What are you currently reading?

[Moonfish]

Interesting looking but ... Let us know.
I see Tyler Cowen blurbed the book. The world knows few greater masters of the incomprehensible sentence, the garbled paragraph, than Tyler Cowen.

It is fascinating. His initial musing on archives, libraries and museums as 19th century phenomena are well worth reading. Very interesting perspectives.

Re-reading Birkerts' essays as well. Have you read it?

[asin] 0865479577[/asin]

[NikF]

Last Nights of Paris - Soupault




At the moment my girlfriend has a couple of days work away (in Florence...where it's raining?) and so I've been indulging myself without any sort of distraction or break; including being able to listen to more music than usual and to read. Also: steak, wine, etc.
As part of that I'm enjoying a surreal and somewhat charming meander around nocturnal Paris.

[Artem]

I began this behemoth today! Wish me luck! It is definitely intriguing in its scope.

Jürgen Osterhammel: The Transformation of the World - A Global History of the Nineteenth Century

Review from NYRB.

[asin] 0691147450[/asin]

Whishlisted it on amazon. Looks interesting.

[Ken B]

I began this behemoth today! Wish me luck! It is definitely intriguing in its scope.

Jürgen Osterhammel: The Transformation of the World - A Global History of the Nineteenth Century

Review from NYRB.

[asin] 0691147450[/asin]

This appeals to my prejudices. I think the 19th century, especially if you take 1815-1914, saw more change of a more fundamental change in the world and how we view than any century before or since (that's a sample size of 1  ) . And people spout such twaddle about the Victorians ... But it also matters how well a book is written. It sounds dire in that respect.

[Brian]

This appeals to my prejudices. I think the 19th century, especially if you take 1815-1914, saw more change of a more fundamental change in the world and how we view than any century before or since (that's a sample size of 1  ) . And people spout such twaddle about the Victorians ... But it also matters how well a book is written. It sounds dire in that respect.

I feel the same way, especially after attempting to read a few pages of the Amazon preview.

[Moonfish]

I feel the same way, especially after attempting to read a few pages of the Amazon preview.

It is a bit dense (perhaps the translation?), but excellent (so far)...    0:)

[Jo498]

I haven't read this one but you have to keep in mind that when a book by a German history professor is considered "easy reading" by German academic standards, it's probably considered dense and barely readable by anglophone standards. (If you want to get a taste of what's considered dense by German standards, have a look at some Hegel.... or better, don't.)

[Moonfish]

I haven't read this one but you have to keep in mind that when a book by a German history professor is considered "easy reading" by German academic standards, it's probably considered dense and barely readable by anglophone standards. (If you want to get a taste of what's considered dense by German standards, have a look at some Hegel.... or better, don't.)

Yes, I am familiar with Hegel (in translation). Great stuff (but not exactly entertaining - brick and mortar). I was not referring to the density of the text in terms of the author but rather the intricacy of the art of translation. Phrases can become awkward in the transition between languages as I am sure you are well aware. Regardless, I like the book very much.

[Brian]

I haven't read this one but you have to keep in mind that when a book by a German history professor is considered "easy reading" by German academic standards, it's probably considered dense and barely readable by anglophone standards. (If you want to get a taste of what's considered dense by German standards, have a look at some Hegel.... or better, don't.)

My father tackled Kant in English and German both, and he failed both times...

[Ken B]

My father tackled Kant in English and German both, and he failed both times...

As opposed to Kant, who only failed in German.

[Karl Henning]

... Until no one feels a need to kill those of another race.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2015/0622/Looking-for-ways-to-prevent-another-Charleston

[Ken B]

[quote  link=topic=68.msg903440#msg903440 date=1435167987]
... Until no one feels a need to kill those of another race.
[/quote]

Rather a low bar. Despite what the nazis said, most of the people they killed were of their own race. Most of those killed in Nanking were of the same race as their killers ...

[Karl Henning]

Point taken.  Is "until no one feels the need to kill anyone else" too quixotic? . . .

[Jaakko Keskinen]

Contrary what the cover says, only part of this christmas number for Household Words in 1856 is written by Dickens. Major part of this is also written by Wilkie Collins and the middle section contains short stories by authors Percy Fitzgerald, Harriet Parr, Adelaide Anne Procter and Reverend James White. While this is definitely one of the greatest christmas numbers of Dickens in charge of, there were several bad things. For starters, it took me forever to find a copy of this with the complete text, not only the Wreck part written by Dickens. I always wondered why did it end so abruptly. I was amazed when I heard that there were much much more to come. Also the uneven quality is influenced by several different authors writing this, some clearly greater than others. Although, oddly enough, the parts I most hated were written by the two most important authors of this collaboration: Dickens and Collins. Holy shit, the biggest sin of this collaboration is the stupid death of Mr. Rarx, "the jerk", and after previously having described the main character Captain Ravender's "death"... in the end it's revealed that he didn't die after all and he was saved and everyone lived happily ever after etc. Oh give me a break, Dickens! I am so sick of these miraculous recoveries and your inability to let your main characters die (A tale of two cities could be seen as an exception, although Dickens probably saw Charles Darnay (which doesn't in any way sound like the name of our author, oh no) as the true main character, who of course survives and lives happily ever after). And Mr. Rarx "the jerk"... I say "jerk" in quotation marks because everyone seems to hate him even when he is doing nothing bad (which means most of the time). Designated jerk, not an actual jerk. Actually, much of this work before the shipwreck (and even after it) reminds me of HMS Pinafore, including having a character on the ship who is supposed to be seen as a jerk but actually fails to seem that bad. Hell, even in work like David Copperfield or Little Dorrit it bothered me how the main characters treat the bad guy like shit far before he actually has done anything bad, or anything that would even imply that he would commit bad actions. That's why I like main characters like Pip more, because even though he is meant to be seen as a more flawed character, I actually feel that he is much more humane and much less jerkass towards other people. I like jerks, though, but they have to be written effectively, and actually meant to be jerks, not straight-out- goodies who just fail being good in reader's eyes.

