|
J_RBG posted:Sioned Davies' translation for Oxford World's Classics was fine for me. Thanks for that. I'm amused that Tolkein
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 23:59 |
|
|
amuayse posted:Thanks for that. I'm amused that Tolkein Honestly, if you enjoy Tolkien, pretty much all of medieval British & Irish literature is a goldmine for those moments where you go 'huh, this sounds familiar'. The films have given him a lot of credibility among this generation which can only be an exciting thing for medievalists, imo. But yeah, the Mabinogion is some of the most imaginative literature I've ever read. It's great stuff, I'd heartily recommend it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
End Of Worlds posted:I'm sorry if I've missed this elsewhere, but could you recommend some of these? It's the first chapter of Mimesis. Also I've been reading the five books of moses from robert alter and I really like the notes he has on each page. Doesn't tell you everything but it's a nice mix of translation details and interpretation so you don't feel lost figuring out what you just read. Also provides a lot of sources for further reading.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 07:45
|
|
|
I read the unabridged Quo Vadis and Ben Hur books when I was like 13 years old, as well as stuff like Moby Dick, Pride and Prejudice, etc. Now all I read is fantasy or scifi stuff. I've read 50-60 books in the last three months or so. :-). Some of this stuff you are talking about sounds like really heavy reading. A lot of people nowadays would not be able to comprehend some of these books mentioned in this thread, lol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
JackKnight posted:I read the unabridged Quo Vadis and Ben Hur books when I was like 13 years old, as well as stuff like Moby Dick, Pride and Prejudice, etc. Now all I read is fantasy or scifi stuff. I've read 50-60 books in the last three months or so. :-). Some of this stuff you are talking about sounds like really heavy reading. A lot of people nowadays would not be able to comprehend some of these books mentioned in this thread, lol. Hello. Thank you for choosing to use your first post ever on this thread! However, I believe that while it is good that you are reading, perhaps you should try to read books that take a little longer? Maybe something with a little more substance and density? Sometimes the best things in life require effort and time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
JackKnight posted:I read the unabridged Quo Vadis and Ben Hur books when I was like 13 years old, as well as stuff like Moby Dick, Pride and Prejudice, etc. Now all I read is fantasy or scifi stuff. I've read 50-60 books in the last three months or so. :-). Some of this stuff you are talking about sounds like really heavy reading. A lot of people nowadays would not be able to comprehend some of these books mentioned in this thread, lol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Sir John Feelgood posted:Could you post a list or a partial list of the 50-60 books you've read in the past 90 days? I'm just curious. Sure. Also, I checked the purchase dates and it is actually about 4 months. Terry Brooks: The Sword Of Shannara Terry Brooks: The Elfstones Of Shannara Terry Brooks: The Wishsong Of Shannara David A. Wells: Thinblade David A. Wells: Sovereign Stone David A. Wells: Mindbender David A. Wells: Blood Of The Earth David A. Wells: Cursed Bones Charles Stross: The Rhesus Chart Dan Simmons: Hyperion Brandon Sanderson: Alcatraz Versus the Evil Librarians Brandon Sanderson: Alcatraz Versus the Scrivener’s Bones Brandon Sanderson: Alcatraz Versus the Knights of Crystallia Brandon Sanderson: Alcatraz Versus the Shattered Lens Brandon Sanderson: The Final Empire: Mistborn Book 1 Brandon Sanderson: The Well Of Ascension: Mistborn Book 2 Brandon Sanderson: The Hero Of Ages: Mistborn Book 3 Brandon Sanderson: The Alloy Of Law: A Mistborn Novel Brandon Sanderson: Steelheart: Reckoners, Book 1 Brandon Sanderson: Warbreaker Brandon Sanderson: The Rithmatist Brandon Sanderson: The Emperor’s Soul Brandon Sanderson: Legion Brandon Sanderson: Elantris Brandon Sanderson: The Way Of Kings: Stormlight Archive Book 1 Brandon Sanderson: Words of Radiance: Stormlight Archive Book 2 Sarah J. Maas: Throne of Glass Sarah J. Maas: Crown of Midnight Sarah J. Maas: Heir of Fire Graham Joyce: Some Kind Of Fairy Tale Kevin Hearne: Hounded Kevin Hearne: Hexed Kevin Hearne: Hammered Kevin Hearne: Tricked Kevin Hearne: Trapped Kevin Hearne: Hunted Kevin Hearne: Shattered Shannon Hale: The Goose Girl Lev Grossman: The Magicians Lev Grossman: The Magician King Lev Grossman: The Magicians Land Terry Goodkind: Debt of Bones Terry Goodkind: Wizards First Rule Terry Goodkind: Stone of Tears Terry Goodkind: Blood of the Fold Terry Goodkind: Temple of the Winds Neil Gaiman, Terry Pratchett: Good Omens Neil Gaiman: American Gods Neil Gaiman: Neverwhere Sebastian Fitzek: The Child Larry Correia: Monster Hunter International Larry Correia: Monster Hunter Vendetta Larry Correia: Monster Hunter Alpha Larry Correia: Monster Hunter Legion Larry Correia: Monster Hunter Nemesis Larry Correia: Hard Magic Larry Correia: Spellbound Larry Correia: Warbound Orson Scott Card: The Lost Gate Orson Scott Card: The Gate Thief Jim Butcher: Storm Front Jim Butcher: Fool Moon Jim Butcher: Grave Peril Peter V. Brett: The Warded Man Peter V. Brett: The Daylight War Peter V. Brett: The Desert Spear Jim Bernheimer: Origins of a D-List Supervillain Jim Bernheimer: Confessions of a D-List Supervillain Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
