The Book Discussion Thread

[D_Davis]

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.

I totally agree. I find the whole notion of categorization by topic, theme, and style to be quite ridiculous. Especially when some authors seem to be arbitrarily thrown in certain sections.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I totally agree. I find the whole notion of categorization by topic, theme, and style to be quite ridiculous. Especially when some authors seem to be arbitrarily thrown in certain sections.

Oh. Heh. Well, that was an easy discussion. :lol:

You said in your initial post that you especially liked the bolded part, but to me they did a poor job of creating any sympathy, or even establishing a solid point, when they pushed blame on the authors.

[D_Davis]

You said in your initial post that you especially liked the bolded part, but to me they did a poor job of creating any sympathy, or even establishing a solid point, when they pushed blame on the authors.

I like it because of the essay it links to, and what the guy who initially made the argument had to say.

I'm not saying I agree with it, but I like what the dude had to say. I found it interesting, and I think it does raise some interesting questions about the hows and whys of genre classification.

[D_Davis]

I often look at two authors to illustrate the arbitrary nature of genre classification:

Alan Lightman and Rudy Rucker.

Both of these authors are experts in their fields: Rucker in the field of theoretical mathematics and computer science, and Lightman in the field of physics. Both were professors at prestigious schools and both have done a great deal of good in their chosen fields.

They also both write science fiction speculating on real world topics related to their fields of expertise.

However, because Lightman writes in a more serious tone than Rucker, he is shelved in the general fiction section and is often given more mainstream attention than Rucker, an author who is far more gonzo in his approach.

So even though these authors share a similar professional background, and even though they write about similar topics, because of their different styles and the different ways they approach their subjects, they are are shelved in different sections and thus marketed to a different audience.

Personally, I love the heck out of both, but I find the genre distinction made between the two to be ridiculous.

But who, if either, would benefit more from a switch? Would Rucker fare better in the general fiction section, or would Lightman fare better in the sci-fi section, or is it perfectly okay the way it is?

I am not making a judgment call here, just pointing out the arbitrary way in which some books of categorized and marketed.

[Melville]

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.
I'm not sure that I follow you. Hegel specifically criticizes the very idea of distrusting perception, noting that such a distrust relies on the questionable differentiation between perceiver and perception. Also, why would the uncertainty principle or statistical physics make one distrust observation? The former tells us that the observer cannot know everything about a system, and the latter tells us how to make predictions when we have incomplete information about a system; neither suggests to me that we should distrust our observations. I think you're pointing at something more subtle than simple distrust, but I'm not sure what.

[D_Davis]

Finished Lost Echoes...

Pretty good Lansdale.

Not the best, but still pretty, pretty, pretty good.

Has a similar structure to The Bottoms, but it's not nearly as good as that book. I feel as though it lacks Lansdale's uncanny ability to create amazing atmosphere and setting. I never really got a sense of time and place in this one, and that's odd for a Lansdale story, really odd.

I can't fully recommend this to anyone but a Lansdale fan.

Compared to his other more mainstream offerings like The Bottoms and A Fine Dark Line, Lost Echoes is merely mediocre even though it contains more than a handful of awesome moments.

Such is the curse of an author like Lansdale - he's already set the bar so high, multiple times, that not everything can be the best.

[lovejuice]

I'm not sure that I follow you. Hegel specifically criticizes the very idea of distrusting perception, noting that such a distrust relies on the questionable differentiation between perceiver and perception. Also, why would the uncertainty principle or statistical physics make one distrust observation? The former tells us that the observer cannot know everything about a system, and the latter tells us how to make predictions when we have incomplete information about a system; neither suggests to me that we should distrust our observations. I think you're pointing at something more subtle than simple distrust, but I'm not sure what.

you are correct that it's more than "distrust." pardon me for bastarding hegel, but here is how i read him. a "nature/essence" is the truth that is sometimes hidden behind facade of reality, i.e. what is being observed.

it's been a while with my last reading of the uncertainty principle, but let's talk stat. i'm working with the statistics of cloud sizes. if you observe a cloud field during a period of time, and plot their size distribution. you get some sorta nonsense no-function. yet if you combine data over a longer period, says a year, suddenly you see its statistical "nature/essence".

now the question is what's reality and what's truth. in reality, there is no such thing as a cloud field that spans over a period of a year. but in truth, cloud sizes follow some statistics -- due to its thermodynamical and physical nature -- and that stat can be used to predict the size distribution of clouds over a short period even though the result might not always confirms with the observed reality.

[lovejuice]

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?

i find this utterly fault. if anything, it's another way around. the prediction in sci-fi is always off-based and overblown. moreover the internet which is truly the only sci-fi reality has rarely been predicted. (right, d?)


It's been colonized by mainstream literature. Authors like Cormac McCarthy and Kazuo Ishiguro have stolen away our precious science fictional heritage 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.

you might not agree with me here, d, but ishiguro is a very very good writer. a mark of one like him is that in whatever genre he writes, he elevates it into "literature." just like umberto eco and the name of the rose which is in appearance a medieval murder mystery, but there is a mile difference between what he and what people like paul doherty or Pérez-Reverte does.

i kinda think the same with dick and, based on an only novel i have read, moorcock. and i am sure you can argue for many others.

[D_Davis]

i find this utterly fault. if anything, it's another way around. the prediction in sci-fi is always off-based and overblown. moreover the internet which is truly the only sci-fi reality has rarely been predicted. (right, d?)

Well, there was a time when sci-fi lit was concerned with its predictive nature, but I think with the new wave movement we saw trends shifting towards more humanitarian themes. It's like Asimov said, sci-fi really became interesting when it started focusing on humankind's reaction to technology, rather than just the tech itself.

Clarke was from this predictive school of sci-fi lit, and he may have been the last.

In this instance, I think that this kind of sci-fi is dead, but I say, "good riddance."

However, with authors such as Cory Doctrow and Rudy Lucker, and others like these, we are seeing a resurgence in predictive sci-fi, but these authors are on a completely different wavelength than those from the golden era.


you might not agree with me here, d, but ishiguro is a very very good writer. a mark of one like him is that in whatever genre he writes, he elevates it into "literature." just like umberto eco and the name of the rose which is in appearance a medieval murder mystery, but there is a mile difference between what he and what people like paul doherty or Pérez-Reverte does.

i kinda think the same with dick and, based on an only novel i have read, moorcock. and i am sure you can argue for many others.

I agree.

But I also think there can be a problem, and here is where I agree with the notion presented above. I've read a few reviews of McCarthy's The Road in which they praise him for elevating sci-fi conventions to a new level, as if more genuine sci-fi authors haven't already done so - decades ago. They praise him while at the same time they belittle the sci-fi genre.

This is really silly, and uncalled for. It's okay to like something without belittling something else. It's almost as if they need to make an excuse for liking something kind of sci-fi.

It's not McCarthy's fault at all, its the fault of an outsider who has shunned genre fiction, thus rendering his or her perspective totally skewed.

This does bug me.

I have not read The Road, but I am going to, and I expect it to be fantastic. However, there are also a handful of other post-apocalyptic books that are amazing, books that I am sure touch upon similar themes. Once I get around to reading this book, I want to write an essay comparing it to Dick's Dr. Bloodmoney and Miller's A Canticle for Liebowitz.

Eco is another great example, and yes, his fiction is on a different level than most genre authors - he has elevated the art of genre to a literary level, just as Dick, Moorcock, Sturgeon, Bradbury, and others have. I mean, just look at the difference between Foucault's Pendulum and The Da Vinci Code. :)

There are definitely differences within the realms of genre lit - some high, some low, or, that is, some are more deserving of praise. I mean, personally I wouldn't shelve Ursula K. Le Guin and Ann Maccaffrey in the same section even though they are both authors who write fantasy. Le Guin is on a completely different level.

You know, Haruki Murakami has been compared many times to Philip K. Dick. I think he is even called the Japanese Philip K. Dick on the cover of one of his books. I've read some Murakami (a handful of short stories), and I think he is okay (I want to read more), and I see the PKD influence.

However, I have to wonder why it is that Murakami seems to enjoy more mainstream success? Why is he considered "general lit" when PKD is still shelved in the sci-fi section? It doesn't really matter, I just wonder why...

What is it about his stuff that appeals to a more general audience, one that probably wouldn't read PKD? Is it the stigma of the sci-fi section? It Murakami had been shelved in the sci-fi section would he be treated as seriously as he is now? Would PKD benefit from having some of his books in a general fiction section?

I don't know. And like I said, this doesn't really matter, it is just something I think about. I'm sure it mostly has to do with marketing anyhow, and at one time the marketing for sci-fi was really terrible, childish, and disrespectful to the audience and the authors.

Sorry for the rambling...

[D_Davis]

I know I shouldn't (and it is rather silly), but in some ways I kind of do take things like this personally. I guess I should just get used to the notion that the fiction I like will probably always be somewhat marginalized by the mainstream, especially critics and academia.

That's okay.

I know that some of the stuff I read is as good as anything else out there. I should look at the bright side - it's kind of like being in a secret club. I just hope that one day I become eloquent enough to make a strong case that helps to elevate the fiction I enjoy to a more prestigious level.

You know, I would love to be responsible for Sturgeon becoming insanely popular outside of genre circles. This would make me feel good, because I think he is an author who deserves as much praise as any who has ever lived. But then again, this could destroy the secret club, and then we won't have anything left to champion.

[megladon8]

I don't consider "The Road" sci-fi at all.

[D_Davis]

I don't consider "The Road" sci-fi at all.

Why not?

[megladon8]

Why not?


Well it's been 2 years since I read it, and you know how my memory is anyways.

But it's really not a science fiction story at all. No high concepts or philosophical ideas. The environments are post-apocalyptic, but not really sci-fi.

It's the story of a boy and his ill father trying to survive when pretty much everything is against them.

If it were a movie, it'd be a drama, not sci-fi.

[D_Davis]

I see.

I haven't read it, but this is a straight up sci-fi concept/setting:


The Road, in a post-apocalyptic blight of gray skies that drizzle ash, a world in which all matter of wildlife is extinct, starvation is not only prevalent but nearly all-encompassing, and marauding bands of cannibals roam the environment with pieces of human flesh stuck between their teeth.Is it the execution that makes it non-sci-fi for you?

I'm not challenging you, just curious.

[megladon8]

I see.

I haven't read it, but this is a straight up sci-fi concept/setting:

Is it the execution that makes it non-sci-fi for you?


Yes, very much so.

I agree that the concept is very sci-fi - I expected a more sci-fi type story going into it.

But, while the setting is vibrant and apparent, it is not prevalent in the story, and I think the sci-fi elements of the story are very superficial.

It's actually a very simple, personal story that could be told in many other settings. I think the incredibly bleak setting and circumstances just add an extra level of hopelessness and irreversibility (is that even a word?) to it all.

Plus, with current world issues, the idea of nuclear or chemical warfare is a very real fear. It's reminiscent of a lot of the fiction and films that came out during the Cold War.

[D_Davis]

Yes, very much so.

I agree that the concept is very sci-fi - I expected a more sci-fi type story going into it.

But, while the setting is vibrant and apparent, it is not prevalent in the story, and I think the sci-fi elements of the story are very superficial.

It's actually a very simple, personal story that could be told in many other settings. I think the incredibly bleak setting and circumstances just add an extra level of hopelessness and irreversibility (is that even a word?) to it all.

Plus, with current world issues, the idea of nuclear or chemical warfare is a very real fear. It's reminiscent of a lot of the fiction and films that came out during the Cold War.

Interesting.

Thanks.

You should read Dr. Bloodmoney, by PKD.

I am really interested in comparing and contrasting these two books.

I also want to do a compare/contrast with No Country and The Bottoms, by Lansdale.

[megladon8]

Interesting.

Thanks.

You should read Dr. Bloodmoney, by PKD.

I am really interested in comparing and contrasting these two books.

I also want to do a compare/contrast with No Country and The Bottoms, by Lansdale.



"The Bottoms" is one I really want to read!! Let me know when you plan on doing this, as I'd love to read it and give some input.

"Dr. Bloodmoney" is also on my list, especially after your review which made it sound fascinating (it's PKD, who knew??).

I hope you enjoy "The Road", and I hope I haven't steered you away. I know my foot often ends up in my mouth, so take what I said about it not being sci-fi with a grain of salt. In fact, take everything I say that way:)

But I can say, in all honesty, that "The Road" is one of the best books I've ever read. One of the most affecting stories I have experienced in any medium.

