What are you currently reading?

[Ganondorf]

Emma (Jane Austen)

I am still reading Emma and while it is very well plotted, I find the characters the writer clearly expects us to be sympathetic towards absolutely insufferable.

[San Antone]

Joseph Conrad : An Outcast of the Islands



An Outcast of the Islands is the second novel by Joseph Conrad, published in 1896, inspired by Conrad's experience as mate of a steamer, the Vidar.

The novel details the undoing of Peter Willems, a disreputable, immoral man who, on the run from a scandal in Makassar, finds refuge in a hidden native village, only to betray his benefactors over lust for the tribal chief's daughter. The story features Conrad's recurring character Tom Lingard, who also appears in Almayer's Folly (1895) and The Rescue (1920), in addition to sharing other characters with those novels.

Conrad romanticizes the jungle environment and its inhabitants in a similar style to that of his Heart of Darkness.

********************

My plan is to get as far as I can reading Conrad from start to finish.

[Brian]

I am still reading Emma and while it is very well plotted, I find the characters the writer clearly expects us to be sympathetic towards absolutely insufferable.

Hmmm, I've just started volume 3, although this is a reread. I think the only character we're supposed to like is Mr. Knightley? Perhaps Robert Martin and Emma's old governess.

But I choose to read Austen as a satirist rather than a romantic, so I follow Emma's own arc more as that of a satirical buffoon getting her comeuppance than a young lady seeking to help her friends. The very first sentence plays on that ambiguity...it doesn't contain any explicitly negative commentary about Emma, while still making me dislike her instantly. 

The only dislikeable character who is really hurting my enjoyment of the book as a whole is Miss Bates. I skip a lot of her long speeches.

[JBS]

Hmmm, I've just started volume 3, although this is a reread. I think the only character we're supposed to like is Mr. Knightley? Perhaps Robert Martin and Emma's old governess.

But I choose to read Austen as a satirist rather than a romantic, so I follow Emma's own arc more as that of a satirical buffoon getting her comeuppance than a young lady seeking to help her friends. The very first sentence plays on that ambiguity...it doesn't contain any explicitly negative commentary about Emma, while still making me dislike her instantly. 

The only dislikeable character who is really hurting my enjoyment of the book as a whole is Miss Bates. I skip a lot of her long speeches.

Emma does gain some self knowledge: by the end of the book she's much more likeable.

The only truly dislikeable characters--the ones Austen intends the reader to dislike--are Mr and Mrs Elton.

The Bateses and Jane Fairfax are women trying to maintain social standing while not having any money, and the near impossible situation Jane is placed in because of her poverty is what drives the plot (when you get to the Big Reveal you'll see what I mean).  Women who are financially dependent on men and therefore not really secure are the focus of all Austen's novels.  Emma is the only Austen heroine who doesn't have to worry about a future in which she may have to live on a very limited income.

[Ganondorf]

I think the only character we're supposed to like is Mr. Knightley?

Thats right, I dont like Mr. Knightley one bit. At one point he starts ranting crap about Harriet's rejection of a side characters' proposal something like "If she keeps rejecting every suitor she soon will think nobody good enough to marry" - as if woman's destiny is to be married. And yes I know that this was the popular view at the time but it still infuriates me. Price and Prejudice on the other hand has main characters blame poor 15-year old Lydie because the sleazy scumbag Wickham ran off with her.So in comparison Knightley is almost likable compared to protagonists of Pride and Prejudice.

[Florestan]

Thats right, I dont like Mr. Knightley one bit. At one point he starts ranting crap about Harriet's rejection of a side characters' proposal something like "If she keeps rejecting every suitor she soon will think nobody good enough to marry" - as if woman's destiny is to be married. And yes I know that this was the popular view at the time but it still infuriates me. Price and Prejudice on the other hand has main characters blame poor 15-year old Lydie because the sleazy scumbag Wickham ran off with her.So in comparison Knightley is almost likable compared to protagonists of Pride and Prejudice.

If late 18th century English mentality is so infuriating to you, then why do you waste your time on Jane Austen? 

[San Antone]

Hmmm, I've just started volume 3, although this is a reread. I think the only character we're supposed to like is Mr. Knightley? Perhaps Robert Martin and Emma's old governess.

But I choose to read Austen as a satirist rather than a romantic, so I follow Emma's own arc more as that of a satirical buffoon getting her comeuppance than a young lady seeking to help her friends. The very first sentence plays on that ambiguity...it doesn't contain any explicitly negative commentary about Emma, while still making me dislike her instantly. 