I invite everyone in this thread to take the challenge and read through Finnegan's Wake with me. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3674764
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:Hello. Thank you for choosing to use your first post ever on this thread! I agree, but lately I have just wanted to zone out. Reading books such as those mentioned isn't a relaxing experience (for me) because it takes a lot of conscious focus to follow the language constructs and terminologies I never use in real life. Were I to read Shakespeare now, I would miss half of the wit the first time around, so I would have to read it twice or more to fully understand it. I agree I should know these books, but I am a truck driver. If I started quoting shakespeare all the sudden, people would look at me funny. :-)
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
JackKnight posted:I agree, but lately I have just wanted to zone out. Reading books such as those mentioned isn't a relaxing experience (for me) because it takes a lot of conscious focus to follow the language constructs and terminologies I never use in real life. Were I to read Shakespeare now, I would miss half of the wit the first time around, so I would have to read it twice or more to fully understand it. I agree I should know these books, but I am a truck driver. If I started quoting shakespeare all the sudden, people would look at me funny. :-) A good thing with Shakespeare is that you don't have to read him! Support your local theater troupe and see a Shakespeare in the park play. Or watch one of Kenneth Branagh's movies (I recommend either Much Ado About Nothing or Hamlet).
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:I invite everyone in this thread to take the challenge and read through Finnegan's Wake with me. I am listening to a 10 minute excerpt of this book.......there is no way I am going to try to listen or read 35 hours of this. O_O It is oddly meditative though. I could see using it as whitenoise for meditating.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
JackKnight posted:I agree, but lately I have just wanted to zone out. Reading books such as those mentioned isn't a relaxing experience (for me) because it takes a lot of conscious focus to follow the language constructs and terminologies I never use in real life. Were I to read Shakespeare now, I would miss half of the wit the first time around, so I would have to read it twice or more to fully understand it. I agree I should know these books, but I am a truck driver. If I started quoting shakespeare all the sudden, people would look at me funny. :-) how about omse nice hemingway?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:A good thing with Shakespeare is that you don't have to read him! Support your local theater troupe and see a Shakespeare in the park play. Or watch one of Kenneth Branagh's movies (I recommend either Much Ado About Nothing or Hamlet). Agreed. It's a fuller experience to see Shakespeare performed opposed to just reading it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
While Shakespeare's plays were certainly meant to be seen rather than read, if you aren't super familiar with the language and expressions and political/social references of his time you are going to miss a lot. The major advantage of reading the plays is that most editions of them come with all kinds of notes to explain said expressions and references. Really it's kind of essential to both read and see the plays in order to really appreciate the full experience.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:A good thing with Shakespeare is that you don't have to read him! Support your local theater troupe and see a Shakespeare in the park play. Or watch one of Kenneth Branagh's movies (I recommend either Much Ado About Nothing or Hamlet). The Belgian posted:how about omse nice hemingway?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
JackKnight posted:I just bought both those on iTunes, as well as Twelfth Night. I know I like twelfth night quite a bit, but I am wondering about a four hour movie (Hamlet), lol If you like those, get Henry V and Othello. Branagh's Hamlet is the best version put to film, hands down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
How about instead try and read catch 22, no longer human by ozuma dazai, american psycho, down and out in Paris and London, a ryu marakami book, uhhhh some other stuff I can not think of off the top of my head. All good things that are easy to understand the first time through.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 08:24
|
|
|