[D_Davis]

I'm really looking forward to reading The Road, sci-fi or not.

I'll probably do No Country, and The Bottoms towards the end of summer. The Bottoms is a book that needs to be read during the hot months. Like Twain, Lansdale's worlds are often sweaty and dirty.

[lovejuice]

in a nutshell, i'll say, literatures have more appeal among general public. genre fictions, on the other hand, ask a lot of forgiveness from their readers or more likely fans. you cannot just dig into your first christie's, and expect to love it outright. red herrings here and there. silly twists. real people don't talk or gossip this way. such and such.

a more literature whodunit such as the name of the rose is more "realistic," begs no forgiveness, and, i will say, can be read and appreciated by anyone who has never visited the genre.

also comparing PKD -- a writer i admire -- to murakami -- a writer i don't care -- is really weird.

[D_Davis]

in a nutshell, i'll say, literatures have more appeal among general public. genre fictions, on the other hand, ask a lot of forgiveness from their readers or more likely fans.

I'll agree with some of this.

Genre fiction is, by definition, self referential. Sometimes, it takes a whole body of work by a genre author to really "get it." That is, it is sometimes better to be more versed in a genre before you are able to get something out of it. It takes work, things aren't so blatant. You really need to study, and dig beneath the "power-chords" before you discover the deeper themes.

And it is easier for a more general audience to accept "realism" than it is "transrealism" or a flat out "fantasy."

[lovejuice]

start a portrait of the artist. been good so far.

[Melville]

you are correct that it's more than "distrust." pardon me for bastarding hegel, but here is how i read him. a "nature/essence" is the truth that is sometimes hidden behind facade of reality, i.e. what is being observed.
You're pardoned. Everybody should bastard Hegel at least once in their lives.

Now I see what you're saying. But it's necessary to note that the nature/essence (i.e. the Notion) in Hegel's writing is not really something hidden behind observations, but something that is constructed by the observer in an act of abstracting away from the observed. The essence of an external object is a truth of the mind, a returning of the mind into itself, rather than something in or underlying the object itself.


it's been a while with my last reading of the uncertainty principle, but let's talk stat. i'm working with the statistics of cloud sizes. if you observe a cloud field during a period of time, and plot their size distribution. you get some sorta nonsense no-function. yet if you combine data over a longer period, says a year, suddenly you see its statistical "nature/essence".

now the question is what's reality and what's truth. in reality, there is no such thing as a cloud field that spans over a period of a year. but in truth, cloud sizes follow some statistics -- due to its thermodynamical and physical nature -- and that stat can be used to predict the size distribution of clouds over a short period even though the result might not always confirms with the observed reality.
Gotcha.

[lovejuice]

start a portrait of the artist. been good so far.

:sigh: this shapes out to be one of those great classics i can't admire.

[Melville]

:sigh: this shapes out to be one of those great classics i can't admire.
Where's your beef? I loved the whole structure, the evolving prose style, and the take on autobiography.

Here's what I wrote about its take on autobiography, in response to somebody's idea for an essay on a different site:

It's definitely true that Stephen gradually takes over the narration, and there's probably more than enough stuff to say about that alone. For example, the contrast between the first and last sentence, with the former presenting a story about Stephen as told by his father, and with the latter presenting a statement by Stephen to his father (and to God, but whatever).

If you want to focus on an overarching meta-narrative, I recall thinking that the transition was mostly about a gradual convergence of Stephen with Joyce himself. That is, at the beginning Joyce is presenting his childhood and himself as a child, which are an alien world and an alien person to his current world and current person. The third person narration is necessitated by this difference. By the end, however, Stephen has become identical, or nearly identical, with Joyce, and so the narration has switched into the first person. However, Joyce is still writing about himself, rather than writing himself—the person that he writes about is always at a distance from him. The diary serves as an attempt to get as close as possible to a final, fixed self-identification. Its entries present Stephen's thoughts, and hence Joyce's, as they occurred, erasing the disjunction between Joyce-the-writer-now and his former self, subsuming the Joyce who evolves after completing the novel under the identity of his finalized self-portrait. Of course, the very fact that these final pages are from a diary, something written rather than something lived, serves to remind us of the lingering differance (quoting Derrida can't do any harm) within this final fixity: the self-portrait is an artifice that is never identical with its creator.

[lovejuice]

Where's your beef? I loved the whole structure, the evolving prose style, and the take on autobiography.


it's the case of the parts being better than their sum. finishing it, i dig into criticisms offered on the internet. there are some new aspects along with ones i caught myself. it's a good book to study and discuss. i'm interested in its politics -- ireland conflict is a new areana for me. i like the aesthetic discussion. and joyce is a hell of a writer. i usually hate a sermon within a book, but this one is engaging enough for me to fleetingly read it. (i am a buddhist, so anything overly christian/protestant always disheartens me.) the meta-biography you mention is also thought-provoking.

but at the end, it just doesn't amuse me enough. it fails to leave any impression, except to think of the novel in intellectual term. even though i do not hundred percents agree with this statement, i have to say it's hard to like a book that doesn't engage you, no matter how much of merit it has. (again it might work better for a christian/protestant.)

still i want to read ulysses, and since i really like the beginning and the end of portray, perhaps ulysses will sing me a better tune.

[Milky Joe]

To be fair, I think the whole point of the sermon is to dishearten. I think Joyce was mightily disheartened by it. The whole thing is a vicious attack on that fire and brimstone version of Irish catholicism that Joyce (and the whole of Ireland) had nailed into his brain during his youth.

[lovejuice]

To be fair, I think the whole point of the sermon is to dishearten. I think Joyce was mightily disheartened by it. The whole thing is a vicious attack on that fire and brimstone version of Irish catholicism that Joyce (and the whole of Ireland) had nailed into his brain during his youth.

sorry, when i say "dishearten," i mean "disengage." i usually skip sermons. (bad me.)

[Milky Joe]

Ah, I see.

[Duncan]

The sermon was the only part of A Portrait... that I didn't like, but that's mostly because I'm sick of hearing Irish people complain about religion. It's still a very well written passage. I call it one of my favorite books.

[Melville]

I loved the sermon. It's interesting that some critics have pointed to it as a powerful piece of religious writing and an indicator of the book's lingering faith, while others see it as an attack on Irish Catholicism's "fire and brimstone" Christianity (as Milky Joe called it). I think it does a great job of accomplishing both things simultaneously.

[Milky Joe]

I think the sermon being pointed to as a powerful piece of religious writing is a testament to Joyce's ability as a writer. The man could literally do anything he wanted, and do it well, extraordinarily well, even. A Irish-Catholic sermon on the torments of hell written so well that you'd think he must have transposed it from an actual sermon? Check. A high treatise on applied aesthetics? Check. Ulysses? Check. &etc. etc.

[Melville]

I think the sermon being pointed to as a powerful piece of religious writing is a testament to Joyce's ability as a writer. The man could literally do anything he wanted, and do it well, extraordinarily well, even. A Irish-Catholic sermon on the torments of hell written so well that you'd think he must have transposed it from an actual sermon? Check. A high treatise on applied aesthetics? Check. Ulysses? Check. &etc. etc.
Yeah, he's great. Although I've heard his poetry is pretty weak.

[Qrazy]

Portrait is amazing, as is Joyce.

[megladon8]

KF, I noticed you're reading "The Amazing Adventures of Cavalier and Clay".

Please post some thoughts when you're finished! It's one I've picked up at the book store more times than I can remember.

[Kurosawa Fan]

KF, I noticed you're reading "The Amazing Adventures of Cavalier and Clay".

Please post some thoughts when you're finished! It's one I've picked up at the book store more times than I can remember.

I'm a bit more than halfway through right now, but I'll refrain from commenting until I finish. Too often lately I've praised or bemoaned a book at this point, only to have my opinion completely change by the end.

[ledfloyd]

I just finished Franzen's The Corrections last night. I loved it to death. It's kind of like The Royal Tenenbaums written by Don DeLillo. Great portrait of the nuclear family in postmodern America. The stuff with the father and his battle with Parkinson's is absolutely heartbreaking. That my grandfather has Parkinson's only made it harder to read. Franzen's biting black humor is not to be underestimated either. Top ten of the decade.

Speaking of, Kavalier and Clay is likely my favorite of the decade.

[Milky Joe]

I just finished Franzen's The Corrections last night. I loved it to death. It's kind of like The Royal Tenenbaums written by Don DeLillo. Great portrait of the nuclear family in postmodern America. The stuff with the father and his battle with Parkinson's is absolutely heartbreaking. That my grandfather has Parkinson's only made it harder to read. Franzen's biting black humor is not to be underestimated either. Top ten of the decade.

Yeah, I'm halfway through this and I'm finding myself agreeing wholeheartedly with you. There is so much truth (re sadness) in this novel that it's almost hard to read for the feeling it places squarely in the bottom of your gut. I have to disagree with the criticisms of it raised above. Both stories (the kids and the parents) are equally beautiful and compelling, and I find it strange to think that Franzen isn't ALWAYS "writing to his audience."

[dreamdead]

My only problem with Chabon's Kavalier and Clay is that there's so little to analyze once you finish it. It's eminently readable, and the way in which Chabon utilizes the comic censorship trials as a historical moment is nice, but there seems to be more of a focus on individual character and less of a focus on thematic elements. That is to say, once I finished it, I realized there was nothing really to write about on it. As a "literary critic", that fact depressed me. As a reader, though, I was entertained throughout.

[Duncan]

I finished Division One of Being and Time. It's interesting, but I'm going to take a break from it for awhile. Read something short and breezy.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Yeah, I'm halfway through this and I'm finding myself agreeing wholeheartedly with you. There is so much truth (re sadness) in this novel that it's almost hard to read for the feeling it places squarely in the bottom of your gut. I have to disagree with the criticisms of it raised above. Both stories (the kids and the parents) are equally beautiful and compelling, and I find it strange to think that Franzen isn't ALWAYS "writing to his audience."

Not sure if you're referring to my comment, but if so that's not what I meant at all.

[Milky Joe]

Yeah, it was (different thread I now realize) your comment. What did you mean? Just that he he's better writing characters that are of his own age?

[Kurosawa Fan]

Yeah, it was (different thread I now realize) your comment. What did you mean? Just that he he's better writing characters that are of his own age?

That's exactly what I meant, and I want to stress that I mean that only in the context of this novel. I've never read anything else by him, and I'm certainly not implying that Franzen couldn't or shouldn't write beyond his own age group. That said, with The Corrections, I thought there was a noticeable dip in quality when the story shifted to the parents. I felt like he couldn't get a grasp on them. They just didn't feel as authentic as their children. I really enjoyed when the story focused around their children though, and I'd certainly be interested to read more from Franzen.

[ledfloyd]

That's exactly what I meant, and I want to stress that I mean that only in the context of this novel. I've never read anything else by him, and I'm certainly not implying that Franzen couldn't or shouldn't write beyond his own age group. That said, with The Corrections, I thought there was a noticeable dip in quality when the story shifted to the parents. I felt like he couldn't get a grasp on them. They just didn't feel as authentic as their children. I really enjoyed when the story focused around their children though, and I'd certainly be interested to read more from Franzen.
I could get on board with that. However, the portrayal of the Father's Parkinson's is devastating. I can kind of see a bit of a dip with the Mother. Still, a dip from the kids is still damn good stuff.


My only problem with Chabon's Kavalier and Clay is that there's so little to analyze once you finish it. It's eminently readable, and the way in which Chabon utilizes the comic censorship trials as a historical moment is nice, but there seems to be more of a focus on individual character and less of a focus on thematic elements. That is to say, once I finished it, I realized there was nothing really to write about on it. As a "literary critic", that fact depressed me. As a reader, though, I was entertained throughout.
What is wrong with a focus on character?

I enjoy the glee I feel reading his prose and becoming involved in the stories. I also feel he captures perfectly the excitement of reading comics as a kid. Joe Kavalier is an amazing character. I just rarely feel as excited reading a novel as I do reading this one. Maybe there's not much subtext, but I'm ok with that.

[lovejuice]

I think the sermon being pointed to as a powerful piece of religious writing is a testament to Joyce's ability as a writer. The man could literally do anything he wanted, and do it well, extraordinarily well, even.

as much as i don't like the over-all book, these are statements i can fully endorse. he's amazing as a writer.