The only dislikeable character who is really hurting my enjoyment of the book as a whole is Miss Bates. I skip a lot of her long speeches.

I haven't read Austin in decades, but consider her among my favorite authors. 

I hadn't read anything until I got a job proofreading at Skadden Arps, a huge law firm in NYC, in the early 1980s. All the proofreaders were *artists, actors, painters, musicians, etc., i.e. people who had other concerns besides using the information in the documents for insider trading, or any inappropriate manner.

We had lots of down time and would get to talking about books, music, plays, and someone had a huge paperback complete Jane Austin, and raved about her - so I jumped in.

* Some of the folks I met there who went on to successful careers in their chosen field include Damien Bona (Oscars historian, now deceased, sadly), Dallas Murphy (mystery writer, Artie Deemer books), Jacqueline (Jackie) Osherow (poet), Betsy Berne (painter, author - her brother is the jazz saxophonist Tim Berne), and Amy Aquino (actress) - among others. It was really a great job.

[BWV 1080]

I haven't read Austin in decades, but consider her among my favorite authors. 

I hadn't read anything until I got a job proofreading at Skadden Arps, a huge law firm in NYC, in the early 1980s. All the proofreaders were *artists, actors, painters, musicians, etc., i.e. people who had other concerns besides using the information in the documents for insider trading, or any inappropriate manner.

 I guess insider trading was only for the partners at Skadden Arps in the 80s

[San Antone]

I guess insider trading was only for the partners at Skadden Arps in the 80s

When I was there there was a big insider trading case involving a senior associate (who later got a job as a waiter at Smith & Wollensky), a word processing staffer, and a dial car driver.

[Ganondorf]

If late 18th century English mentality is so infuriating to you, then why do you waste your time on Jane Austen? 

When it comes to Pride and Prejudice one reason is probably that most of the book feels surprisingly modern. It's not until Lydie-Wickham plot thread that the book comes truly the product of its time and that was towards the end. Considering Emma is widely considered the author's crown jewel I thought that when most of the P & P is superb maybe Emma is one of those works which manages to completely transcend the biases of its time. Well, Emma showed its failings in this regard rather fast but since I have OCD, I often have to finish the book after I've started it. There are exceptions to this like Tolstoy's War and Peace but that is because I found no redeeming features in that book. Emma, for all its faults, is perfectly plotted so it is by no means a failure. It is likely I will give another chance to War and Peace at some point since I very much enjoyed Anna Karenina.

[AnotherSpin]

The film starring Anthony Quinn was good, but it in no way replaces the book it's based on.

[vers la flamme]

Just finished John Osborne's Look Back in Anger. Not sure how I feel about it; I wanted to punch the protagonist in the face multiple times throughout the course of the play, so if that was the author's intention then I suppose it was a resounding success.

[Florestan]

Tolstoy's War and Peace but that is because I found no redeeming features in that book.

Let me guess: early 19-th century Russian mentality is totally infuriating to you, right? 

Seriously now, what is so terrible about War and Peace in your opinion?

[AnotherSpin]

[..] There are exceptions to this like Tolstoy's War and Peace but that is because I found no redeeming features in that book. [..] It is likely I will give another chance to War and Peace at some point since I very much enjoyed Anna Karenina.

Sure, War and Peace is by no means a book for everyone. Don't rush into giving the book (or yourself) a second chance, it will wait any span of time for a moment when you are mature enough

[Florestan]

A fascinating piece of social and cultural history, written in an eminently readable and entertaining style. Highly recommended.

[Brian]

That looks very interesting. Loesser was an accomplished pianist and composer too, right?

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

Fun read.

[atardecer]

Dostoevsky - Three Short Novels: Poor Folk / The Double / The Eternal Husband
Translations - Andrew R. MacAndrew

[Florestan]

That looks very interesting. Loesser was an accomplished pianist and composer too, right?

Pianist yes, composer no.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Loesser

[vers la flamme]

Just finished Itamar Moses's 2005 play Bach at Leipzig, which I found randomly while browsing the library. It was hilarious, and so good. A highly fictionalized account of the power struggle which emerged following the death of Johann Kuhnau in 1722. My main gripe is that I think the author fundamentally misunderstood some of the theological tenets of Lutheranism, which has some minor bearing on certain elements of the plot, but that can be overlooked in a farce as overall ridiculous as this. Would recommend. The ending was beautifully done too.