|
A human heart posted:Its a real struggle to be a hipster who also likes huge books let me tell you Is that the third volume of Marcel Proust's In Search of Lost Time Sodome et Gomorrhe sometimes titled in English as Cities of the Plain or are you just happy to see me
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 22:09 |
|
|
'Atlas Shrugged' for me. I've tried to read it three or four times over the years to see what the fuss was about and could never make it through. I may never know about John Galt and I am OK with that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 07:37
|
|
|
Does giving up on a reread count? Because I tried rereading Stranger in a Strange Land after first reading it over a decade ago, and my younger self was definitely more tolerant of total garbage than I am now. As soon as Heinlein's idiot superman goes off on his own and the book turns into one long dirty old man rant using his female characters as sockpuppets all in favor of joining the harem of a magical moronic man-child posing as Jesus Literal-loving Christ, I couldn't stomach anymore of that poo poo. This book was one of the many reasons hippies were so awful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 09:00
|
|
|
Stuporstar posted:Does giving up on a reread count? Because I tried rereading Stranger in a Strange Land after first reading it over a decade ago, and my younger self was definitely more tolerant of total garbage than I am now. As soon as Heinlein's idiot superman goes off on his own and the book turns into one long dirty old man rant using his female characters as sockpuppets all in favor of joining the harem of a magical moronic man-child posing as Jesus Literal-loving Christ, I couldn't stomach anymore of that poo poo. This book was one of the many reasons hippies were so awful. Oh god...it took me three attempts to finish that book and it's one of the few Heinleins my father and I agree are terrible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 08:35
|
|
|
There's a lot of books I've checked out of the library recently that I didn't finish before they were due back. I can easily read a book in a few weeks but these just didn't grab me enough to bother. Sorcerer to the Crown by Zen Cho, which read like watered down Susanna Clarke. The main male character was very drab and the female character was too obnoxious as a counterpoint. Ink and Bone by Rachel Caine. It started getting appealing on a train to this special training school and there are students from a range of backgrounds, but it also felt like Harry Potter without the thrill of magic. If I see it at the library again I might read the rest. Right now I have Between Two Thorns by Emma Newman checked out. Not engrossing so far but I may finish it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
Stuporstar posted:Does giving up on a reread count? Because I tried rereading Stranger in a Strange Land after first reading it over a decade ago, and my younger self was definitely more tolerant of total garbage than I am now. As soon as Heinlein's idiot superman goes off on his own and the book turns into one long dirty old man rant using his female characters as sockpuppets all in favor of joining the harem of a magical moronic man-child posing as Jesus Literal-loving Christ, I couldn't stomach anymore of that poo poo. This book was one of the many reasons hippies were so awful. Same for most of the Howard Family books to be honest
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
Stuporstar posted:Does giving up on a reread count? Because I tried rereading Stranger in a Strange Land after first reading it over a decade ago, and my younger self was definitely more tolerant of total garbage than I am now. As soon as Heinlein's idiot superman goes off on his own and the book turns into one long dirty old man rant using his female characters as sockpuppets all in favor of joining the harem of a magical moronic man-child posing as Jesus Literal-loving Christ, I couldn't stomach anymore of that poo poo. This book was one of the many reasons hippies were so awful. I've avoided rereading most Heinlein stuff for fear of this very thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
Roshani Chokshi's "The star touched queen" has a protagonist with so little consistency in character relations that I gave up. She simply does what the narrative requires, even when the characterisation makes no sense ("We've always hated each other and I acknowledge she's acted maliciously towards me, and explicitly wants me to die... better take her advice") mixed with hopeless purple prose. Gail Carriger's Parasol Protectorate series has a mediocre but enjoyable enough airport novel for the first, and an incredibly thin and frustrating second book with an ending that would have had me toss the book aside if it wasn't on my kindle. In liu of book tossing... The protagonist has the power to turn the supernatural into normal humans with a touch. She is married to a werewolf for over a year, and this marriage is presented as ecstatically happy true love, and they're meant to be highly intelligent detectives. It is repeatedly established that they gently caress a lot but don't otherwise touch a lot because her contact turns him human in every way and he begins to age, etc. Her entire purpose, her job and the plot of two books is based on this power. She gets pregnant, but werewolves can't get people pregnant. Do any of the characters acknowledge two books and a year+ worth of hammering in that her touch turns him into a human? Nope. He immediately thinks she's cheated on him, calls her a slut and a whore, breaks their marriage and throws her from the household while everyone instantly turns on her, and then the next book is her proving her loyalty so he'll take her back with a quick "Lol, my bad." It's really dumb.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2017 11:49
