What are you currently reading?

[mn dave]

I know, right? Actually I could read the chapters of it that have been released, but having read some 2k+ pages of the same story, it will be nice to read something else for a change of pace.

Yeah, I like switching off. So many genres of good fiction.

[stingo]

New one, from the book club to which I belong....

[asin]B000PDZFKC[/asin]

[milk]

New one, from the book club to which I belong....

[asin]B000PDZFKC[/asin]

One of the few contemporary novels I enjoyed without reservations over the last few years.

[milk]

science nerds might dig my current read.
[asin]0804139024[/asin]

Thanks for this. It wasn't the most well-written or thoroughly realized book - in terms of characterization - but it was a lot of fun and will eventually make a good flick...as opposed to this:

...which was well-written and fully realized yet mostly succeeded only in annoying me.
I just started this one but it already seems quite interesting:

[Brian]

Thanks for this. It wasn't the most well-written or thoroughly realized book - in terms of characterization - but it was a lot of fun and will eventually make a good flick...as opposed to this:

...which was well-written and fully realized yet mostly succeeded only in annoying me.

I have attempted to read that book 4 times. The farthest I've gotten is page 3, because the prose annoys me so much. It's very, very rare that I start a book and do not finish it, and unprecedented to give up so many times on the same book, so quickly.

[milk]

I have attempted to read that book 4 times. The farthest I've gotten is page 3, because the prose annoys me so much. It's very, very rare that I start a book and do not finish it, and unprecedented to give up so many times on the same book, so quickly.

It took a lot of will to get through to the end. I see Franzen is considered in some quarters to be one of the greatest contemporary authors. I originally read Franzen's "Freedom" because I confused him with Safran Foer, who I think is better. Freedom wasn't great either but I think it was better than Corrections. Changing pace here, has anyone here ever read Amitav Ghosh? Another totally unrelated question is, not having ever read Dune, am I missing a great experience?

[Brian]

I see Franzen is considered in some quarters to be one of the greatest contemporary authors.

Personally I consider Franzen to be a writer who has spent his career obsessed with correcting the fact that he is not David Foster Wallace, a sort of Salieri-in-the-movie figure in contemporary literature.

[Ken B]

I have attempted to read that book 4 times. The farthest I've gotten is page 3, because the prose annoys me so much. It's very, very rare that I start a book and do not finish it, and unprecedented to give up so many times on the same book, so quickly.

I used to be like that. Then I realized I had on my shelves more than I can read in a decade.
One of the advantages of reading mostly non fiction is you can drop a book and it wasn't a total waste.

Thread Duty How Jesus Became God, by Bart Ehrman

[mn dave]

Thanks for this. It wasn't the most well-written or thoroughly realized book - in terms of characterization - but it was a lot of fun and will eventually make a good flick...

Indeed!

[kishnevi]

Another totally unrelated question is, not having ever read Dune, am I missing a great experience?

you might like it, but it's very much a child of its time in terms of themes, etc.  If you ever saw the SciFi channel adaptation,  you can probably skip it.  (or at least judge from that version if you'd like the book).   If you ever saw the first movie adaptation, with Sting and Jose Ferrer,  understand that you missed out on about 90 percent of it (the SciFI version missed out on quite a bit, but mostly kept its cuts to the stuff that probably doesn't translate well to the screen in the first place).   A lot of the goodness of the book lies in the background detail--Herbert was an excellent "Subcreator", to use JRR's term.

Overall, try it,  but you may not actually like it.

[Ken B]

It took a lot of will to get through to the end. I see Franzen is considered in some quarters to be one of the greatest contemporary authors. I originally read Franzen's "Freedom" because I confused him with Safran Foer, who I think is better. Freedom wasn't great either but I think it was better than Corrections. Changing pace here, has anyone here ever read Amitav Ghosh? Another totally unrelated question is, not having ever read Dune, am I missing a great experience?

Ahhh. Dune. Another entry for the hate threads. It starts so, so well. I loathe that book.

Is this "let's discuss all the stuff Ken B hates" week? Is a Deepak Chopra thread in the offing? Fried liver recipes?

Of course it could be I just hate a lot of stuff. But it does seem you guys are hitting an awful lot of them!

[Daverz]

Almost done with the kindle sample of

[asin]067443000X[/asin]

He writes well, or at least it reads well in translation, so I think I'll get the whole thing.

[Philo]

A lone reviewer selling viewers on reading Pynchon's Mason & Dixon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juItmzOPmYE

[milk]

you might like it, but it's very much a child of its time in terms of themes, etc.  If you ever saw the SciFi channel adaptation,  you can probably skip it.  (or at least judge from that version if you'd like the book).   If you ever saw the first movie adaptation, with Sting and Jose Ferrer,  understand that you missed out on about 90 percent of it (the SciFI version missed out on quite a bit, but mostly kept its cuts to the stuff that probably doesn't translate well to the screen in the first place).   A lot of the goodness of the book lies in the background detail--Herbert was an excellent "Subcreator", to use JRR's term.

Overall, try it,  but you may not actually like it.

I'm looking for some sci-fi to love. Over my last vacation I tried the Robinson Mars series and Hyperion. Both start well. Hyperion was much better but I still felt like I'd had enough by the time I started the second one. To me, like a Song of Fire and Ice, Mars is potentially a better TV series than book-series. You'd think those authors were getting paid by the word.   

[stingo]

I'm looking for some sci-fi to love. Over my last vacation I tried the Robinson Mars series and Hyperion. Both start well. Hyperion was much better but I still felt like I'd had enough by the time I started the second one. To me, like a Song of Fire and Ice, Mars is potentially a better TV series than book-series. You'd think those authors were getting paid by the word.

