Books I have to read

[RainInSpain]

1984 goes first.

No, To Kill a Mockingbird does.

Does it hold special significance for you, Jean? For my part, I can say that it was not one of those books that changed me, showed me a different perspective, or brought that 'ecstasy of perfect recognition'.

Really? None of those things? It's a pretty powerful piece on an American period. Sorry to hear that it didn't reach you.

Does it hold special significance for you, Jean?

well, yes, along with nine other books on my list of ten best books ever. I tried to explain it partly in this post, partly later in the same thread; many other people expressed their thoughts and feelings there too, and many did it better than bears...

I know that it's a very well-respected novel. Don't know why I did not feel about it as deeply as most - my best attempt at self-analysis is that I intentionally did not let myself have any strong feelings about it. It would have been too painful to go back to real life and see that the vast majority of people around me were too self- serving to care about integrity or ethics.

Also, I might have read it too late - I think I was about 13 or 14 at the time, and at that point I was reading a lot of Theodore Dreiser - An American Tragedy, first and foremost, but also The Trilogy.

[Roland of Gilead 33]

it's pathetic there's prolly literally thousands of books i need to read! hell i haven't even read all of "SK" books! i've read most of the ones he did in the 70's. almost half of the 80's. & i fair better in the 90's. & half read about half of them. than i didn't really read for a couple of years & the last newest book i read of his was "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon" ones that came after that i started at some point buuut just never finished it.

"Different Seasons" is one of his books where i've read some of it but never all of it. 'Shawshank' i've read but i don't think i read any other ones. in that book i mean, it took me 8 or 9 years to FINALLY get around to reading well Finish should be a better term for the 4th "Harry Potter" book

& as for "Wizard & Glass" which i'm currently reading. it's taken me 14 years to finally get around to read & finish the damn thing. he he.

hell there are books i bought at a book sale waay back in (1992) from my libary that had the sale. that i STILL have yet to read! i bought a LOT of books that day. & have read some of them, just NOT all of them yet. he he

[Jean]

what are you waiting for?

[Roland of Gilead 33]

well i used to be able to concentrate really well on reading. but than it started to lacken. it comes & goes, it's nothing to do with anything medical i don't think. it's just sometimes i have too much shit on my mind & i can't concentrate because of it.

also i have to be in the mood for like i said somewhere else here, i forget where? right now i'm in the mood for some "SK" but when i'm done with "W&G" i may read the next book in the series or another "SK" book or i may read who knows maybe a "Dean Koontz' novel. it just depends on what

i'm in the mood for. weather it's horror, fantasy maybe "Piers Anthony' or maybe Mystery such as "Ed Mcbain" or "James Patterson" for example

i never really know. i also have to be in the mood to read as well. i didn't used to be like that but now i am. it's weird ain't it? though it IS an improvement that i am going to be able to check off at least one of "SK" books that i need to read off my list. & a book that i had started over a

dozen times but just NEVER got around to finishing it. cause i got bored by the flashback cause NOTHING happened, at least where i would stop reading it anyways. i'm on page 445 now. so i may finish it this time. it's the farthest i've ever gotten into it. so in short who knows ya know?

anyone else like this? also there's quite a few "SK" books i've started but just never finished, "Firestarter" is one, "Cujo" is another. "Duma Key" is another, "Cycle of the werewolf" is another, "Gerald's Game" "Needful Things" i got pretty far into that one but i just never finished it. & those are the ones i can think of at the top of my head. now keep in mind those are books that i didn't think they were bad, but i think i just lost interest in

while reading it. or i got into a mood that i wanted to read a shorter book. & "W&G" like i said went into that catagory as well. i'm just thrilled that

this time i may actually fucking finish it! i've been wanting to read the last 3 books in the series for years! i just dreaded reading the 4th one cause of how slow it was. it's sped up of course by page 445 i think i can say that. so this is my reason i think, also i watch too many tv shows, & too many movies as well. so sometimes i'm just in the mood to watch those as well. plus i work as well.

sorry about rambling on here. he he

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

My favorite is also A Christmas Carol....A also really liked Oliver Twist.