[D_Davis]

Check this out:

http://trashotron.com/agony/audio/joe_r_lansdale.mp3

It's an awesome interview with Joe R. Lansdale. Man is it cool to hear his voice, the southern twang is just awesome. He talks about Bubba Ho Tep, Batman, Mark Twain, growing up in Texas, movies, writing, Hap and Leonard (two of his most awesome characters), the small press, horror, and a bunch of other stuff.

This is a great way to get acquainted with one of America's most interesting and stylish novelists (and he also works with screenplays, cartoons, and comic books). He is a living treasure of prose, one who should be celebrated by more.

[Marley]

I started reading again and finished Chuck Palahnik's Lullaby yesterday. It was my first novel by this twisted author and after hearing so much enthusiastic praise for him I was slightly disappointed. Perhaps this wasn't the best starting place. Nevertheless, it was a quick read with an interesting premise and I don't regret reading it but the book really didn't leave any kind of impression or much to dwell on once it was over.

Maybe I'll give Lolita another try next.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I started reading again and finished Chuck Palahnik's Lullaby yesterday. It was my first novel by this twisted author and after hearing so much enthusiastic praise for him I was slightly disappointed. Perhaps this wasn't the best starting place. Nevertheless, it was a quick read with an interesting premise and I don't regret reading it but the book really didn't leave any kind of impression or much to dwell on once it was over.

Maybe I'll give Lolita another try next.

Palahniuk kinda sucks. I used to really like the guy, but he's a one-trick pony that peaked at Survivor. Read that and Fight Club if you're compelled to read more of his stuff, and then just stop (although I liked Choke as well, especially the ending).

[Marley]

Palahniuk kinda sucks. I used to really like the guy, but he's a one-trick pony that peaked at Survivor. Read that and Fight Club if you're compelled to read more of his stuff, and then just stop (although I liked Choke as well, especially the ending).

Thanks for the heads up. Survivor will be the next Palahniuk that I read but it won't be for a while.

[Mysterious Dude]

So did Mitya kill that guy, or what?!

[ledfloyd]

I'm rereading A Confederacy of Dunces for the 5th or 6th time. This book gets more hysterical every time I read it. I've never read another book that delivers the laughs as consistently as this one.

After I finish it I'm going to tackle Moby Dick. I hear it's a whale of a tale.

[Duncan]

So did Mitya kill that guy, or what?!

No. It was Smerdyakov.

[Marley]

I forgot how great Pullman's His Dark Materials actually is. Shame on me. As a fantasy junkie it definitely is one of the pinnacle works of the genre. Please read it if you haven't already.

Next up: The Road

[Duncan]

Finished Franny and Zooey last night. Thought it was very good. I'm always impressed by authors who can convey so much through dialogue. Liked The Catcher In The Rye better, though.

[Melville]

I read Dick's A Scanner Darkly over the weekend. It definitely has its flaws, but overall it was pretty good stuff. The mid-paragraph insertion of technical definitions and other languages to evoke the character's psychological disintegration was great, reminding me a lot of the end of Dave Sim's Minds.

[D_Davis]

Glad you liked ASD. It's a great book. Blows me away every time I read it. Dick's mastery of character is incredible. He totally nails the little quirks and traits of his creations, and the dialog is genuine and quite funny without feeling like forced druggie-talk.

I'd be interested to see what you would think of one of Dick's totally gonzo works like UBIK, Three Stigmata, Divine Invasion, or VALIS.

I recently got a collection of 40 scholarly articles on Dick (written from 1974-1992), from the Journal of Science Fiction Studies. It looks like a great read.

[D_Davis]

Finished Franny and Zooey last night. Thought it was very good. I'm always impressed by authors who can convey so much through dialogue. Liked The Catcher In The Rye better, though.

You should definitely check out William Peter Blatty's The Ninth Configuration then. He conveys so much narrative through the dialog of the characters. It is absolutely incredible. One of the best books I've ever read. I've read it 2.5 times now in the last couple of weeks. I just keep going back to it. If you can find it, give it a go.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Finished The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay. I can see the complaints about it being a bit... inconsequential? I guess that's an accurate word. There really isn't anything left to think about when all is said and done. That's not necessarily a terrible thing, but it makes the experience a bit more forgettable when there's nothing to consider when it's over. I'm on the fence about Chabon as an author. His penchant for taking two pages to describe every single character, building, part of a city, etc. is a bit of an annoyance at times. It doesn't help flesh out those characters and settings, but rather reads like a Cliff Notes summary. The only characters who I felt close to were Joe, Sam, and Rosa, despite his efforts to get me acquainted to anyone and everyone who passed through along the way. I also felt like at times he was writing with a thesaurus at his side. In fact, there were two occasions (which have now slipped my mind since they were in the first half of the book) in which I'm fairly certain he used a word incorrectly. At the very least those words were very awkward, though this seemed to tone itself down as the novel progressed. I also thought some of the foreshadowing was clunky. I mean, a thunderstorm before the story takes a sad and tragic turn? Really? A bit lame.


Still, as a character driven drama, it's quite a solid story. I feel like I'm being a bit harsh, and that could be my expectations getting in the way. I was certainly never bored, and I liked that things felt like they progressed naturally rather than forcing an agenda. Everything doesn't always work out for the best, which is a good thing, and the dramatic moments have some nice weight to them. I'm certainly glad I read it, and I'd read another work of Chabon's in the future.

[megladon8]

Cool, KF.

I'd still like to read it, but it does sound a bit...er...not great?

How much did the comic book stuff come into play?

[Kurosawa Fan]

Cool, KF.

I'd still like to read it, but it does sound a bit...er...not great?

How much did the comic book stuff come into play?

The comic books are prevalent throughout. They're a backdrop for everything that's going on around Joe and Sam.

[megladon8]

The comic books are prevalent throughout. They're a backdrop for everything that's going on around Joe and Sam.


Cool. I'll definitely check it out at some point.

Every time I've gone to Midtown Comics in NYC, they've been pimping the book out like crazy.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Oh, and I decided to squeeze in The Soul of Baseball, which is a really quick read. I read through 60 pages in a flash last night. I think I'm really going to enjoy it.

[Marley]

Started A Long Way Down yesterday because my Library didn't have The Road reserved for me even when it said otherwise on their website. Nick Hornby has always been one of my favorite authors and he continues to impress with his latest effort about four people who are on the verge of suicide and find healing through one another. One critic said "It's like The Breakfast Club rewritten by Samuel Beckett" which is pretty darn accurate. I'm really enjoying this one so far.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Started A Long Way Down yesterday because my Library didn't have The Road reserved for me even when it said otherwise on their website. Nick Hornby has always been one of my favorite authors and he continues to impress with his latest effort about four people who are on the verge of suicide and find healing through one another. One critic said "It's like The Breakfast Club rewritten by Samuel Beckett" which is pretty darn accurate. I'm really enjoying this one so far.

I'm a big Hornby fan as well, but this is my least favorite of his novels. I remember almost nothing about it less than a year after reading it, and what I do remember isn't very favorable. I have Slam waiting for me on my shelf, so I'm hoping he redeems himself.

[Marley]

I'm a big Hornby fan as well, but this is my least favorite of his novels. I remember almost nothing about it less than a year after reading it, and what I do remember isn't very favorable. I have Slam waiting for me on my shelf, so I'm hoping he redeems himself.

100 more pages to go. I'd like to finish the book before forming a final opinion of the book and compared to About a Boy or High Fidelity it does fall short of matching the brilliance of those two. I still think it is a very enjoyable read.

I haven't read Slam yet so tell me if it is any good when you get around to it.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I haven't read Slam yet so tell me if it is any good when you get around to it.

Will do.

I finished The Soul of Baseball today. Wonderful read. At times it's perhaps a bit too sentimental, but with someone like Buck O'Neill that's understandable. Highly recommended to anyone, regardless of whether you're a baseball fan or not. The book is more about celebrating life than anything else.

I'll be moving on to Manhunt next.

[Lucky]

I could not put Veronika Decides to Die down. I haven't had a book capture my attention like this in years. I finished it in a 24 hour period and my mind is left buzzing with philisophical tidbits I've never even bothered to entertain before. Any other suggestions by Coelho? I've read (and loved) The Alchemist years ago and am looking forward to exploring the rest of his catalog.

[Benny Profane]

I'll be moving on to Manhunt next.

Just seeing the title like that (without the 12 Day Chase part) made me think momentarily you were headed out on some homo-erotic mission around your neighborhood in Michigan. My bad.

Anyway, I started it last night too.

Which means I finally finished Mason & Dixon by Thomas Pynchon. Took me about 5 weeks, but it's 775 pages, and I slowed down towards the conclusion because I didn't want it to end. It ranks up there with one of the best books I've ever read. I don't even know where to start with a review, so I'll leave it at that.

[lovejuice]

Any other suggestions by Coelho? I've read (and loved) The Alchemist years ago and am looking forward to exploring the rest of his catalog.

anything but the valkyrie. that book is one big SUCK. (and yes, i too love the alchemist.)

[Kurosawa Fan]

Just seeing the title like that (without the 12 Day Chase part) made me think momentarily you were headed out on some homo-erotic mission around your neighborhood in Michigan. My bad.


See, that would go in the Random Thoughts thread.

[Marley]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/1573223026.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

What makes life worth living? This is the fundamental question of Nick Hornby's "A Long Way Down" that is instigated by the attempted comical suicide of four strangers who coincidentally pick the same block tower to jump off of on New Year's Eve. This is definitely one of the quickest reads in recent memory and much of that has to do with Nick Hornby's swiftly elegant writing style, snappy dialogue and natural story-telling voice. He is one of my favorite authors with High Fidelity and About a Boy being two of the best novels I have read in my entire life so suffice it to say, my expectations were exceedingly high. It was naive of me to think that Hornby would be able to top himself with his latest work and while it wasn't a bad book by any means it definitely didn't resonate with me as much as I initially hoped it would. Perhaps I was expecting something a little more inspirational or profound (after all, his novel is about suicide and what makes life worth living) and it was niether. However, the greatest strength of this novel is that Hornby manages to be add a refreshing sense of humor to the gloomy subject matter and use it cleverly to expose the selfishly ridiculousness of committing such an act. I applaud Hornby for staying away from any kind of cliched redemption for his flawed characters and taking a more realistic approach that is funny as much as it is serious. If only the novel contained a little more depth instead of providing the obvious sentiments regarding suicide it would have truely reached a level of greatness. Fans of Hornby's previous novels should find it engaging but for newcomers to his work I wouldn't suggest this book as a good starting place.

[lovejuice]

the man who was thursday can be anything from god gift to mankind in a book format to the shittiest piece of writing. the same is true, genre-wise. it's detective, noir, comic, spiritual, nightmarish, political allegory, magical realism, and many others. to me, it's viking, but it's also a book i won't recommend to anyone except as a curiosity; how a person will interpret its mixed-bagness. i'm really tempted to offer it as the book of the month for may.

[Benny Profane]

Ugh. Save it.

[lovejuice]

Ugh. Save it.

so you don't like it?

[Benny Profane]

so you don't like it?

It's one of the worst books I've ever read.

[lovejuice]

It's one of the worst books I've ever read.

very understandable. the novel literally disintegrates itself. the middle section is annoying predictable -- my biggest beef. it can get insufferably didactic. but by the time we reach the balloon chasing scene i feel so spiritual uplifted. not to sound condescending, imo, it's a novel that can be easily misunderstood. chesterton messes a lot with your expectation -- its genre-hopping after all will put the host to shame. i think of it as more comic, spiritual, and magical realism -- there's even a sort of little-prince-children-book feel -- than detective, noir, and political allegory.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I really liked it, but since 3 of us have already read it, having it be the book of the month for May wouldn't be the wisest idea. Especially considering the lack of participation in these things thus far.

[lovejuice]

I really liked it, but since 3 of us have already read it, having it be the book of the month for May wouldn't be the wisest idea. Especially considering the lack of participation in these things thus far.

oh, i don't think i will have it as my selection since i have set my eye on one particular title for so long.

[Marley]

Reading "A Dirty Job" by Christopher Moore. This guy is shaping up to be my favorite author.

[lovejuice]

probably i'll read the zero, and after that manhunt.

[Kurosawa Fan]

probably i'll read the zero.

:pritch::pritch::pritch:

[megladon8]

"The Zero" has been on my shelf for a while, too.

