What are you currently reading?

[stingo]

I just finished Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children by Ransom Riggs for an online book club to which I belong. It's not something I'd pick up left to my own devices, but it was actually a quick read, which, for a 382 page book says a lot I suppose. I am intrigued enough with the world and characters Riggs created to pick up subsequent volumes, the next being the already available Hollow City.

[asin]B004FGMDOQ[/asin]

[bwv 1080]

serious look at the risks of Artificial Intelligence, which if feasible promises to be the last invention humans ever make

[Ken B]

serious look at the risks of Artificial Intelligence, which if feasible promises to be the last invention humans ever make

You lookin' at me?  You lookin' at me? Well I don't know who else you could be lookin' at. You lookin' at me?

[Karl Henning]

Published: May 6, 1990

To the Editor [of The New York Times]:

The colorful canard that Adolf Hitler's last name was "originally" Schicklgruber continues to live on. I'm referring to your April 14 "About New York" column on the third reunion of the Mobile Radio Broadcasting Companies of World War II — the psychological warfare experts who were responsible for boosting our morale while demoralizing the enemy by using lies or the truth — whichever was more effective.

In the case of Hitler's presumed last name, it seems a lie was more effective, perhaps because "Schicklgruber" sounds more ridiculous than "Hitler," even today. Therefore, the lie lives on, being more preferable than the truth. This may be the most enduring success of our psychological warfare experts.

As you report it, Hans Habe, leader of the Broadcasting Companies and post-World War II novelist, was responsible for having "broken the story that Hitler's original name was Schicklgruber."

[mn dave]

On me iPad.
[asin]1569474788[/asin]

[Karl Henning]

Why Muslims from US, Europe join Islamic State

[Ken B]

Why Muslims from US, Europe join Islamic State

Dreadful article. Religion really is vital here. The stuff about "religious novices" whitewashes that fact that converts are often the most zealous, in any religion or cause.

[ritter]

Antonin Artaud: Les Tarahumaras.



Poetic at times, scatologiocal at others, oscillationg between luicidity and irrationality (or plain weirdness)...but as often is the case with Artaud, nothing short of fascinating! 

[stingo]

In the middle of Snow by Orhan Pamuk so far and I think it's really good.

[asin]B000MAH7UO[/asin]

[Florestan]

In the middle of Snow by Orhan Pamuk so far and I think it's really good.

[asin]B000MAH7UO[/asin]

The only Pamuk's novel I liked. The others are the epitome of boredom for me.

[stingo]

The only Pamuk's novel I liked. The others are the epitome of boredom for me.

Interesting. I am really liking it, though I understand public opinion doesn't care for this book as much as his others.

[Karl Henning]

It may sound strange, but the question must be asked: Will New Jersey take a lesson from Singapore?

Last year, a probe by Europol investigators found 680 matches worldwide were fixed by syndicates with links to Singapore. Asia-dominated criminal groups are laundering about $140 million a year through illegal sports betting, according to the International Centre for Sport Security.

[Ken B]

It may sound strange, but the question must be asked: Will New Jersey take a lesson from Singapore?

Soccer proves cheating and fixing are no bar to popularity.

[Karl Henning]

There is that.

[lisa needs braces]

Incoherent essay from A.O Scott. "The Death of Adulthood."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/magazine/the-death-of-adulthood-in-american-culture.html?_r=0

Shorter A.O Scott: "Adulthood is dead and not cool anymore and this is bad, but it's also good because feminism."

[Drasko]

Venedikt Erofeev  - Moscow-Petushki

[Karl Henning]

... the strange spectacle of four foreigners being the stars of a New Zealand political rally ....

[The Six]

A classic children's book

[Karl Henning]

... can you also with total confidence grant Apple the ability to write files of its choosing onto your hardware? That is a strictly rhetorical question because, too bad, you already did.

[Jaakko Keskinen]

More Dickens. Rereading his last completed novel, Our mutual friend.

Critics usually say that the previous book, Great Expectations, was his last great one. But I dunno, I think this has some good stuff in it. Although admittedly much bad or mediocre as well, but I run to that in his other books too. So maybe this doesn't count as a great book. It's just that the best thing in the book is so unbelievably good that it overshadows everything else.

Many Dickens's novels have usually one side-story along with the main one. This has actually two. The main one, concerning John Harmon, Boffins, the villain Silas wegg, Bella Wilfer, Mr. Venus and Betty Higden, is mainly pretty weak. In fact I could almost swear that Dickens was high when he wrote this story. There is some of that in the second storyline too, what with Lizzie and Charley Hexam looking into fire and seeing pictures in it, but at least it's not present almost all the time. John Harmon, the "our mutual friend" of the title is bland and uninteresting. The villain Silas Wegg is thoroughly tiresome with his insistence that there is something valuable hidden in giant dust heaps that Boffins inherit along with lot of money. And to make the matters worse, there is. Nicodemus Boffin aka "Golden dustman" has some interesting qualities, is pretty funny when he appears to have become miser but then Dickens, seemingly running out of time, decides to try to explain it as mere pretending. Many critics, and me too, agree that Dickens's original intention was to really make Boffin asshole, to show all the corruption money causes, which he would later repent. But like many critics said, he probably run out of time since this novel was published in twenty monthly parts and he couldn't quite fit it or something else. But I wonder, if that's the case then why did he waste space by constantly shouting about "My lords and gentlemen and honorable boards" in passages describing Betty Higden's selflessness. She is boring enough without them. Venus annoys me as well, with his catch-phrase regarding Pleasant Riderhood's refusal to marry him. Although Timothy Spall seemed to portray him more interestingly in 1998 tv serial. But that has probably more to do with Timothy Spall's acting skills than with the character himself. Easily the best part of the main story line is Bella Wilfer's characterization. Her family in general doesn't interest me that much but Bella herself is one of the most convincing female characters Dickens has created. She is no Rosa Dartle but she works well enough. My favorite part with her is when she turns pale after hearing that her husband, John Harmon, is severely accused of murder (of murdering himself, no less. It's a complicated situation). You might for the moment think that she is horrified that she possibly married a murderer. But then she shouts: "How dare they!" The build-up is perfect. You might think that anyone would respond that way after hearing their loved one being accused of something horrible. And they probably would but I think the way this works best for me at least is that at first Bella is described as mercenary gold digger, full of insecurities etc. and as, well, a jerkass. But that's mostly only on the surface. The way her inner beauty comes more and more in plain sight is described pretty convincingly. There are times when she annoys me as well but mostly she is described fine, at parts even superbly.