JackKnight posted:I agree, but lately I have just wanted to zone out. Reading books such as those mentioned isn't a relaxing experience (for me) because it takes a lot of conscious focus to follow the language constructs and terminologies I never use in real life. Were I to read Shakespeare now, I would miss half of the wit the first time around, so I would have to read it twice or more to fully understand it. I agree I should know these books, but I am a truck driver. If I started quoting shakespeare all the sudden, people would look at me funny. :-) What I like to do is to read multiple books at the same time, so you could read one which requires more focus to understand and appreciate the text and another for turning your brain off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 08:36
|
|
|
Stravinsky posted:How about instead try and read catch 22, no longer human by ozuma dazai, american psycho, down and out in Paris and London, a ryu marakami book, uhhhh some other stuff I can not think of off the top of my head. All good things that are easy to understand the first time through. Fellwenner posted:What I like to do is to read multiple books at the same time, so you could read one which requires more focus to understand and appreciate the text and another for turning your brain off. Yeah, I am kind of doing that now. I've got a book that takes some focusing to follow, and I am interspersing it with another book series I am reading.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 09:04
|
|
|
I really miss the time when I read only one book at a time... Then I bought e-reader and now it's really hard to get anything finished (unless it's new book by my favorite author or something like that) because it's so easy to switch between books. I think I'm currently reading something like 12 different books.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 09:55
|
|
|
JackKnight posted:I have heard of catch 22, but don't know what it is about. It's about bomber pilots/bombardiers in WW2, the insanity of the military, mortality, and jokes. It's good. It's certainly what I would call a "fun book" and is often laugh out loud funny but I suppose one must warn you the book also has moral grey areas, human follies, social commentary, and death presented in a form other than a cool action hero killing bad guys, and it doesn't have any magic or descriptions of technology at all. But you know, try it anyway. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 12:59 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 12:53
|
|
|
Catch 22 is fantastic but it's also a fairly 'easy' read so yeah get on it ASAP. It's probably one of my favorite books. If you enjoy it try A Reckoning For Kings, which isn't exactly literature but is good enough I'll recommend it here anyway. It's got a similar thing going on with "the military is the engine for its own troubles" except set in Vietnam. There's less comedy and more drama but it's a great read.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
Just asking JackKnight, what makes you want to read these books? Quite honestly you shouldn't feel as if you're reading the Wrong Type of Book if you're getting out of it what you want. That said, if you want to broaden your palette, I can't recommend medieval literature enough, especially if you have interest in fantasy. Plenty of good translations are available that make that first plunge easier. You would be surprised how much these stories resonate, especially if you're into '''''genre fiction'''''. My recommendations are mainly related to British medieval literature, because that's what I assume you'll find easiest (it's also what I know the most), but there is so much stuff out there in Europe alone to explore that's equally good. Old Norse - The Poetic Edda is a great source of Norse mythology, which is tons of fun. Anglo-Saxon - Beowulf is good fun. Welsh - The Mabinogion (mentioned above) is excellent, and definitely underrated. Middle English - Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, which is probably my favourite poem of all time. If you're going to read it, definitely get the Simon Armitage translation. This is obviously nowhere near close to comprehensive, but I can't be bothered, and you've had loads of good recommendations already.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
Earwicker posted:Just about every internet discussion of Pynchon I've seen seems to ignore all of his books except Crying of Lot 49 and Gravity's Rainbow. Many of his other books are good and in some cases could also make good starting points. Against the Day for example is a much better book than Crying of Lot 49, a lot more depth and a lot more history, but it's not nearly as hard to get into as Gravity's Rainbow can be for many readers. I started with V and I'm happy I did that. It's not super long and was definitely helpful in reading GR. Also it's really funny.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