If dystopian futures are your thing, you might want to try Hugh Howey's Silo Trilogy - Wool, Shift and Dust.

[North Star]

If dystopian futures are your thing...

I'd love to live in a dystopian future!

[bwv 1080]

I'm looking for some sci-fi to love. Over my last vacation I tried the Robinson Mars series and Hyperion. Both start well. Hyperion was much better but I still felt like I'd had enough by the time I started the second one. To me, like a Song of Fire and Ice, Mars is potentially a better TV series than book-series. You'd think those authors were getting paid by the word.

Have you read the Revelation Space series by Alastair Reynolds?

[Karl Henning]

Court halts Oklahoma executions: why lethal injection is now so controversial

[Jaakko Keskinen]

Rereading Harry Potter books, it seems I have grown into love-hate relationship with it, as seems to be case with more and more works that I read.

Sorry about having so old quote from North Star but when I was browsing through this topic, this caught my attention.

Why should the boy who got in the team because his dad bought everyone in the team the most expensive broomstick win?

I don't know. Part of me believes that wasn't the only reason he got in team. I think it's a case of bit of a protagonist centered morality. While I have no doubt that it was part of the reason he got in the team I think it is remarked at least once, I think in Philosopher's stone, that Draco really is a good flyer. Harry is perhaps better than him, having won against him several times, but I'm not sure if that makes him a bad one (a flyer, that is, as person, see below). I remember that you said earlier in that post that Slytherin team really wasn't that bad, that remark about him buying his way in team just caught my attention. I am sure the bribe from Lucius played a part, maybe even a big part in it, I just don't think that was the only reason.

Now, about other things in Harry Potter. The biggest problems I have with this book are the main character being much of a Mary Sue, succeeding in almost everything (sure it is mentioned that in past, before he knew he was a wizard, he was always picked as last one in physical education: the thing is we never actually see those moments, the moments we actually see are mostly him about winning again and again and again.). Other important part I don't like in these series is the afore mentioned protagonist centered morality. I think the worst parts of this are evident when:
a) In philosopher's stone Dumbledore first congratulates Slytherin about winning a house cup but then says he has to give a "few" last minute-points, which end up being, if I remember correctly, 170 points, just enough for Gryffindor to win Slytherin. Seems rather unfair and prejudiced, doesn't it, considering Dumbledore himself was in Gryffindor.
b) In one book it is mentioned that Fred and George shove this guy named Montague in vanishing cabinet, which, it is mentioned, could have have fatal consequences. He is mentioned having tried to take unfairly points from them but does that justify essentially attempted murder? Even Hermione is only worried that Fred and George would get in trouble for doing this, not because their actions were, you know, homicidal. The fact that they don't care about things like that (including many others, I think one book actually ends with Draco and his friends turned into some slug-like creatures) makes it inconsistent when, in Half-blood Prince, Harry is horrified when he uses Sectumsempra against Draco, almost killing him. And in that instance using a spell like that sounds to me more understandable, considering that Draco didn't try to take points from him but to use a cruciatus curse on him. Sure, it was still a horrifying occurrence but you know, they didn't care about things like that earlier.
c) Portraying Slytherins as jerks. Sure there are nice slytherins like Slughorn but I don't think that's quite enough. Even though Rowling herself has said that there are many nice Slytherins. Then there are guys like Snape and Draco, who are definitely jerks but in the end they try to take steps of atonement for their wrong-doings. Which leads us to things that I really love in these books.

First, I have to say that Rowling is really innovative, having created a beautifully constructed fantasy setting. Her books also have a strong structural unity. And finally I like that (in the last books that is) she uses shades of grey in these books. Yes, I know I complained earlier about protagonist centered morality but things are not quite so all the time. Mentioning some characters now that have either showed remarkable growth in character or at least passing shade of humanity.

Draco is a piece of work. He is definitely not a nice man but he's hardly a psychopath. In last two books he shows a humane side in him, a scared teenager, afraid of that the new Hitler could kill him and his parents if he doesn't obey him. While his attempts to murder Dumbledore are very bad things, you must remember the rule "Blood is thicker than water". Dumbledore, even if he was justified in doing so, was responsible for imprisoning his father in a place that is described as a horrific, human rights abusing place. Lucius of course hardly deserves great food and soft beds, but you can still at least see bit of a Draco's point of view. And ultimately, Draco can't bring himself to directly murder him. I love that. In last book it also is hinted that he recognices Potter and his friends in Malfoy manor, but he seems reluctant to rat them out. It is also mentioned by Rowling that he probably tried to raise his son Scorpius as a better person, meaning that he learned something after all.

About other Malfoys etc: I believe that several fans believed that Lucius's and Narcissas marriage was loveless but I think the final book pretty much proves that while they are not nice persons they really genuinely care about each other. Even one of the most evil characters in the series, Bellatrix Lestrange, seems to genuinely love Narcissa as a sister. Not so sure about her other, disowned sister Andromeda, though.

Then of course there is Snape. He bullies children, is emotionally abusive to them. That is one of the worst things teacher can do to a student. Yet he is also painfully humane. While I guessed from the start that Snape was in love with Lily (as I also guessed about 95 % of things that happened in the last book) I think it is still very craftfully done.

Sorry for the long post and possible typos!


Edit: One final thing I really like about the way Rowling handled Malfoys was the fact that all of them managed to avoid prison. That was probably not completely fair but that kind of thing really happens in real life and I hate it when in some books (cough, Dickens, cough) every single not so likable person gets some divine retribution. So I am glad that Rowling handled it this way.

[milk]

Have you read the Revelation Space series by Alastair Reynolds?

If dystopian futures are your thing, you might want to try Hugh Howey's Silo Trilogy - Wool, Shift and Dust.

Thanks! I'll look into these.