[lovejuice]

the zero is viking. only 60 pages left. very differnt from what i expected. if memory serves me right, kf mentioned the similarity to catch 22. however i find the book not as humorous and much more depressing. in fact i have to catch myself not to read too much in one sitting; otherwise, it drains all my energy for a day. i really love how remy's condition reflects the ill and the beauty of our society. kinda like a more philosophical version of memento.

[Kurosawa Fan]

the zero is viking. only 60 pages left. very differnt from what i expected. if memory serves me right, kf mentioned the similarity to catch 22. however i find the book not as humorous and much more depressing. in fact i have to catch myself not to read too much in one sitting; otherwise, it drains all my energy for a day. i really love how remy's condition reflects the ill and the beauty of our society. kinda like a more philosophical version of memento.

Yeah, I did compare it to Catch-22, but you're absolutely right, it's certainly less humorous. The two books just seemed to have identical atmospheres. They both submerged me into a hazy, dream-like state every time I picked them up. And like you say, after I'd read The Zero for awhile, it was hard for me to pull myself out of that world, much like Catch-22.

[lovejuice]

Yeah, I did compare it to Catch-22, but you're absolutely right, it's certainly less humorous. The two books just seemed to have identical atmospheres. They both submerged me into a hazy, dream-like state every time I picked them up. And like you say, after I'd read The Zero for awhile, it was hard for me to pull myself out of that world, much like Catch-22.

finished it, and yes, way wonderful. the book's easy to read regardless of its being fragmented and most of the time readers are left in the dark -- just as the main character. i would have guessed 320 pages are too long for a book of this nature. turn out walter's prose is so absorbing i don't mind the length at all.

i love its post-modernistic approach. this perhaps is what people in the 80s feels like reading white noise -- the book i find rather irrelevant today. i'm going to venture a wild guess, kf, and suggest you check out doctorow's ragtime. imo, the two share many similarities.

[Kurosawa Fan]

i love its post-modernistic approach. this perhaps is what people in the 80s feels like reading white noise -- the book i find rather irrelevant today. i'm going to venture a wild guess, kf, and suggest you check out doctorow's ragtime. imo, the two share many similarities.

I'll look for it the next time I'm at B&N. Thanks for the recommendation, and I'm ecstatic that you liked the book seemingly as much as I did.

[lovejuice]

i have this funny notion. if you have to suffer from a condition, do you prefer leonard's or remy's? remy seems to retain some of his long term memory, but he's also living a life of an evil twin. leonard at least can account for his every action.

spoiler for memento
forgetting in memento is a redemption for its main character. leonard can go on with his life because of his ability to forget. remy, on the other hand, suffers from it. the book condemns our culture of short term memory.
really awesome book. and i'll say the main character of the zero lives a life that even leonard will shun. poor guy. :cry:

[Ezee E]

Finished David Copperfield. It felt like an assignment in high school, but it is alright. I'd rather read others.

[Marley]

Started "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" today. I'm really digging Kundera's writing style. Anyone a fan of this one?

[Ezee E]

I'm going for a light, most likely quick read next. And I'm sure everyone here in Match Cut that knows about this hates it, but meh, it's I Hope They Serve Beer In Hell.

Then I'll move on to a Michaelangelo biography.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Started "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" today. I'm really digging Kundera's writing style. Anyone a fan of this one?

I liked this book quite a bit, but it's the only one of his I've read. I'm pretty sure he's lovejuice's favorite author. If not favorite, then close to it. He seems pretty obsessed. :)

Oh, and I watched the film adaptation recently and wasn't impressed.

[lovejuice]

Started "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" today. I'm really digging Kundera's writing style. Anyone a fan of this one?

fan of this one? fan of kundera? fan of "The Unbearable Lightness of Being"? you, sir, don't you notice my happy birthday kundera thread? as kf mentions, i'm obsessed with the man. he is among the only three authors from which i can say, more or less, i have read all their books. in fact i even go so far as to hunt down some of the harder to acquire play, and his earlier music compositions.

in short, yes, kundera owns my ass.

speaking of the movie, i think, henry & june is a more faithful adaptation of LIGHTNESS than LIGHTNESS itself is.

[Sven]

I didn't mention that a few weeks ago I finished The Power and the Glory and it was ecstatic.

[Melville]

Has anybody read The Palm-Wine Drinkard by Amos Tutuola? It's a Nigerian folk tale of Tutuola's own invention, written in Pidgin English. It has some great lines like "We could not travel on the Deads' road because of fearful dead babies, etc." and "We had sold our death to somebody at the door for the sum of £70:18:6d and lent our fear to somebody at the door as well on interest of £3:10:0d per month, so we did not care about death and we did not fear again."

[Kurosawa Fan]

I didn't mention that a few weeks ago I finished The Power and the Glory and it was ecstatic.

It's in my top five books ever. It will likely have a permanent place there. In other words, you rock.

[Duncan]

Has anybody read The Palm-Wine Drinkard by Amos Tutuola? It's a Nigerian folk tale of Tutuola's own invention, written in Pidgin English. It has some great lines like "We could not travel on the Deads' road because of fearful dead babies, etc." and "We had sold our death to somebody at the door for the sum of £70:18:6d and lent our fear to somebody at the door as well on interest of £3:10:0d per month, so we did not care about death and we did not fear again."
You ever finish Narcissus and Goldmund?

[Duncan]

So I finished the Upanishads tonight. I am not won over by it, but of all the religious texts I have read I find it the most appealing. It was my introduction to Hinduism aside from basic common knowledge. I liked the tension between the Self and pantheism, and the conclusion that both are possible. Most of all I liked pantheism presented as a source of apotheosis for the Self. I think it expresses feelings that I've had that when put into writing I can't bring myself to agree with, but nonetheless find very attractive. I also found its emphasis on personal perception interesting. Lines like, "But in the ocean of Spirit the seer is alone in beholding his own immensity." There are, of course, many things I disagree with. As with Buddhism there is the goal of overcoming desire which I have always found problematic. Still, a great read. A much different book than what I was expecting.

[lovejuice]

It's in my top five books ever. It will likely have a permanent place there. In other words, you rock.

really, kf, i want a greene's recommendation. i love POWER and even HEART -- which i know you don't. i'm not a big fan of BRIGHTON. what should i read next?

[Kurosawa Fan]

really, kf, i want a greene's recommendation. i love POWER and even HEART -- which i know you don't. i'm not a big fan of BRIGHTON. what should i read next?

For a very quick, very good read I'd go with The Tenth Man.

[Mara]

Just read The Glass Castle by Jeannette Walls. It's a weirder-family-than-thou memoir that shows Walls' journalistic background by staying away from self-pity and letting the facts speak for themselves. It's not as funny or outlandish as, say, Running with Scissors, but has a deeper emotional aspect and shows how no matter how badly you may be treated by family, they are still family and you can't stop loving them, even if you can't respect them.

Not life-changing, or anything, but a decent read.

[D_Davis]

Seattle Library book sale today!

An entire military hanger filled with $1 books.

This is going to be awesome.

[Boner M]

Can anyone recommend some Kobo Abe, outside of the novels that inspired the three Teshigahara films in that recent Criterion box?

[Ezee E]

Seattle Library book sale today!

An entire military hanger filled with $1 books.

This is going to be awesome.
What did you end up with?

[D_Davis]

What did you end up with?

Check the purchased thread....

[Mara]

Just finished Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen and I'm quite disappointed. A murder mystery revolving around a 1931 circus train-- what could go wrong? The entire thing felt flat and forced, with emotions stated ("I love her") but never felt. I'm actually amazed that a female writer created such boring female characters, too. The ending was implausible and I'm not entirely sure why I spent the afternoon getting to it.

Also, it was written in the present tense, which I found annoying.

[D_Davis]

Also, it was written in the present tense, which I found annoying.

I like present tense when it is done right. It conveys a sense of immediacy.

The novel I'm working on now is in present tense - I like writing in the tense as well.

[Mara]

I like present tense when it is done right. It conveys a sense of immediacy.


I should have specified: in this particular instance, I found it annoying. I've seen it used quite effectively.

[Melville]

You ever finish Narcissus and Goldmund?
Yeah. Although it centered on themes that are very important to me, I thought its exploration of those themes was blunt to the point of being pedantic. The whole thing seemed too straightforward in its style, with the prose bluntly stating themes and characters' thoughts rather than conveying them in more interesting ways. While that straightforwardness could be made to work if it was reduced to the extreme simplicity (in the "direct or guileless" sense of the word) of a folk tale or if it dealt in more detail with its philosophical issues, but it seemed kind of stranded in between. I also just can't get behind its notions of femininity/motherhood/Life.

I really wanted to like it, and its basic concept had a lot of potential, but it just didn't work for me.

[Benny Profane]

Staying on my historical nonfiction kick I started Over the Edge of the World: Magellan's Terrifying Circumnavigation of the Globe by Laurence Bergreen last night. I can tell this will be another electrifying read.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Finished my Manhunt and moved on to The Big Over Easy by Jasper Fforde. It's a fun read thus far.

[lovejuice]

Finished my Manhunt and moved on to The Big Over Easy by Jasper Fforde. It's a fun read thus far.

oh, i want to know how to feel about TBOE. I over have this fondness for Fforde.

[Qrazy]

Someday I'll write a book entirely in the second person... no one steal this idea from me.

[D_Davis]

Someday I'll write a book entirely in the second person... no one steal this idea from me.

I recently read a book by Norman Partridge written in second person, present tense if I remember correctly. It was awesome.


I started The Creation by E. O. Wilson today on the way home from work. Good stuff.

[Qrazy]

I recently read a book by Norman Partridge written in second person, present tense if I remember correctly. It was awesome.


Mother fucker stole my idea.

[D_Davis]

Mother fucker stole my idea.

Dark Harvest

I don't think the entire thing is in 2nd person - not like a choose your own adventure or something - but enough is to say it is. He addresses the reader, and plays upon our common knowledge of horror conventions, and he often tells us what we are seeing as if he is directing a camera. It contains some of the coolest transitions I've ever read in a book, very cinematic, unique, and artfully done.


Isn't Italo Calvino's If on a Winter's Night a Traveler in 2nd person?

[ledfloyd]

Isn't Italo Calvino's If on a Winter's Night a Traveler in 2nd person?
Every other chapter is. Used to great effect.

I've never read a book written entirely in 2nd person that I liked. Tom Robbin's Half Asleep in Frog Pajamas uses it but I found it annoying and pointless.

[D_Davis]

Every other chapter is. Used to great effect.

I've never read a book written entirely in 2nd person that I liked. Tom Robbin's Half Asleep in Frog Pajamas uses it but I found it annoying and pointless.

Cool.

It's probably best use as a literary device for effect.

[Duncan]

Yeah. Although it centered on themes that are very important to me, I thought its exploration of those themes was blunt to the point of being pedantic. The whole thing seemed too straightforward in its style, with the prose bluntly stating themes and characters' thoughts rather than conveying them in more interesting ways. While that straightforwardness could be made to work if it was reduced to the extreme simplicity (in the "direct or guileless" sense of the word) of a folk tale or if it dealt in more detail with its philosophical issues, but it seemed kind of stranded in between. To be honest, I felt this way a little too. Especially near the beginning. I came around by the end though. I think his prose in general is rather guileless, except perhaps towards the end of Steppenwolf. I find his lack of irony and honesty quite effective. Narcissus seems much closer to me than Goldmund, so I was taken aback by the ending. Like I had been left behind without realizing it. Where you found bluntness I found an almost elemental power that moved me more than I care to remember.


I also just can't get behind its notions of femininity/motherhood/Life. His Jungian influence is the only thing I don't wholly appreciate in his writings.

Anyway, sorry it didn't really work for you. I still recommend reading some more of his books. He was awarded the Nobel Prize mostly for The Glass Bead Game, which is my favorite novel on the right day.

[lovejuice]

He was awarded the Nobel Prize mostly for The Glass Bead Game, which is my favorite novel on the right day.

i'm always perplexed by this. many people claim such and such writer win a nobel prize for such and such book. can a writer be awarded the prize for a single piece of work?

and i really like N&G, but it was way too long ago for me to contribute any thing of significance.


I find his lack of irony and honesty quite effective.

indeed. when people gain certain level of intellect, they adopt an irony of some form. it's quite uncommon for a wise writer to be irony-free like HH.