[Roland of Gilead 33]

I've also never read that one either. nor any of "Dickens' to be honest. just saw the films. i tried to read what i call "Les Mes' by "Victor Hugo"

years ago. i LOVE the play of it. the (1989) cast album is easily the best one. since it's the entire play. anyways i have the book of it on paperback.

with the little girl that's the cover they use for play for it. & i tried reading it in high school. i got to i think Book #2 than i lost interest cause it was A VERY motherfucking EXTREMELY DIFFICULT read cause on how he wrote it. he just dragged on & on & basically rambled through the entire book

& i just couldn't read it anymore. i realize that back than they got paid for how many words they wrote & they don't do that anymore. but i think that's the reason why he wrote it like that. i think IF it was written today. it would be a LOT better read than it actually is. or rather the version that was written over 150 or so years ago.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I felt the same way about The Count of Monte Cristo. Too many words.

[Roland of Gilead 33]

ahh good someone who agree with me on certain books thankee sai

[RainInSpain]

Les Misérables was a difficult read for me, as well - mostly because it covers so many subjects and has so many author's digressions. But I still consider it a must-read.

Can't agree on The Count of Monte Cristo, though. For me, it was a breeze to read. It's an adventure novel at its core, despite the more important motifs of revenge and justice. But to each their own, of course

What about War and Peace or Atlas Shrugged, as examples of longer novels that are still too important to miss?

[pathoftheturtle]

sorry about rambling on here. he he

Not at all. I mean, I appreciate your input, for one at least.

well i used to be able to concentrate really well on reading. but than it started to lacken. it comes & goes, it's nothing to do with anything medical i don't think. it's just sometimes i have too much shit on my mind & i can't concentrate because of it. ... so this is my reason i think, also i watch too many tv shows, & too many movies as well. so sometimes i'm just in the mood to watch those as well. plus i work as well.

Well, y'know, it takes practice. The only way to get better at reading is to read. No pain, no gain.

Les Misérables was a difficult read for me, as well - mostly because it covers so many subjects and has so many author's digressions. But I still consider it a must-read.

Can't agree on The Count of Monte Cristo, though. For me, it was a breeze to read. It's an adventure novel at its core, despite the more important motifs of revenge and justice. But to each their own, of course

I'm with you, on both counts.

... i tried to read what i call "Les Mes' by "Victor Hugo" years ago... i lost interest cause it was A VERY motherfucking EXTREMELY DIFFICULT read cause on how he wrote it. he just dragged on & on & basically rambled through the entire book... i think IF it was written today. it would be a LOT better read than it actually is. or rather the version that was written over 150 or so years ago.

I don't know... seems like calling contemporary novels "better" reads is awfully subjective on your part as a contemporary reader. Does art imitate life or does life imitate art? I'd rather we push ourselves collectively than really lose track of what was good about old-fashioned literature.

What about War and Peace or Atlas Shrugged, as examples of longer novels that are still too important to miss?

What about them? Um, they're examples of longer novels that are still too important to miss.
I'll say this: as with the previous couple examples, you've mentioned one that really can be difficult and one that moves pretty quickly by its nature. (The latter is so contrived in plot that one just buzzes along, thinking about the message and questions of its philosophical validity.)

It's true, though, that it's not as great a novel as Great Expectations is. (Which also is not Dickens's very best.)

Which of his novels is his best, in your opinion? (Dickens being my favorite author, I have three personal favorites, none of which is either GE or Tale of Two Cities)

Oh, well, I wasn't exactly saying my opinion there, but carrying on with the line about his "great" and "minor" works. Although, come to think of it, critics might indeed call Great Expectations his best. Or David Copperfield. And Bleak House. Oliver Twist. These are well-respected and enjoyable.
Personally, my favorite is A Christmas Carol, though. I know that's not a classy answer, but I think there's good reason for its popularity.
I like other novels of his, too, though. I'm also a fan, though not so much so as I guess you are.

fantastic! such a lot of Dickens' novels already listed, and none of them is of those three (even four, come to think of it) that bears love most!...

Are you sure you don't mean "outrageous!"? "Fantastic" conveys a much more upbeat tone. Thanks for that.
I remembered you've said elsewhere that you love Nicholas Nickleby and The Old Curiosity Shop. I've never read either. No time like the present, though, I suppose. Which should I get first? And, out of curiosity, what are your other two? Please don't say Little Dorrit; I wasn't so wild about that one. And in all honesty, I have mixed feelings about Oliver Twist, too. I preferred Bleak House and Tale of Two Cities over David Copperfield, even though I realize that it's probably a greater novel objectively. I liked Hard Times a lot, though. You know me, kind of, I guess. I'm sentimental, in a way, but very much an idea man. My approach to fiction is slightly peculiar.