|
|
|
grumbster posted:I gave up on American Gods. It got so samey with them driving to all these old gods only to be rejected with the same "You can't stop what's coming", that I stopped caring about what the big payoff might be. Also, I got the distinct feeling that writing the gods into the modern world made Gaiman feel very clever, and that Gaiman is a guy who really gets off on feeling very clever. It took me three tries to get through this but the payoff at the end is worth it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
House of Leaves took me several tries to get through. I've given up on Catch 22, Gravity's Rainbow, and a few of the really long Stephen King books.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
JustinMorgan posted:House of Leaves took me several tries to get through. Truly, giving up on books is a land of contrasts
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 03:43
|
|
|
I tried to read Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace a few times but every time I get a few hundred pages in and I realize I have no idea what’s going on and I give up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Alpheus posted:I tried to read Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace a few times but every time I get a few hundred pages in and I realize I have no idea what’s going on and I give up. I have the Audible version of IJ and every time I even look at "56h 19m" I  .I really liked his essays so I can't imagine I wouldn't like IJ but, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Can't imagine the effort it would take to sit down and have working ears for such a long time
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
I am curious how they handle the footnotes on that
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
I like when the footnotes cite endnotes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
Sleeping Beauties by Stephen King and his son. It has like 100 characters, and nothing really suspenseful happened. I stopped about 40% through it. The second book in King's Dark Tower series. I really enjoyed the Gunslinger, and I thought the ending with the Man In Black dying during that time jump was really good. I only got about 50 pages into the second book, I remember it was boring, but I intend to finish it and the whole series in the future. Nonfiction: The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. It's simply not written well like the Hitchens book. Mindhunter by John Douglas. The graphic descriptions of crime scenes, mutilated corpses, and torture by serial killers was too much for me. I stopped early on in that one because it make me feel like poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 01:59
|
|
|
Moby Dick - too many diversions and not whale.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:Moby Dick - too many diversions and not whale. The digressions are the whole drat point!
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
We all know the whole point of Moby dick is "just be yourself"
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
I spent my teens and early 20s failing to read pretty much everything on reddit’s Best books ever list. From everything dystopian fiction, to Orwell, Philip K Dick, and Salinger. Then I worked out that what I actually love is golden age and earlier detective fiction and my life became much happier for it. You do you book barn.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:I spent my teens and early 20s failing to read pretty much everything on reddit’s Best books ever list. From everything dystopian fiction, to Orwell, Philip K Dick, and Salinger. Then I worked out that what I actually love is golden age and earlier detective fiction and my life became much happier for it. I think the problem here is mostly that you expected reddit to have a list of good books
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
A human heart posted:I think the problem here is mostly that you expected reddit to have a list of good books Lol I’m old enough to have had children when SA was born let alone reddit. It is exactly the sort of list you would expect a group of angry young men to write; All required school reading, teenage angst, and the kind of book you struggle through at all costs when you are young so that you can say you have read it. As for the last one, for a lot of people there are books like catch 22 and David Copperfield that are better off read when you are in your 30s and have read a lot of other books. Catch 22 has a rhythm and pattern to it that you need to get into and that is learned for a lot of people. If I have one bit of advice for people who don’t get it then read Dulce et Decorum Est by Wilfred Owen out loud over and over again untill you nail the punctuation and understand the meaning behind the words. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46560/dulce-et-decorum-est