[Duncan]

i'm always perplexed by this. many people claim such and such writer win a nobel prize for such and such book. can a writer be awarded the prize for a single piece of work? I don't think so. I said "mostly" for that book though. Then again, a physicist can get the Nobel prize for one paper.

[D_Davis]

The Creation is really good.

It is reminding me of the parts I've read of David Suzuki's The Sacred Balance.

Given Wilson's pedigree, I'm sure Suzuki has been greatly influenced.

I believe in the sacred connection of spirituality and nature, and I have often wondered why there aren't more religious folks fighting for the environment. After all, if this is a god's creation, shouldn't the god's followers, more than anything, want to protect it as its stewards?

Unfortunately, especially in modern western religions, it seems as though religious people have taken a blank-check approach to God's creation - it's ours, it was made for us, we'll do what we damn well please with it.

Screw off!

I look outside of my window (living in Seattle is pretty damn beautiful) and I see the creation all around me, and it fills me awe and humbleness. I need to do more to protect it.

[lovejuice]

Then again, a physicist can get the Nobel prize for one paper.

yep. but, i think, it is the literature prize as lifetime achievement award that throws people off. you can't guess how many people i encounter have this misconception; camus got it from the plague, grass got it from the tin drum, naipaul got it from half a life, and so on. until i start to feel like perhaps it's me that is mistaken.

[Melville]

i'm always perplexed by this. many people claim such and such writer win a nobel prize for such and such book. can a writer be awarded the prize for a single piece of work?
The prize is awarded for a body of work, but the Academy frequently cites an individual work. The reasoning behind each prize in literature is at the bottom of the Wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_in_Literature

[lovejuice]

The prize is awarded for a body of work, but the Academy frequently cites an individual work. The reasoning behind each prize in literature is at the bottom of the Wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_in_Literature

mann was awarded "principally for his great novel, buddenbrooks"? quite unflattering considered it's his first book. but i agree that it's very good.

[Melville]

mann was awarded "principally for his great novel, buddenbrooks"? quite unflattering considered it's his first book. but i agree that it's very good.
I'm embarrassed to admit that I've never read anything by Mann.

[Mysterious Dude]

I just discovered that Cormac McCarthy stole his "the gettin' place" joke (No Country for Old Men) from William Faulkner (The Sound and the Fury).

My mind = blown.

[lovejuice]

I'm embarrassed to admit that I've never read anything by Mann.

his books are huge, and not quite as much pay off as dostoevsky's. i'll recommend death in venice; some shorts are way fantastic and serve well as an intro to the guy.

N&G aside, if you like HH, there is a stronge chance you might feel the same with mann.

[Qrazy]

Turgenev's Rudin was rather scrumptious.

[SirNewt]

The Creation is really good.

It is reminding me of the parts I've read of David Suzuki's The Sacred Balance.

Given Wilson's pedigree, I'm sure Suzuki has been greatly influenced.

I believe in the sacred connection of spirituality and nature, and I have often wondered why there aren't more religious folks fighting for the environment. After all, if this is a god's creation, shouldn't the god's followers, more than anything, want to protect it as its stewards?

Unfortunately, especially in modern western religions, it seems as though religious people have taken a blank-check approach to God's creation - it's ours, it was made for us, we'll do what we damn well please with it.

Screw off!

I look outside of my window (living in Seattle is pretty damn beautiful) and I see the creation all around me, and it fills me awe and humbleness. I need to do more to protect it.

“For it is just like a man about to go on a journey, who called his own slaves and entrusted his possessions to them. 15 “To one he gave five talents, to another, two, and to another, one, each according to his own ability; and he went on his journey. 16 “Immediately the one who had received the five talents went and traded with them, and gained five more talents. 17 “In the same manner the one who had received the two talents gained two more. 18 “But he who received the one talent went away, and dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money.
19 “Now after a long time the master of those slaves came and settled accounts with them. 20 “The one who had received the five talents came up and brought five more talents, saying, ‘Master, you entrusted five talents to me. See, I have gained five more talents.’ 21 “His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’
22 “Also the one who had received the two talents came up and said, ‘Master, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more talents.’ 23 “His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’
24 “And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. 25 ‘And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.’
26 “But his master answered and said to him, ‘You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow and gather where I scattered no seed. 27 ‘Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest. 28 ‘Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.’
29 “For to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. 30 “Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Seems pretty clear to me.

E. O. Wilson actually spoke at my school just after the release of that book. As I was sitting there waiting for the lecture to begin a disgustingly nerdy Biology student was prattling on about how Wilson had lost his mind a little, trying to reach out to evangelicals. He'd punctuate his sentences with that nauseating laugh only true nerds can achieve. I wanted to turn around and punch him in the mouth. *shivers*

[D_Davis]

E. O. Wilson actually spoke at my school just after the release of that book. As I was sitting there waiting for the lecture to begin a disgustingly nerdy Biology student was prattling on about how Wilson had lost his mind a little, trying to reach out to evangelicals. He'd punctuate his sentences with that nauseating laugh only true nerds can achieve. I wanted to turn around and punch him in the mouth. *shivers*

Your mentioning of Wilson in the other thread is what reminded me to check this book out. Thanks! It's been a great find, and I will definitely be reading more of his stuff.

He is a tad condescending, but given his POV, and the position of so many religious people here in the west, it is understandable.

[SirNewt]

Your mentioning of Wilson in the other thread is what reminded me to check this book out. Thanks! It's been a great find, and I will definitely be reading more of his stuff.

He is a tad condescending, but given his POV, and the position of so many religious people here in the west, it is understandable.

May the deities, artificial or otherwise, bless the exchange of ideas facilitated by the internet.

[ledfloyd]

Paul Auster's New York Trilogy is amazing. Amazing.

[lovejuice]

Paul Auster's New York Trilogy is amazing. Amazing.

:sigh: a lot of people agree with you. oh well...i might give it another chance.

[Qrazy]

Anyone read any Knut Hamsun? Just read Pan, it was pretty damn good.

[megladon8]

Paul Auster's New York Trilogy is amazing. Amazing.


Yep.

I think "City of Glass" is my favorite.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Anyone read any Knut Hamsun? Just read Pan, it was pretty damn good.

I read Hunger, and while it was good, I found it a tad repetitive and not terribly memorable.

[Qrazy]

I read Hunger, and while it was good, I found it a tad repetitive and not terribly memorable.

Ah, I've only read Pan.

[Melville]

Anyone read any Knut Hamsun? Just read Pan, it was pretty damn good.

Hunger - 10
Pan - 10
Mysteries - 9.5
Victoria - 8.5

[lovejuice]

fans of kafka check out gombrowitz's ferdydurke. it's quite amazing.

[SirNewt]

Well, I have 'Moby Dick' next, and then I'm thinking of starting on Praust. I think I really hate myself.

That's if I don't break down and reread either some Calvino or 'The Garden of Forking Paths'. And then there's always that last 600 pages of Solzhenitsyn to finish. *sigh* What the hell am I doing sitting at this computer?!

[megladon8]

So, I've begun reading Thomas Pynchon's "The Crying of Lot 49".

Benny Profane's thoughts on his work made his books sound just too incredible to resist.

B.P. also steered me towards this great site Thomas Pynchon Wiki (http://www.pynchonwiki.com/), and said it was a great reading companion with all of his work. And yes, it's been a great help.

I read the first two chapters tonight, and I read each of them twice. The first time, I just read them attentively and without breaks to "research" things. I let Pynchon totally envelop me in his world, with his so-very-odd set of characters.

Pynchon has a great rhythm with his writing, which I found it took me a while to really "get". I had to both turn my brain off from any preconceived notions of what to expect, while also having my brain work to grasp the story. Pynchon goes off on tangents about some of the strangest details, and they almost become entire subplots, so I found myself occasionally re-reading passages to get what's "really" going on.

To backtrack a bit, I was really nervous to get into Pynchon's work. Reading about his ridiculous amounts of knowledge, which he injects into his works in nearly every word, scared me into thinking I just wouldn't "get it". That it would be like trying to sit down and read something in Japanese.

It's not like that, fortunately. It's just dense work that I can't fly through like I do normally, and it really benefitted me to read the two chapters once, just taking everything in, before trying to really understand the more subtle references in his work.

He seems to be a walking encyclopedia, and reading just these two chapters has been like no other reading experience I've had before. I really felt like I got to enter someone else's mind.

Anyways, needless to say I am really enjoying it. And it strikes me as work that will benefit greatly from multiple reads throughout the coming years.

[ledfloyd]

I just finished Paul Auster's New York Trilogy. Possibly top ten books all time.

[megladon8]

I just finished Paul Auster's New York Trilogy. Possibly top ten books all time.


It may be in mine, as well.

[D_Davis]

Pynchon is one author whom I really wish I had the patience for. His strange ties to cyberpunk, new wave SF, and conspiratorial musings make me want to like his stuff, but I simply can't crack his massive tomes or his prose. It took me a month to get through Crying of Lot 49, and that's like a drop in a bucker compared to his other stuff.

Someday I'll read him, but I still don't think I am ready.

[megladon8]

Pynchon is one author whom I really wish I had the patience for. His strange ties to cyberpunk, new wave SF, and conspiratorial musings make me want to like his stuff, but I simply can't crack his massive tomes or his prose. It took me a month to get through Crying of Lot 49, and that's like a drop in a bucker compared to his other stuff.

Someday I'll read him, but I still don't think I am ready.


I'm certainly not ready to comprehend all he has to offer.

But - using a term that you once used with regards to Tsui Hark's films and which I now use regularly - I just let him have his way with me.

This is also why I say it's work that I think would be beneficial from multiple re-reads throughout life. I'll know more when I'm 25 than I do now, and I think I'll get more out of this book. Then when I'm 32, then when I'm 40, and so on.

[Duncan]

I just skipped Wuthering Heights and went moved on to Pynchon's V. I really don't have much time for reading nowadays, and probably won't finish any book until after graduation (less than a month!).

[Benny Profane]

All the Pynchon love makes me smile. V. is a masterwork that I plan on reading again shortly. Hard to believe he was only in his early 20s when he wrote it. Hard to believe anyone could be that smart.

[megladon8]

All the Pynchon love makes me smile. V. is a masterwork that I plan on reading again shortly. Hard to believe he was only in his early 20s when he wrote it. Hard to believe anyone could be that smart.


Where would you say is a good place to go after "The Crying of Lot 49"?

"Against the Day" sounds really intriguing. However, with its mammoth size, I would hate to get in over my head, and spend 1000+ pages feeling lost.

[Benny Profane]

Where would you say is a good place to go after "The Crying of Lot 49"?

"Against the Day" sounds really intriguing. However, with its mammoth size, I would hate to get in over my head, and spend 1000+ pages feeling lost.


I think you might really like Vineland.

[megladon8]

I'm getting interested in reading Barack Obama's "The Audacity of Hope".

[Duncan]

I'm getting interested in reading Barack Obama's "The Audacity of Hope".

But don't you know he lifted the title from one of Rev. Wright's speeches?

[megladon8]

But don't you know he lifted the title from one of Rev. Wright's speeches?


Nope.

So does that somehow make the book unreadable or something?

[Duncan]

Nope.

So does that somehow make the book unreadable or something?

No, I was joking. It's a relatively inconsequential piece of trivia that has been one of the main selling points on the Obama/Wright controversy.

[Mara]

I'm getting interested in reading Barack Obama's "The Audacity of Hope".

I own this book, but I haven't read it yet.

I should dig it out. (Most of my books are still boxed from my move.)

[ledfloyd]

I've been reading a ton recently. I read Into the Wild in one sitting. Having seen the movie I wanted more. The book is amazing, I thought anyways. I'm very interested in reading Krakauer's other work. I just finished Bernard Malamud's The Natural and was quite amazed how different it was than the movie, especially in tone. A book deserving of it's reputation. Reading Joe Posnanski's The Soul of Baseball has made Buck O'Neil a hero of mine. I wish I could be half as happy-go-lucky.

I took a break on Moby Dick, which I'm enjoying. Gonna get back to that soon. I have the His Dark Materials trilogy on deck, along with Krakauer's Under the Banner of Heaven. I'm also thinking of giving Tolstoy a shot sometime soon. Maybe digging deeper into Dostoevsky, and trying out Gogol and Chekov. Based on the Dostoevsky I've read, I think I'm going to love digging deeper into Russian Lit.