[Jean]

yes, I meant "fantastic", and here is why: it makes me happy to realize, yet another time, how BIG my favorite author is; everybody finds something for himself (or they don't, of course... I mean, those who do), and the opinions coincide as rarely as it is the case with King. Actually, I've only seen once a total coincidence of opinions on Dickens - mine and Chestertone's; I was pleasantly surprised (astounded - shocked - if it were possible to use these words meaning "very pleased") to discover that our understanding of Dickens is the same, while everyone else's is different.

Nicholas Nckleby is the novel that embodies what I love about Dickens. I don't think there are any ideas there, though.
my second favorite is Martin Chuzzlewit, and maybe you should start with this one. Or maybe Our Mutual Friend, bears' third favorite. Old Curiosity Shop is bears' guilty pleasure.
(oh - there's also Dombey and Son, bears love it! and Pickwick, of course)

I so wish you would love them! or at least like! at least one of them

P.S. I think I will merge this thread with that one in a couple of days

[Roland of Gilead 33]

actually i didn't say that books were badly written back than, just that they are a HARD read. that's all. as for "war & Peace" ? i've never read it, nor have i really had any wanting to read it, not cause of it's lenghth ok that's prolly part of it. another is i don't much care for reading the kind of subject it

contains, stuff like that really doesn't interest me.

[Roland of Gilead 33]

ok i looked up on how many pages "War & Peace" is on wikipedia & i take back the length of it. cause it looks to be about the same size of "IT"

[pathoftheturtle]

Oh, is that all?

[Roland of Gilead 33]

i don't normally read history stories like that anyways, nor have i see the film that well the version with 'Hank Fonda" either. or any other version either. anyways, has anyone read "Dean Koontz" book 'Strangers" ? that's a great book one MUST read. & i think it'd also make a great movie to

[Girlystevedave]

To Kill a Mockingbird was a great book.
And I just recently read Great Expectations for the first time...also a good read.

[RainInSpain]

What about War and Peace or Atlas Shrugged, as examples of longer novels that are still too important to miss?

What about them? Um, they're examples of longer novels that are still too important to miss.
I'll say this: as with the previous couple examples, you've mentioned one that really can be difficult and one that moves pretty quickly by its nature. (The latter is so contrived in plot that one just buzzes along, thinking about the message and questions of its philosophical validity.)

Well, I had this wild idea that there was that unique someone for whom Atlas Shrugged was easier than, say, It. (Not really.)

Good thing you guys mentioned Dickens. My little shameful secret is that I've never read any of his works beyond Oliver Twist. Somehow they did not 'click' with me when I was young(er). I should probably try again now; I keep thinking of starting with The Pickwick Papers - what do you think?

[pathoftheturtle]

actually i didn't say that books were badly written back than, just that they are a HARD read. that's all. ...

I see. All I was saying, though, is that that is still not a matter of fact. Like, if you could bring an average reader from the past into the present and give him a book from his own time that he never read and a book written recently, which would he say was easier to follow? If Victor Hugo were alive today, he might compose his novels in a contemporary fashion... but if everyone that lived then were alive today, he might not.

...I keep thinking of starting with The Pickwick Papers - what do you think?

I think that sounds good.

ETA -- We may need a Dickens thread soon!

[Roland of Gilead 33]

that makes sense actually, if "Hugo" was alive today i think his books would be written differently. he prolly would have trouble reading today's author's.

[Jean]

has anybody actually read Atlas Shrugged?

::intimidated bear::

[pathoftheturtle]

Intimidated? Why? Ayn Rand bother you?

[Jean]

No. I am intimidated meaning awestruck.

[pathoftheturtle]

has anybody actually read Atlas Shrugged?

::intimidated bear::

I've just found out that they're making a film trilogy of it. First one's coming out 15 April 2011. Damn.

[rosered]

I want to read Doestoevski's The Karamazov brothers.

[Jean]

I want to read Doestoevski's The Karamazov brothers.

highly recommended