The second storyline of the book is easily the best. It involves Hexams, Roger "Rogue" Riderhood and his daughter Pleasant, Doll's dressmaker Jenny Wren, dissolute Eugene Wrayburn and schoolmaster Bradley Headstone. Lizzie Hexam is one of those "perfect" womans Dickens is so fond of. However she is more realistically portrayed than usually is the case with Dickens heroines. Still extremely boring character though. I can bearly read her thoughts during her rescue of Eugene Wrayburn. It tastes like diabetes. And how come she speaks perfect King's english despite being a working class woman and her father certainly doesn't talk King's English? It's like in Oliver Twist. Her brother Charley is not interesting either. He is uninterestingly portrayed selfish jerk, that's it. Their father Jesse "Gaffer Hexam", is more interesting. He is fierce and aggresssive man and petty criminal, often compared to a bird of prey but he seems to be loving father, at least towards Lizzie. Rogue Riderhood is even more likable. This might seem shocking seeing how he is easily the most evil character in the entire book and the nicest thing that can be said about him is grim admiration towards how much of a cunning bastard he is. But he is extremely funny. Some might think this just stupid but I laugh at how he thinks affidavit is "Alfred David" and at his drunken rants about how he is a honest man who gains his honest living by the sweat of his brow all the while committing more and more jerkass actions. Plus his belief that once a man has almost drowned he can never be drowned again. He is so delightful that I actually kind of hope he hadn't died in the end, even though he seemed to have it coming. One critic called Silas Wegg a delightful rascal. But I think that title belongs to Rogue here. Pleasant, Rogue's loving daughter is not half the fun her abusive father is. Go figure. Jenny Wren is often praised but I find her insufferable usually. And then easily the greatest character in the whole book, who is so unbelieavbly powerfully written that I have very hard time believing it's from the same guy who wrote something like rants to his Lords and gentlemen and honorable boards. The character who has the honor being in my avatar picture right now, portrayed by David Morrissey in 1998 tv serial. His name is Bradley Headstone. Outwardly cool and civil schoolmaster, he has incredibly powerful passionate side inside which makes him fall in love with Lizzie Hexam and ultimately trying in his jealousy to murder his rival, Eugene Wrayburn. Now you might think that this guy is eeeviiiiiilll like Riderhood. Nope. He is extremely complex and sympathetic character. Sure attempted murder is attempted murder but the situation is more complex in that he has worked hard his entire life to achieve a respectful position in society. He falls in love with a girl, girl doesn't fall in love with him but instead falls in love with a  well-bred and educated guy who constantly mocks Bradley and his lower class position and treads upon his self-respect, makes Bradley seem clumsy in his attempts to talk back to him, for the most part of the book treats Lizzie manipulatingly, knowing his power and considers even taking her by force and finally: he knows that Headstone constantly follows him around at night, believing Eugene might take him to Lizzie who has gone hiding, Eugene leads him around the London aimlessly, at times turning around and going right past him and pretending Headstone doesn't even exist, even talking about Headstone in front of him how he (Eugene) is making Headstone undergo grinding torments, in other words, sadistically torturing him. Now Eugene is not all-bad, after almost murdered by Headstone he repents and marries Lizzie,and even before that he pays for Lizzie's education but I still think one critic makes a good point in saying that although Headstone is technically the "bad half" and Eugene the "good half" of each other, Headstone still is, paradoxically, more sympathetic. Wrayburn is portrayed superbly as well but I prefer Headstone in his hauntingly convincing psychological insight he provides. Headstone is actually probably the Dickens character I most identify with. So while the second storyline isn't perfect either, the stuff that is good is so unbeliavably good that it overshadows the actual main storyline.

Finally, the third storyline, involves Society such as Lammles, Veneerings, Podsnaps, Mortimer Lightwood, Twemlow, and Fascination Fledgeby. Similar to main storyline, this is not always that interesting. Lammles are mainly forgettable and boring, except maybe getting a few chuckles out of Alfred Lammle's  "Give me your nose, sir!" shouts which also makes me think that Dickens was high when writing this. I'm not sure what to think about lawyer Lightwood. I guess he has some interesting characteristics here and there but he's bit bland character as well. Fascination Fledgeby is boring. Podsnap is mainly interesting in that he is modelled on Dickens's best friend, Forster. The satire involving him and other society members doesn't usually raise my interests.

So while Our Mutual Friend is a flawed book, the stuff that is good is usually excellent, in case of Headstone actually unbeliavably good. This is often the case in Dickens but probably in no other book as plainly visible as in this.

Oh, and did I mention that "Our mutual friend" is bad english?

Edit: After rereading Hard times I'm gonna read Pickwick and Dombey which I have never read from beginning to end.