That being said, there is something to enjoy for. The shipwreck is described powerfully enough, I like several of the characters, the "jerk" mr. Rarx is given some interesting attributes, and even redeeming qualities which seem to be redeeming qualities even in the author's eyes. Of course, like I said, it's hard to talk about redeeming qualities when the character doesn't seem that much of a bad guy. The description of scenery is vivid, shining in colors of the Golden Mary of the title, the lust for gold is often superbly powerful and the several "lesser" authors actually write quite effectively. Having female authors in the group also is a nice plus, and they write fine prose and poetry. And it's interesting to see several authors trying their hands in one entirety, and to read about the development of this christmas number. If I am not mistaken, this was one of the first collaborations of Dickens and Collins, if not their very first one. Maybe I should start reading more Collins. I've heard that he creates a magnificent scoundrel in Count Fosco in The Woman in White. The Moonstone has gathered much praise as well.

Has anyone ever read Collins? Are his books worthwhile to read?

[Ken B]

Contrary what the cover says, only part of this christmas number for Household Words in 1856 is written by Dickens. Major part of this is also written by Wilkie Collins and the middle section contains short stories by authors Percy Fitzgerald, Harriet Parr, Adelaide Anne Procter and Reverend James White. While this is definitely one of the greatest christmas numbers of Dickens in charge of, there were several bad things. For starters, it took me forever to find a copy of this with the complete text, not only the Wreck part written by Dickens. I always wondered why did it end so abruptly. I was amazed when I heard that there were much much more to come. Also the uneven quality is influenced by several different authors writing this, some clearly greater than others. Although, oddly enough, the parts I most hated were written by the two most important authors of this collaboration: Dickens and Collins. Holy shit, the biggest sin of this collaboration is the stupid death of Mr. Rarx, "the jerk", and after previously having described the main character Captain Ravender's "death"... in the end it's revealed that he didn't die after all and he was saved and everyone lived happily ever after etc. Oh give me a break, Dickens! I am so sick of these miraculous recoveries and your inability to let your main characters die (A tale of two cities could be seen as an exception, although Dickens probably saw Charles Darnay (which doesn't in any way sound like the name of our author, oh no) as the true main character, who of course survives and lives happily ever after). And Mr. Rarx "the jerk"... I say "jerk" in quotation marks because everyone seems to hate him even when he is doing nothing bad (which means most of the time). Designated jerk, not an actual jerk. Actually, much of this work before the shipwreck (and even after it) reminds me of HMS Pinafore, including having a character on the ship who is supposed to be seen as a jerk but actually fails to seem that bad. Hell, even in work like David Copperfield or Little Dorrit it bothered me how the main characters treat the bad guy like shit far before he actually has done anything bad, or anything that would even imply that he would commit bad actions. That's why I like main characters like Pip more, because even though he is meant to be seen as a more flawed character, I actually feel that he is much more humane and much less jerkass towards other people. I like jerks, though, but they have to be written effectively, and actually meant to be jerks, not straight-out- goodies who just fail being good in reader's eyes.

That being said, there is something to enjoy for. The shipwreck is described powerfully enough, I like several of the characters, the "jerk" mr. Rarx is given some interesting attributes, and even redeeming qualities which seem to be redeeming qualities even in the author's eyes. Of course, like I said, it's hard to talk about redeeming qualities when the character doesn't seem that much of a bad guy. The description of scenery is vivid, shining in colors of the Golden Mary of the title, the lust for gold is often superbly powerful and the several "lesser" authors actually write quite effectively. Having female authors in the group also is a nice plus, and they write fine prose and poetry. And it's interesting to see several authors trying their hands in one entirety, and to read about the development of this christmas number. If I am not mistaken, this was one of the first collaborations of Dickens and Collins, if not their very first one. Maybe I should start reading more Collins. I've heard that he creates a magnificent scoundrel in Count Fosco in The Woman in White. The Moonstone has gathered much praise as well.

Has anyone ever read Collins? Are his books worthwhile to read?

Collins definitely is. The Woman in White is one of the most readable books I ever came across. I read it in just over one day and then started on The Moonstone. He's less reliable once you get past those two, but Armadale was good.
I also recommend Uncle Silas by Le Fanu as a great read.

[Brian]

I haven't read "Woman in White" but Collins' "Moonstone" is a fun read and is also widely credited as the first true detective novel.

[Jaakko Keskinen]

Thank you! I'll read him more as soon as I can!

Recently finished these three Stevenson short stories:







Didn't care much for Janet (the language style was annoying) but Markheim and Falesá are definitely among the best stuff I've ever read from Stevenson. Markheim reminds me of Raskolnikov, I wonder if Stevenson ever read Dostoyevsky? Falesá is a very appealing work what with its neat handling of racism etc. I really like the main character. Yes, he is a deeply flawed character but that only makes him more complex and layered.

[aligreto]

+1 for Collins' The Woman in White.

[Artem]

Two books that I finished recently:



Satantango was great and I look forward to reading more books by this writer.

[Jo498]

"Woman in White" is very good (I read this in German, it was translated by Arno Schmidt, a notoriously difficult postwar author who did quite a few translations (to make a living, I guess) and also had a taste for the underrated/trashy), the "Moonstone" might be even better, it is certainly funnier because the main narrator (an elderly butler of the family where the mystery takes place) is very comically drawn. This may not be as deep as e.g. Dickens but it is at least as readable.