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 00:07
|
|
|
I find it hard to sympathize with anyone who has a hard time trying to read Orwell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:I find it hard to sympathize with anyone who has a hard time trying to read Orwell. I don’t find Orwell difficult to read or find it beyond me, it simply does not interest me. I get it, but I would rather read John le Carré because I’m not an American.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 08:42
|
|
|
ah, yes, noted yank george orwell
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 10:22
|
|
|
ulvir posted:ah, yes, noted yank george orwell It resounds more with modern Americans because we didn't have ! Communism to same extent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 12:21
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:It resounds more with modern Americans because we didn't have ! Communism to same extent. What?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:It resounds more with modern Americans because we didn't have ! Communism to same extent. You know which side of the iron curtain the UK was on right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
You know Orwell was a filthy socialist pinko, right? Seriously, though: I have no idea why would he be more accessible to, of all things, Americans. His messages are pretty clear and straightforward, not like it's difficult to understand if you happen to live elsewhere. anilEhilated fucked around with this message at 14:23 on Dec 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
“To the same extent” America does not have that much history, don’t get me wrong what it has is incredible for such a short space of time; colonisation, revolution, civil war, world wars, Cold War, and naturally they tend to focus on those. Europe has a much bigger well to draw from so writers like Orwell and Steinbeck aren’t as revered outside of the 14-19 year old male heavy internet user bracket. Forums, Reddit in particular, massively distort the perception of what is actually popular amongst the general population. It simply does not interest me, morality tales, conspiracy theory, dystopian fiction all don’t.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:“To the same extent”
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
It is OK not to enjoy a particular writer/genre. I enjoy very specific genres of books, just like others may enjoy science fiction or literary fiction. Life is short, forcing yourself to read something you don’t like because other people make you feel like you should read it or are less of a person for not liking the same things they like is silly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
not quite sure what learnincurve did to deserve a dog pile
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:writers like Orwell and Steinbeck aren’t as revered outside of the 14-19 year old male heavy internet user bracket. Forums, Reddit in particular, massively distort the perception of what is actually popular amongst the general population. Orwell is so revered because he's thoroughly misinterpreted. Never seen Steinbeck get much praise from this group.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:not quite sure what learnincurve did to deserve a dog pile Posted in the book forum
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
 Book people get defensive when you say you don’t like their favourites, it happens on the internet and real life, and I think we are all guilty of getting huffy or preachy over a book we love at some point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:
Fine with you not liking Orwell, I think he's written some nice things (e.g. Homage to Catalonia) but hardly one of my favourites. I just assumed that statements like this one learnincurve posted:America does not have that much history, don’t get me wrong what it has is incredible for such a short space of time; colonisation, revolution, civil war, world wars, Cold War, and naturally they tend to focus on those. Europe has a much bigger well to draw from so writers like Orwell and Steinbeck aren’t as revered outside of the 14-19 year old male heavy internet user bracket. Forums, Reddit in particular, massively distort the perception of what is actually popular amongst the general population.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
anilEhilated posted:You know Orwell was a filthy socialist pinko, right? He was opposed to actually existing socialism and wrote a bunch of stuff beloved by anticommunists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 22:09 |
|
|
No that was more of a comment about Reddit. Young people haven’t read that many books and most of them are on school book lists, if there is a book that they enjoy then everyone MUST know about it even though that book is 60 chuffing years old. Every generation of teenagers acts like they are the first to have ever read Orwell/Bradbury/and so on and so forth and it just gets boring seeing the same six book recommendations all the time. A more recent and hilarious example were all those teenagers on Reddit/tumblr/goodreads who suddenly started (out of nowhere) banging on about The Picture of Dorian Gray and how they loved Wilde and how he spoke to their soul, boy did those kid’s get a shock when they all sat down to read the importance of being Ernest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:46
|
|