[Benny Profane]

I've been reading a ton recently. I read Into the Wild in one sitting. Having seen the movie I wanted more. The book is amazing, I thought anyways. I'm very interested in reading Krakauer's other work. I just finished Bernard Malamud's The Natural and was quite amazed how different it was than the movie, especially in tone. A book deserving of it's reputation. Reading Joe Posnanski's The Soul of Baseball has made Buck O'Neil a hero of mine. I wish I could be half as happy-go-lucky.

I took a break on Moby Dick, which I'm enjoying. Gonna get back to that soon. I have the His Dark Materials trilogy on deck, along with Krakauer's Under the Banner of Heaven. I'm also thinking of giving Tolstoy a shot sometime soon. Maybe digging deeper into Dostoevsky, and trying out Gogol and Chekov. Based on the Dostoevsky I've read, I think I'm going to love digging deeper into Russian Lit.

Rep for this whole fucking post. I'd put Krakauer near the top of my favorite author list. Into the Wild is gold, and Under the Banner of Heaven is outstanding.

Tolstoy rec: The Death of Ivan Ilyich. Best novella I've ever read. Nice warmup before you hit the marathons of his longer works.

However, I did not care for Dead Souls by Gogol very much, though it certainly has it's moments.

[Melville]

I'm also thinking of giving Tolstoy a shot sometime soon. Maybe digging deeper into Dostoevsky, and trying out Gogol and Chekov. Based on the Dostoevsky I've read, I think I'm going to love digging deeper into Russian Lit.
I'd recommend Tolstoy's and Gogol's short stories over their novels. Everything in The Death of Ivan Ilych and Other Stories is good, especially the title story and The Kreutzer Sonata. Gogol's best are The Nose and The Overcoat; if you read Dead Souls, be forewarned that the second part is incomplete and seriously detracts from the greatness of the first part.

Actually, you should check out Dostoevsky's short stories as well, particularly The Double and The Crocodile. The latter is easily the funniest thing I've ever read. It doesn't usually come with his short story collections, so here it is online:

http://www.kiosek.com/dostoevsky/library/thecrocodile.txt

[Kurosawa Fan]

Finished The Big Over Easy. It was a fun book, imaginative (to a fault) and entertaining, but nothing exceptional. I'm not sure I'd go out of my way to read another Jack Spratt Investigates novel, though I'd be interested in reading something different by Fforde.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I read The Little Prince last night. What a beautiful story. It's a bit sad that I didn't get to experience it as a child. I can't wait to read it with my son.

[lovejuice]

Finished The Big Over Easy. It was a fun book, imaginative (to a fault) and entertaining, but nothing exceptional. I'm not sure I'd go out of my way to read another Jack Spratt Investigates novel, though I'd be interested in reading something different by Fforde.

i really like the first thursday next, but the second one left me a bit underwhelming. definitely check out the eyre affair.

[Mara]

I read The Little Prince last night. What a beautiful story. It's a bit sad that I didn't get to experience it as a child. I can't wait to read it with my son.

I'm a big fan. I had it read to me as a child, both in English and the original French.

I confess-- I'm a huge baby and I tear up at the end.

[SpaceOddity]

I read The Little Prince last night. What a beautiful story. It's a bit sad that I didn't get to experience it as a child. I can't wait to read it with my son.

My absolute favourite book.

*wonders whether the stars are set alight in heaven so that one day each of us may find our own again*

[ledfloyd]

Under the Banner of Heaven was pretty much amazing. I went to the library yesterday and got Krakauer's Into Thin Air. Certainly becoming one of my favorite Non-Fiction authors. I also got David Foster Wallace's Consider the Lobster, DeLillo's Falling Man and Roth's Everyman.

[Melville]

My absolute favourite book.

*wonders whether the stars are set alight in heaven so that one day each of us may find our own again*
You should post here more often. The book discussions have felt a bit off in your absence.

[SpaceOddity]

You should post here more often. The book discussions have felt a bit off in your absence.

Serenade me with a rendition of 'I miss you like crazy' and you're on.

[Milky Joe]

I also got David Foster Wallace's Consider the Lobster.

so, so fantastic. It's one of the funniest books I've ever read, even though he doesn't really try to be.

[ledfloyd]

so, so fantastic. It's one of the funniest books I've ever read, even though he doesn't really try to be.
I dunno, after reading that speech on Kafka, I think maybe he does try to be funny, but his idea of funny is outside of the cultural norm. The porn oscars article is hysterical.

[Wryan]

My office is doing a book club kinda auteurist thing, where they select an author and you can ready anything by the author, instead of selecting one book that everyone has to read. This month is travel writer/humorist Bill Bryson. I read A Walk in the Woods and The Lost Continent. Liked the former tremendously, but I'm partial to the Appalachian Trail since I lived in Boone, NC for six years and the AT and its majesty were close by. Book made me want to hike the whole thing and was quite funny, even if some of it seemed convenient for laughs. The latter I liked well enough. It's not as funny as Walk and takes some caustic swipes at the South and its people (some not without reason, others plenty without reason). In a swift inversion of my experience with his other book, TLC made want to give up my plans of driving around the country, since the vast majority of the book describes awesomely ugly and impoverished shitholes. Sure, I knew that the nation has its share of terrible small towns (the primary focus of the book), but I had expected to feel reinvigorated after reading it. Instead, I felt depressed.

Into the Wild is a great damn book.

[ledfloyd]

I went on a Bryson kick awhile back. A Walk in the Woods and I'm A Stranger Here Myself were my favorites. I don't think I ever read The Lost Continent. I've been wanting to check out that Short History of Nearly Everything book he has out.

[Wryan]

Yeah, a few people are reading Short History. I would skip TLC, to be frank. It's a few rungs below WITW.

[megladon8]

Still working my way through "The Crying of Lot 49".

I'm sorry, Benny - I know you have been checking back here every hour, on the hour, 24/7 to find out my thoughts.

Just been so packed with end-of-the-year stuff.

My goal is to finish it by the end of the weekend. Whether I succeed is another story, but at least I made a goal!

I'm loving it so far, though. I'm just over halfway through.

Pynchon's character names are hilarious. Actually, just his writing in general has great wit to it - I have chuckled several times.

[Benny Profane]

Pynchon's character names are hilarious. Actually, just his writing in general has great wit to it - I have chuckled several times.

Yes, the names he uses are funny. My username is taken from the central character in V.

They're also highly suggestive, though. Such as Pierce Inverarity, a cousin of veritas, whose name implies the elusiveness of truth.

[Melville]

Serenade me with a rendition of 'I miss you like crazy' and you're on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1pABjF7WfE
I'm the kid on keyboard.

[SpaceOddity]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1pABjF7WfE
I'm the kid on keyboard.


*wipes tear*

[SpaceOddity]

My current read's Aphra Behn's Oroonoko.

*likes 'em old*

[SpaceOddity]

Starting The Midwich Cuckcoos by John Wyndham.

[SpaceOddity]

Current read:

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/5509/salammbojk2.jpg

[Melville]

I haven't finished a book in weeks.

[Qrazy]

Prob. gonna start Death in Venice soon... and at some point The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz.

[ledfloyd]

Current read:

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/5509/salammbojk2.jpg

hot.

[Qrazy]

hot.

I'd hit it.


The book cover.

[SpaceOddity]

Kafka:

"Altogether, I think we ought to read only books that bite and sting us. If the book we are reading doesn't shake us awake like a blow on the skull, why bother reading it in the first place? So that it can make us happy, as you put it? Good God, we'd be just as happy if we had no books at all; books that make us happy we could, in a pinch, write ourselves. What we need are books that hit us like a most painful misfortune, like the death of someone we loved more than we love ourselves, that make us feel as though we had been banished to the woods, far from any human presence, like a suicide. A book must be the axe for the frozen sea within us. That is what I believe."

[Qrazy]

That's pretty much my central problem with pre-existentialism and existentialism (as much as I admire and respect other elements), the desire for the propagation of misery. I agree that art should not be complacent and most of my favorite books are as he describes, but I also think there's plenty of room out there for life affirming and comic works (I suppose some works can both sting and affirm simultaneously). I disagree with the central premise that unhappiness is solely what drives thought and creativity... a complacent society would certainly be awful... but art which inspires by the depth of it's love, empathy and beauty is just as potent and useful I think as it's alternative.

[lovejuice]

That's pretty much my central problem with pre-existentialism and existentialism (as much as I admire and respect other elements), the desire for the propagation of misery. I agree that art should not be complacent and most of my favorite books are as he describes, but I also think there's plenty of room out there for life affirming and comic works (I suppose some works can both sting and affirm simultaneously). I disagree with the central premise that unhappiness is solely what drives thought and creativity... a complacent society would certainly be awful... but art which inspires by the depth of it's love, empathy and beauty is just as potent and useful I think as it's alternative.

i agree here, although i rather think kafka is playing devil's advocate with his quotation.

[ledfloyd]

i wonder what kafka would think if i told him his work makes me happy. cause it does.

i started delillo's falling man and everything else i'm reading has fallen by the wayside. his style is suited perfectly to dealing with september 11th.

[Qrazy]

i agree here, although i rather think kafka is playing devil's advocate with his quotation.

Why do you think this? Because he has a lot of dark humor in his works? It still 'bites and stings' though.

[lovejuice]

Why do you think this? Because he has a lot of dark humor in his works? It still 'bites and stings' though.

his stance in that quotation is a bit too extreme. more like he's trying to be thought provoking rather than actually believe that.

[megladon8]

As of tonight, I am starting over with "The Crying of Lot 49".

My gaps between reading chapters have just been too large, and I'm finding myself quite lost.

Since I'm about halfway through, it won't take me long to re-acquaint myself with the material I've already read, then I can finally finish it up.

I really am loving it. I've just had a hectic few weeks.

[Qrazy]

his stance in that quotation is a bit too extreme. more like he's trying to be thought provoking rather than actually believe that.

Ehhh...

[Melville]

That's pretty much my central problem with pre-existentialism and existentialism (as much as I admire and respect other elements), the desire for the propagation of misery. I agree that art should not be complacent and most of my favorite books are as he describes, but I also think there's plenty of room out there for life affirming and comic works (I suppose some works can both sting and affirm simultaneously). I disagree with the central premise that unhappiness is solely what drives thought and creativity... a complacent society would certainly be awful... but art which inspires by the depth of it's love, empathy and beauty is just as potent and useful I think as it's alternative.
I don't know. I think the emphasis of the quote is that art should be provocative rather than appeasing (i.e. it shouldn't just make us happy). Certainly great art can be positive in the way that you describe, but in my opinion they are potent only if they are in contrast to the bite and sting that Kafka describes; they only achieve their potency when seen from a place deep in the woods. Existentialists and pre-existentialists like Heidegger, Sartre, Dostoevsky, and so on, made pretty good arguments in favor of the idea that angst/anxiety/etc. reveals fundamental aspects of the structure of our experience. Truly uplifting works of art, in my opinion, bite and sting us with that fact before showing us a way of overcoming (or just living with) it. It's a Wonderful Life, Catch-22, and The Brothers Karamazov spring to mind as examples.

[Qrazy]

Existentialists and pre-existentialists like Heidegger, Sartre, Dostoevsky, and so on, made pretty good arguments in favor of the idea that angst/anxiety/etc. reveals fundamental aspects of the structure of our experience.

I don't know, I find the attempt to tie angst/anxiety to metaphysical underpinnings to be one of the weaker areas of Sartre and Heidegger's work. I find it tends to rationalize/justify such feelings and seeks to further these feelings as often and as much as it seeks to determine a way to overcome them. I think they're all great thinkers and I love their work and identify with it but I don't know if I'm sold on the idea that angst must necessarily be central to the human experience. I've certainly experienced a great deal of it as have many others but I'm wary of philosophies that embrace it... even just as a step on the ladder towards something more fulfilling... I think human beings can and should be happier... we don't need to romanticize our capacity for suffering.


I don't know. I think the emphasis of the quote is that art should be provocative rather than appeasing (i.e. it shouldn't just make us happy).

Yeah I sort of agree but I also think really it just needs to shake a bit... shake up your perceptions of what is, what should be and what can be... like The Man Who Planted Trees or something...

[lovejuice]

Ehhh...

why not? that other guy probably doesn't mean it when he says he is cinema. or does he?

[Qrazy]

why not? that other guy probably doesn't mean it when he says he is cinema. or does he?