J_RBG posted:Just asking JackKnight, what makes you want to read these books? Quite honestly you shouldn't feel as if you're reading the Wrong Type of Book if you're getting out of it what you want. That said, if you want to broaden your palette, I can't recommend medieval literature enough, especially if you have interest in fantasy. Plenty of good translations are available that make that first plunge easier. You would be surprised how much these stories resonate, especially if you're into '''''genre fiction'''''. I need to exercise my brain. I used to use big words all the time and was generally smarter and wittier, but now I am like every other blue collar moron out there. As a truck driver, I don't often have the occasion to actually use my brain for anything, so it's slowly turning into jelly from lack of use. So now I am thinking about how to educate myself again in proper and educated English. One of my observations over the years is the general devolution of the English language in general. I read something somewhere that said our early presidents made speeches you needed to be educated to understand properly. Now our president makes speeches a 4th grader can understand. It's one of my peeves that we as Americans do not maintain our standards in language usage and comprehension, and I am even more peeved that I am sliding down right along with the majority of other people. Before I saw this post I was fairly content to read easy to digest books, then I was like "ha not me, I read the classics already 15 years ago" and now after contemplating the problem I have decided to memorize something big, and start to try communicating with a more complex language structure. First I will watch Hamlet a few times, and then try to memorize the play entirely (since it seems to have a lot of fans). Then I will start using the phrasing and wordage I learn from that. I don't know how it will work out, but that is the intent as of now. I assume I still have the neurological plasticity needed to memorize large amounts of content, but it may take some effort as I haven't memorized anything since I stopped playing piano. :-)
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
Lawrence Durrell wrote a quartet of novels of which I've read the first. Its plot and storyline are slowly unfolded by the narrator through, as a GR friend put it, the hazy fog of memory. It's wonderful and highly recommended. I bring it up because Durrell had a fantastic vocabulary and you'd certainly find quite a lot of what you're looking for in that regard from him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 08:57
|
|
|
JackKnight posted:I need to exercise my brain ... I assume I still have the neurological plasticity needed to memorize large amounts of content, but it may take some effort as I haven't memorized anything since I stopped playing piano. :-) For memory, there's nothing better than poetry. Don't memorise all of Hamlet, you have absolutely nothing to gain compared to the vast effort that would require. The soliloquies, sure, why not - it's some of the finest poetry in the English language, and meditation on their contents is in my opinion very much worthwhile. But the play as a whole isn't merely a neurological equivalent of weightlifting. Nor indeed is literature in general, but whatever. Regarding your qualms about modern language, I think African American Vernacular English has a very rich potential, despite it being what many snobs would deem as a bastardisation of Our Beautiful Language (ya feel me?) - we still live in an age, just like any other really, where the most ordinary language can be manipulated to make something brilliant. Linguistic invention is what happens a lot in great literature, not some reflection of how people always spoke in some golden age. To take Hamlet as an example, it would have been seen as particularly difficult language even in Shakespeare's day. No doubt technology has democratised language use considerably (Newspapers regulate how people write, TV flattens out regional dialects, the radio meant politicians could no longer speak to people of similar circumstances - print indeed ushered in an age of individualised reading that completely ruined the need for oral literature along with increased literacy - if you want people to have a better memory, bring back widespread oral literature!), but it's not in my opinion necessarily a bad thing, or at least I'm not that anxious about it. As long as artists and writers exist, we'll get new, challenging things. I'm not disagreeing of course that more challenging material won't necessarily bring the benefits you're looking for, so definitely go ahead with the recommendations you've received. They'll also bring other benefits, as well, better ones in my view.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 13:32
|
|
|
I like the bit in Beckett where the guy screams BALLS! over and over at his tape machine, but somehow can't help but come back and switch it on again, even though its just full of a bunch of delusional bullshit that will only make him angry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 14:08
|
|
|
