the foundations of their genre? Look, I'm in agreement that genre authors and their work go largely unrecognized, but to put any amount of blame on an author for developing a story is ridiculous. Blame the critics, blame the publishers, I'm okay with that. But to say that McCarthy or any other nationally recognized authors can't write about whatever they want and have to limit themselves as to which genre they can be influenced by/borrow from/write a story from is reductive and petty. I'm not interested in hearing anything else from someone who holds that point of view.

[D_Davis]

Also, did you read the essay linked in the bold statement? It's pretty good...

http://www.storysouth.com/comment/2007/06/read_the_essay_before_you_join .html



Read the essay before you join the reaming

by Jason Sanford

A while back The New York Review of Science Fiction (http://ebbs.english.vt.edu/olp/nyrsf/nyrsf.html)accepted an essay of mine called "Dipping Their Toes in the Genre Pool: The U.S. Literary Establishment's Need-Hate Relationship with Speculative Fiction." Well, I guess the essay has been published because I've already infuriated the first subscriber of that wonderful publication (not that infuriation was my intention).


Matthew Cheney writes a blog called "The Mumpsimus" and evidently my essay caused him to spend (http://mumpsimus.blogspot.com/2007/06/shibboleth-of-literary-establishment.html)"the last hour yelling at all of the various moving boxes" in his apartment. He also has a lot of other truly unique words to express his view of my essay. Cheney's rebuttal consists mainly of arguing that there isn't a true literary establishment and that I'm part of the "special, marginalized club" of science fiction writers who have martyr complexes over not being accepted by the greater literary world.


Now, anyone who knows me will laugh at this last statement. Through my work with storySouth (http://www.storysouth.com/)and the Million Writers Award (http://www.storysouth.com/millionwriters.html), I have tried to show that the best writing exists outside of genre. While I’m a firm believer in Sturgeon's Law that 90% of everything is crap, the remaining 10% can be an amazing thing to behold, whether or not its classified as literary fiction or speculative fiction.