It's Godard... I think he kind of means it... yeah it's also a joke... but he still kind of means it.

[Boner M]

White Noise was OK. Consistently readable, with many trenchant insights, but the characters are all a little too deliberately puppet-y for my tastes, and the whole thing reeks of a kind of 'OMG I'm totally capturing the zeitgeist!' preciousness that is vaguely off-putting. I thing I prefer DeLillo as an essayist, going by what I've read. Satisfying enough, but I guess I'll have to drag out the old 'admired more than liked it' in this case.

Can anyone tell me if Underworld is worth a look despite my reaction to the above?

[Benny Profane]

Also had a lukewarm reaction to White Noise. I agree with your observation about the characters. I also thought the ending was an anti-climactic letdown.

[lovejuice]

my feeling about white noise is its being rather irrelevant to nowadays. the book is still of our time, but DeLillo's interpretation of the post modernism -- perhaps novelistic in 1985 -- feels too premature in light of where we are today.

[Melville]

I don't know, I find the attempt to tie angst/anxiety to metaphysical underpinnings to be one of the weaker areas of Sartre and Heidegger's work. I find it tends to rationalize/justify such feelings and seeks to further these feelings as often and as much as it seeks to determine a way to overcome them. I think they're all great thinkers and I love their work and identify with it but I don't know if I'm sold on the idea that angst must necessarily be central to the human experience. I've certainly experienced a great deal of it as have many others but I'm wary of philosophies that embrace it... even just as a step on the ladder towards something more fulfilling... I think human beings can and should be happier... we don't need to romanticize our capacity for suffering.
If you buy Sartre's basic idea of humanity as something constantly at a distance from itself ("it is what it is not, and it is not what it is"), then it's pretty hard to remove anxiety from its central place. But that doesn't mean that he or Heidegger are embracing it; they are just examining what it reveals about existence, which they obviouly thought was quite a bit. (And, from personal experience, I agree with them, although I reach slightly different conclusions than they do.) I don't think either of them romanticize suffering at all, although pre-existentialists like Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky certainly do (which I have no problem with; it's as good a thing to romanticise as anything else).


the whole thing reeks of a kind of 'OMG I'm totally capturing the zeitgeist!' preciousness that is vaguely off-putting.
Yeah.

[MacGuffin]

Are there any intellectually stimulating books about ghosts? House of Leaves is the closest I have gotten, and that's actually about a minotaur and a haunted house. Let me know.

[Melville]

Are there any intellectually stimulating books about ghosts? House of Leaves is the closest I have gotten, and that's actually about a minotaur and a haunted house. Let me know.
I haven't read it, but I've heard that The Turn of the Screw is quite good.

[Qrazy]

If you buy Sartre's basic idea of humanity as something constantly at a distance from itself ("it is what it is not, and it is not what it is"), then it's pretty hard to remove anxiety from its central place.

Oh I think anxiety is central but not necessarily for their 'metaphysical' reasons... the encounter with nothingness... it's a great metaphor but literally transposed to our individual identity and experience I find it falls apart.

But there's also a difference between anxiety being a major facet of the way we interact with the world... as plan makers and fortune tellers... and it being an integral, necessary and important element which ought to be either embraced, propagated or encouraged... it leads less often to greater thoughts and revelation than to apathy and depression in practice, in my personal experience... I think we ought to try to ease our anxieties through thought, meditation, etc not promote them.

[Mysterious Dude]

I read William Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury. I liked the experimental and fractured nature of the first two parts, and was disappointed that it was almost completely absent in the second two parts.

[Melville]

I read William Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury. I liked the experimental and fractured nature of the first two parts, and was disappointed that it was almost completely absent in the second two parts.
The progression in style was one of my favorite aspects of the book. I thought it worked really well with the novel's central theme: the characters' relationships with time.

There was a short discussion of the book around earlier in the thread:
http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?t=5&page=14

[lovejuice]

I read William Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury. I liked the experimental and fractured nature of the first two parts, and was disappointed that it was almost completely absent in the second two parts.

TSatF definitely makes me want to read more faulkner's even though i never have managed time to do so -- as i lay dying has been on my bookshelf for a while. i somehow agree with your comment, although it makes sense considered a sort of character jason is. moreover most of my understanding of the first two chapters came in retrospective based on what happen during the third. perhaps without any linear narration, the novel would have been all but readable.

[lovejuice]

and if any of you think about reading an iris murdoch's, out of 16 that i have i find the bell to be a perfect introduction to the dame. it's short, funny, sexy, philosophical, and contains a lot of what she is famous for.

[Qrazy]

The progression in style was one of my favorite aspects of the book. I thought it worked really well with the novel's central theme: the characters' relationships with time.

Agreed.

[Benny Profane]

Headed out to wine country later this month. Anyone know of any good novels that have that region as a setting? Don't say Sideways.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Headed out to wine country later this month. Anyone know of any good novels that have that region as a setting? Don't say Sideways.

Steinbeck's novels are close enough.

[Benny Profane]

Steinbeck's novels are close enough.

That's actually a good call. I've been meaning to read something else by him.

[megladon8]

Finally finished "The Crying of Lot 49".

It took me three reads to really "get" it. But it was so, so worth it.

One of the best books I have read in quite a long while. Pynchon's writing style - his descriptions, his unsentimental view of beauty - is great.


EDIT: Reading J. G. Ballard's "Vermilion Sands" next.

[megladon8]

I'm really enjoying J. G. Ballard's short story collection, "Vermilion Sands".

It's quite melancholic, and most of the stories deal with themes of longing and lost love. Which makes sense, given who recommended it to me :)

I didn't realize until I read the preface that Ballard was the author of "Empire of the Sun".

[Ezee E]

If you don't get offended by stories of debauchery, womanizing, and can laugh at stupidity, then I Hope They Serve Beer In Hell is a book to read.

Written like a blog, without any kind of true substance, but passages that will make you laugh out loud.

Pretty entertaining.

[Mysterious Dude]

Gogol's Dead Souls is not what I expected. It's... funny.

[Benny Profane]

The Torture Garden is definitely one of my least favorite books that I've ever read. If there's one thing I hate, it's endless descriptions of flowers and plants. The central premise of the novel is that the barbarities of Europe (and the U.S., probably) are thinly veiled or transformed into the arenas of business, gossip, and politics, while remote places in the third world (China, in this case) they are less fake about it, and that's the main difference between civilization and non. It also argues that love and death are one and the same. I wonder if Pynchon read this before Gravity's Rainbow, as that's one of the main themes of that book as well. The problem with TG is that it's so stuffy and boring, that despite all the supposed horrors that the characters witness, it's never really all that shocking, and all I could say was "yeah, so?"

I could see there being a major outcry when it was released in 1899, though. It's pretty graphic, and the depraved female protagonist Clara is not your typical feminine character.

Overall, skip it.

Finished part 1 of A Happy Death yesterday. Should be done soon.

[Mara]

TSatF definitely makes me want to read more faulkner's even though i never have managed time to do so -- as i lay dying has been on my bookshelf for a while.

I would strongly recommend As I Lay Dying. It might be my favorite Faulkner.

[megladon8]

I'm halfway through "Vermilion Sands" and it's starting to get a little repetitive.

Every story seems to begin with "I saw ______________ and it reminded me of her".

I thought there'd be a little more variety than just stories of longing. Hopefully there'll be some more of a mix in the latter half.

However, I must say again, this isn't at all surprising considering who recommended it to me :)

[Sven]

Charles Dickens is my boy.

[Qrazy]

Charles Dickens is my boy.

A Tale of Two Cities is quality lit fo shiz.

[Sven]

A Tale of Two Cities is quality lit fo shiz.

This calls for a dance. May I?
:pritch:

[megladon8]

"Great Expectations" is one of my top 5.

[trotchky]

New Palahniuk novel is out today.

I doubt I should read it, but I probably will anyway.

[Mara]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v254/maragirl/41SKEVjxuLL.jpg

I think it's fair to say that I'm a Stephanie Meyer fan. Her trilogy of young adult vampire books (Twilight, New Moon and Eclipse) were great escapist entertainment; thoughtful and stylish. Even the most jaded, esoteric, hardened intellectual I know read the first one on a dare and sheepishly admitted to liking it. (Although, as a side-note, the first glances at the film adaptation look ridiculous.)

So I was excited about her new "adult" novel that came out this month, The Host, and blind-bought it even though I haven't had a paycheck in five months.

The plot isn't anything too original, although it's not exactly derivative, either. Earth has been conquered by a race of parasites who have colonized a number of worlds by peacefully slipping into the still-living minds of the inhabitants and assuming control. The "host" personality essentially dies, and the "souls", as they call themselves, continue living a fairly normal life. The "souls" are gentle and altruistic-- loving, even. They see their colonization of earth as a civilization process, erasing violence and hatred and human evil. The souls, however, are not ready to handle humanity's insane drive to exist. They are shocked by the emotions and memories of their human hosts. They start to have problems they've never experienced before.

The novel is told in first person from the point of view of one of the souls-- a female called Wanderer. She is inserted into the mind of a rebel human, who has been living on the fringes of society for years, named Melanie. Something goes very wrong, and Melanie refuses to die. Instead, Wanderer and Melanie end up sharing a mind together, fighting against each other's values and cultures, and both trying to regain control over the body.

As in her other novels, Meyer is extremely-- almost absurdly-- romantic. Melanie refuses to die because she loves a man named Jared, and she will do anything to get back to him. Wanderer shares the biological urge to be with this man, and develops her own love for him. The physical and emotional journey of the two women, as sisters and enemies, is fascinating. The world-view presented is complex and unusual, and Meyer shows a great deal of imagination.

The novel is marred, somewhat, by a rosy-glassed ending that feels out of place with the dark tone of the novel. Nevertheless, I found it an extremely enjoyable read, and would recommend it.

[monolith94]

Have you ever read any Wilkie Collins, Mara?

[lovejuice]

I think it's fair to say that I'm a Stephanie Meyer fan. Her trilogy of young adult vampire books (Twilight, New Moon and Eclipse) were great escapist entertainment; thoughtful and stylish. Even the most jaded, esoteric, hardened intellectual I know read the first one on a dare and sheepishly admitted to liking it.

consider i'm dared.

[Mara]

consider i'm dared.

I'm really curious to hear your reaction. I mean, they're young adult fantasy romances about vampires... how can they be good?

And yet I maintain that they are.

[Mara]

Have you ever read any Wilkie Collins, Mara?

I had never heard of him before Christmas, when my sister's book group read The Woman in White, and I was intrigued enough to pick it up.

My word.

In some ways, it was so good. The characters were tightly drawn and fascinating, particularly the Baron and Marian. It was very suspenseful, with some genuinely surprising twists and turns. The multiple viewpoints involved improved the reader's perception of events by showing characters through multiple lenses.

But, in other ways, it was kind of awful. The plot was a holy mess of improbable twists and turns and (horror of horrors) coincidences. And, I read some of the longest novels without needing a break, but even to me the book dragged after the first 500 pages.

So, overall my impression was positive with some reservations. I might even call it a "guilty pleasure."

Have you read other things by him? Are they worth a shot?

[monolith94]

I'm 100 pages into The Woman In White right now, and planning on reading the Moonstone after it. Haven't been introduced to the Baron yet. Unless by Baron you mean Sir Percival Glyde. My copy of the book is ~600 pages long, so I guess it could eventually drag, but right now it's nipping along smartly; I'm moving through it faster than I moved through Tom Jones (the last really thick book I read). I haven't encountered coincidences too heinous so far, and don't particularly think that the mere presence of them automatically discredits the plot of a novel. I mean, all novels are terribly improbable, relative to real life.

What has impressed me, though, has been the humor of the novel. It'll have me chuckling at some improbable moment. I've just made it to the first major change in viewpoint, and that change was a really masterful writerly transition, imo. I just mentioned it, because reading it it struck me as the sort of thing you might like.

The reason I picked it up was because of this review (http://www.filmsfolded.com/movie.php?movieid=68108), which led me to research the author. I was intrigued enough by both his connection to Dickens and his use of drugs to pick up The Woman In White.

[Mara]

I haven't encountered coincidences too heinous so far, and don't particularly think that the mere presence of them automatically discredits the plot of a novel. I mean, all novels are terribly improbable, relative to real life.

Too many coincidences break my "suspension of disbelief," as they say. I'll be clipping along happily, but then two characters from England will magically be reunited in a Paris backalley, and it really frustrates me.