JackKnight posted:One of my observations over the years is the general devolution of the English language in general. I read something somewhere that said our early presidents made speeches you needed to be educated to understand properly. Now our president makes speeches a 4th grader can understand. It's one of my peeves that we as Americans do not maintain our standards in language usage and comprehension, and I am even more peeved that I am sliding down right along with the majority of other people. You've got some really terrible logic at work here. The fact that presidents in the past made speeches that could only be understood by highly educated people, and presidents in the present make speeches at a fourth grade level, does not in any sense indicate that the English language has "devolved". It means that presidents are now making speeches that can be understood by a larger percentage of the population than they did in the past. Think about why this has happened. Presidents in the late 18th century, when they made speeches, were not addressing the entire population. Why would they? In early days of the US, many states had laws such that only white male landowners were legally allowed to vote. So already, a chunk of the uneducated element of the American population was considered irrelevant to a president's speeches because they were simply not voters. Many other segments of the population were not allowed to be educated. On top of that, a president at the time would only be addressing those people interested enough in politics to either come and see a speech/debate in person, or interested and capable enough of reading it in a paper in the following weeks. Again, this is a much narrower and more educated pool of people than a president addresses today in nationwide broadcasts. In fact, literacy and education has, since the days of our early presidents, dramatically increased in the US. There is a far larger percentage of educated people in the US right now than there was when Jefferson was running for office. The content of presidential speeches getting easier for more people to understand is not any sign of the language "devolving", it's a sign of it democratizing. That's a good thing. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Oct 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
No this guy is right, idiocracy was a documentary.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
People tend to forget that English is a living language, which means it is going to change over time and is not set in stone. Modern day English is way different than what was spoken in say Shakespeare's time, or heck even during the revolutionary war.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
J_RBG posted:TV flattens out regional dialects Correct me if I'm wrong, but this doesn't actually happen. I'm pretty sure it's been shown that mass media exposure to different dialects doesn't actually cause any particular spread of those dialects. Vocabulary, sure, but that's different.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
Also do not memorize Hamlet. You have zero reason to unless you really like it and decided you wanted to perform it or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:Correct me if I'm wrong, but this doesn't actually happen. I'm pretty sure it's been shown that mass media exposure to different dialects doesn't actually cause any particular spread of those dialects. Vocabulary, sure, but that's different. Dialects are largely formed at a young age and the largest influence is on what your peers (other schoolchildren at the same age) and parents spoke.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
Memorise Hamlet and constantly quote things from it even when they're not very relevant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
Basically do what I do for the Simpsons, but for Hamlet.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
CestMoi posted:Memorise Hamlet and constantly quote things from it even when they're not very relevant. And then get the quotations ever so slightly wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Stravinsky posted:People tend to forget that English is a living language, which means it is going to change over time and is not set in stone. Modern day English is way different than what was spoken in say Shakespeare's time, or heck even during the revolutionary war. People also tend to forget that unlike most other common languages, English does not have any kind of official body to determine what "correct" grammar and vocabulary should be. We have various competing guidelines but there is no "official" proper English, just a set of different dialects that we tend to socially rank from "proper" to "bad" or "uneducated" based on the perceived social class associated with the dialect and vocabulary in question. And of course it's not like slang-heavy language spoken with a regional dialects is necessarily any worse than "proper" language in terms of effectiveness at communicating ideas, it's just bad because it's associated with poor people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
English is dead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 23:59 |
|
|
I must add that it is no coincidence that the poster who was only just now lamenting the "devolution" of the English language and talking about "blue collar morons" was only a few posts earlier indicating that they read pretty much nothing other than scifi and fantasy and derive little enjoyment from books focusing on such issues as the human psyche, moral grey areas, or human susceptibilities. This is what happens.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 16:49
|
|