There are some great coincidences in Tom Jones, which you know I love, but it's essentially a comic novel, and it plays the coincidences as deliberately hilarious.

But Woman in White feels much more dramatic and important, so the coincidences just feel like sloppy writing to me. Then again, it's a "sensational" novel, so maybe I'm asking for what is outside the genre.



The reason I picked it up was because of this review (http://www.filmsfolded.com/movie.php?movieid=68108), which led me to research the author. I was intrigued enough by both his connection to Dickens and his use of drugs to pick up The Woman In White.

Yeah, I might have to check that book out.

And you haven't met the Baron yet. He's... something else.

[SpaceOddity]

Wilkie Collins is such fun. I prefered The Woman in White to The Moonstone.

Although... how exactly is Walter able to marry Lucy prior to establishing her identity?

[monolith94]

Damn, damn, damn – it's going to be at least several weeks until I can read that spoiler!

Tarnation!

[megladon8]

Reading this next...

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41EJ4FCKRWL._SS500_.jpg

[lovejuice]

Reading this next...

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41EJ4FCKRWL._SS500_.jpg

whoa! look so cool. what's it about?

[megladon8]

whoa! look so cool. what's it about?


It's about a young man who moves into an apartment in Paris and finds a hole in one of the walls.

He becomes obsessed with it, as he can look through it and see what people are up to in other apartments.

I gather being a voyeur takes over his life.

[monolith94]

I don't mean to beat this topic into the ground, Mara, but what about the great plot contrivances of tragic Greek literature? Oedipus Rex has a great plot, but it can only be contrived as coincidental beyond credulity.

[Mara]

I don't mean to beat this topic into the ground, Mara, but what about the great plot contrivances of tragic Greek literature? Oedipus Rex has a great plot, but it can only be contrived as coincidental beyond credulity.

They bother me, but I forgive them because they have so many other good qualities. Besides, the Greeks really believed in Fate, which would explain a lot of the coincidences (because the divine is interfering with natural factors.)

I'm really bothered by the final coincidence at the end of Moliere's Tartuffe, which is unforgivable.

[Melville]

Inspired by my recent argument with Qrazy about Nietzsche, I decided to read Beyond Good and Evil. It was pretty great, possibly the best thing I've read by Nietzsche, and certainly the most nuanced and cogent presentation of his views. I love his criticism of the assumption of a unified Self, which he asserts is actually based on "the synthetic concept 'I'", and especially his relation of that synthesis to traditional morality, truth and language, and the will to power. Here are some choice quotes that would have been relevant to my discussion with Qrazy and Duncan:

On the Ubermensch:
"The ideal of the most high-spirited, alive, and world-affirming human being who has not only come to terms and learned to get along with whatever was and is, but who wants to have what was and is repeated into all eternity, shouting insatiably 'from the beginning'—not only to himself but to the whole play and spectacle."

On everybody else:
"Their most profound desire is that the war they are should come to an end."

On politics:
"The vast majority of ordinary human beings exist for service and the general advantage."
"The democratic movement is not only a form of the decay of political organization but a form of the decay, namely the diminution, of man, making him mediocre."
"More after my heart—I mean such an increase in the menace of Russia that Europe would have to resolve to become menacing, too, namely, to acquire one will by means of a new caste that would rule Europe, a long, terrible, will of its own that would be able to cast its goals millenia hence... The time for petty politics is over: the very next century will bring the fight for the dominion of the earth."

On suffering:
"You want, if possible—and there is no more insane "if possible"—to abolish suffering. And we? It really seems that we would rather have it higher and worse than ever. Well-being as you understand it—that is no goal"
"In man creature and creator are united... Your pity is for the 'creature in man', for what must be formed, broken, forged, torn, burnt, made incandescent, and purified—that which necessarily must and should suffer."

On the will to power:
"Life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker."

On master morality:
"Moralities must be forced to bow first of all before the order of rank"
"It is not the works, it is the faith that is decisive here, that determines the order of rank: some fundamental certainty that a noble soul has about itself... the noble soul has reverence for itself."

[lwilson85]

Started reading some Julio Cortazar short stories. Very Nouveau roman. Takes such a simple setting or idea and transforms it into something else entirely, while you question your own sanity and understanding of indentity, memory, and most of all the human language.

[lovejuice]

Inspired by my recent argument with Qrazy about Nietzsche, I decided to read Beyond Good and Evil. It was pretty great, possibly the best thing I've read by Nietzsche, and certainly the most nuanced and cogent presentation of his views.

i agree. especially the "cogent presentation" part. i have tried to get through zarathusa many times but never succeed. you think, that's necessary now after BGaE?

[Benny Profane]

Now reading Tortilla Flat by Steinbeck. I'll probably finish it tonight. People who say this is lesser Steinbeck are d-bags.

[Qrazy]

On politics:
"The democratic movement is not only a form of the decay of political organization but a form of the decay, namely the diminution, of man, making him mediocre."

On the will to power:
"Life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker."

On master morality:
"Moralities must be forced to bow first of all before the order of rank"
"It is not the works, it is the faith that is decisive here, that determines the order of rank: some fundamental certainty that a noble soul has about itself... the noble soul has reverence for itself."

I admire and enjoy all of it (he's a terrific writer) but I only agree with some... I particularly don't agree with the above.

He speaks of the destruction of the animal side of man but in my mind that is the side which most desires power... the power to control one's circumstances and one's fate... to cushion ourselves against displeasure. To distill life to power for it's own sake, I shudder at the thought... and this is usually where the self-reflexive defense mechanism of the ideology kicks in... clearly to reject such notions I must still be burdened by slave morality.

But in my eyes above and beyond power there is love. Love and the capacity for love is humanity's saving grace. It's where we're most psychologically fulfilled, it's where we're at our happiest, it's what allows us to live in harmony (and at no great loss of anything). It carries with it it's own brand of pain, but even with the pain it's worth it. Before civilization life was about overpowering, but the advent of civilization and democracy have allowed us to change this to a degree. While he argues for the destruction of our 'animal nature' I feel this is actually precisely what he seeks to preserve, except dressed up in the trappings of logic, the rational and dignity.

To love one must trust and trust is 'weakness' in a sense, but a very necessary weakness, without it we could not love. The capacity to care about others and not to seek to overpower them, this is what yields happiness... and if happiness is not the goal then what is? Dignity? A manufactured dignity for the man who embraces the suffering he experiences which he himself created? I can not believe in that dignity, even more so when there is no God to hold us to such a notion.

[monolith94]

Oh man… I have no idea how much sleep I've missed out on the past two nights staying up until the wee hours of the morning so that I could finish The Woman in White. So incredible. The night before last, I read late late late, but the reading had me so emotionally worked up that I couldn't fall asleep.

[SpaceOddity]

Oh man… I have no idea how much sleep I've missed out on the past two nights staying up until the wee hours of the morning so that I could finish The Woman in White. So incredible. The night before last, I read late late late, but the reading had me so emotionally worked up that I couldn't fall asleep.

Are you reading The Moonstone, next?

[Mara]

Oh man… I have no idea how much sleep I've missed out on the past two nights staying up until the wee hours of the morning so that I could finish The Woman in White. So incredible. The night before last, I read late late late, but the reading had me so emotionally worked up that I couldn't fall asleep.

Did you finish? What did you think?

[monolith94]

Oh yes, I thought that was inferred. The answer to your second question remains: incredible. The Count's letter was amazing; I'm going to have to go back and reread it.

One thing that fascinated me was the working of the gaze into the novel: Laura Fairlie was always the one being watched, the object of a male gaze. When the narration turns to a woman, it is to Marian, a woman who is mentioned again and again as being like a man. I'm pretty sure that if I, like, cared enough to, there'd be meat in there for an essay.

[Melville]

i agree. especially the "cogent presentation" part. i have tried to get through zarathusa many times but never succeed. you think, that's necessary now after BGaE?
Yeah, Zarathustra made a lot more sense to me after having read The Genealogy of Morals; I imagine the same would be true if you read Zarathustra now after having read Beyond Good and Evil. Zarathustra is definitely worth reading for its poeticism alone.


He speaks of the destruction of the animal side of man but in my mind that is the side which most desires power... the power to control one's circumstances and one's fate... to cushion ourselves against displeasure. To distill life to power for it's own sake, I shudder at the thought... and this is usually where the self-reflexive defense mechanism of the ideology kicks in... clearly to reject such notions I must still be burdened by slave morality.
I'm still not sure how his philosophy is any more reflexively defensive than any other philosophy. According to Nietzsche, your philosophy is wrong because it is based on an idea of human life that is wrong and that stifles human life. It's not wrong because you're burdened by slave morality; it's just plain wrong.


But in my eyes above and beyond power there is love. Love and the capacity for love is humanity's saving grace. It's where we're most psychologically fulfilled, it's where we're at our happiest.
Sometimes, maybe, if that love is reciprocated. But it's often when we're most uncertain (because of our need for reciprocation), unfulfilled (because we are drawn out of ourselves and towards the other), and unhappy (because it points to an incompleteness or lack of unity in ourselves). We're talking about romantic love here, right? Otherwise, what do you mean by 'love'?


and if happiness is not the goal then what is? Dignity? A manufactured dignity for the man who embraces the suffering he experiences which he himself created?
But Nietzsche's view of life is that it is inherently a struggle and inherently contains suffering, and that most human accomplishments are born of that suffering. He's all about affirming life as it is. I agree that his description of life is somewhat limited, which in turn limits his notion of embracing it.

Anyway, as I said in the other thread, I actually agree with you, and I wasn't intending to restart the debate. I just thought those quotes nicely isolated the topics that we were debating. In particular, I think they show that Duncan's description of Nietzsche's philosophy is a bit too cute and cuddly.

[Qrazy]

Anyway, as I said in the other thread, I actually agree with you, and I wasn't intending to restart the debate. I just thought those quotes nicely isolated the topics that we were debating. In particular, I think they show that Duncan's description of Nietzsche's philosophy is a bit too cute and cuddly.

Ah ok, well I just thought I'd elaborate my thoughts a bit more, but you're right that the conversation is played out so I'll let it lie... and yeah they are a good selection of quotes.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Benny raving about Steinbeck pushed me to make Cannery Row the next book I read.

[Qrazy]

Sometimes, maybe, if that love is reciprocated. But it's often when we're most uncertain (because of our need for reciprocation), unfulfilled (because we are drawn out of ourselves and towards the other), and unhappy (because it points to an incompleteness or lack of unity in ourselves). We're talking about romantic love here, right? Otherwise, what do you mean by 'love'?


I do want to comment on this though. No not necessarily romantic love, just love for another creature, human being or otherwise... treating them as an end in itself. Doing for them without concerning yourself with a loss or gain of power. I don't believe self unity is possible without love for the other.

[Mara]

Benny raving about Steinbeck pushed me to make Cannery Row the next book I read.

I really enjoyed it when I read it a couple of years ago.

But then, the Washington Post has been doing a thing where they go back to a book that was popular in the past and re-review it to see how it's held up, and they gave it a negative review. I was very surprised.

So I'll be interested to see what you think.

[Qrazy]

I like Cannery Row as well, I'd say it's one of his strongest. I feel like the Washington Post probably would have given most Steinbeck novels a negative review on re-look so it's not purely a Cannery Row phenomenon. I assume this is because Steinbeck represents his own particular brand of romantic reduction (re: grapes of wrath, the pearl, etc)... idolizing the plight of the poor, etc... however much like Dickens I still find his stories, his plot weavings and prose, compelling enough to merit a great deal of praise.

[megladon8]

1/3 through "Hell".

It's even more erotic than I expected, but Barbusse is also quite tasteful.

It's also really cool to read how ahead of his time he was, with regards to things such as homosexuality.

He has this to say about the sight of lesbians secretly making love in a hotel room...

"What form? What does the form of love matter? I abandon this anxiety, and it seems to me that the whole tragedy of love is promptly revealed to me.

They love each other; the rest is nothing. Whether they are normal or depraved, whether they are blessed or accursed, they love each other and possess each other as far as that is possible on this earth."


Considering the original publication date of 1908, I thought this was some surprisingly forward thinking.

[Ezee E]

Reading Dark Harvest now, due to meg's rave.

It seems like it should be a kid's book, but by all means it isn't. I'm digging it a lot right now. I bet I'll have it finished by the weekend.