|
Currently Reading:
![[image loading]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51-iqIpFk-L._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg)
Really been enjoying the whole series. About 800 pages into this one right now. Not a ton happens in this book and we are dealing with a lot of new characters but its exciting seeing things from different perspectives. Cersei's story is getting really dark.
Reading Next:
![[image loading]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51QAlbYAm6L._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg)
I cant get enough of this series right now. I need to finish everything there is.
I've read most of Asimov's books and short stories. Somehow missed these 3
The Currents of Space
The Stars, Like Dust
A Pebble in the Sky
So I'll be reading those 3 next. I should be ready for some cool sci-fi after having read only George R.R.Martin fantasy for so long
|
Those Asimov books will seem old school. Still nice tho. Have you read all the connecting novels that bridge the empire to robots and to foundation?
Dance with Dragons is better than Feast.
|
On February 17 2013 16:40 sam!zdat wrote:
Those Asimov books will seem old school. Still nice tho. Have you read all the connecting novels that bridge the empire to robots and to foundation?
Dance with Dragons is better than Feast.
I really enjoy Asimov's style especially his short stories like I, Robot and the original Foundation where the stories are almost independent but have some overarching structure.
As far as the empire novels im not sure. I think ive read all the robot books and ive read all the foundation books maybe minus one of the prequels.
EDIT:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_sci_fi.html#asimov-suggested-reading-order
I just checked and I havent read 3 through 8 of this list.
|
The Daylight War by Peter V. Brett
I read the first two books... I liked the first a lot and had to force my way through the second (I seem to be in the minority there) but I want to see how things continue. Hopefully I like this book more than the second. The world is very cool and I like some of the characters but there was a lot in the second book that just felt forced to me, I had a hard time swallowing some of it.
Next? Likely something from Joe Abercrombie. Probably the First Law trilogy.
|
Just finished:
![[image loading]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51BmkgFxxCL._SL160_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-dp,TopRight,12,-18_SH30_OU01_AA160_.jpg)
the sequel to Heroes Die and I will read the rest of the series because these books are great. They have the most disturbing scenes I've ever read (graphic violence, torture) but it doesn't feel forced or put in for the sake of shock value. Characters are deep and there are no good/bad guys, everyone has their own motivations. The first book is action-packed and awesome. The second book is about 300 pages longer and is slower, the writer puts in more philosophy and the plot is more complicated. The philosophy actually deepens the characters instead of feeling like a lecture, but I must say that the plot could probably be a bit less complicated without losing value.
|
start with naked sun then and go from there
|
|
|
Just now reading
![[image loading]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51y0iPnxx4L._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU02_.jpg)
The clarity of thought and wisdom of this man is truly inspiring.
|
On February 17 2013 16:53 HardCorey wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2013 16:40 sam!zdat wrote:
Those Asimov books will seem old school. Still nice tho. Have you read all the connecting novels that bridge the empire to robots and to foundation?
Dance with Dragons is better than Feast. I really enjoy Asimov's style especially his short stories like I, Robot and the original Foundation where the stories are almost independent but have some overarching structure. As far as the empire novels im not sure. I think ive read all the robot books and ive read all the foundation books maybe minus one of the prequels. EDIT: http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_sci_fi.html#asimov-suggested-reading-orderI just checked and I havent read 3 through 8 of this list.
Thanks for that list. The only ones I have not read are The Currents of Space and The Stars, Like Dust. As far as the Foundation novels go, I much preferred 1 - 3. The later novels, at least to me, seem to represent a change in Asimov's thinking:+ Show Spoiler + For example, the whole notion of Gaia/Galaxia seems counter to the chaos of individualism he praised in a short story he wrote in the 1950s (the name of which I can't recall). I can only assume that he became disillusioned as he got older.
|
disillusioned! it is a major progress in his thinking! the early foundation novels are so horribly naive!
edit: the eighties are not the fifties man
|
Going through this book again.
![[image loading]](http://pixhost.me/media/images/being_and_time.jpg)
This time, I should be able to properly understand Heidegger. Not being able to fully grasp him is unbelievably frustrating. From what I understand, this is perhaps the best existential work that does not dissolve into teenage anxiety stricken bullshit
|
lol that's why you're all angsty
wtf you reading heidegger son
go read somehting fun
|
On February 17 2013 18:25 sam!zdat wrote:
lol that's why you're all angsty
wtf you reading heidegger son
go read somehting fun
I am actually using this book as my last chance to see if I am capable of philosophy or not.
|
On February 17 2013 16:57 Xeteh wrote:The Daylight War by Peter V. Brett I read the first two books... I liked the first a lot and had to force my way through the second (I seem to be in the minority there) but I want to see how things continue. Hopefully I like this book more than the second. The world is very cool and I like some of the characters but there was a lot in the second book that just felt forced to me, I had a hard time swallowing some of it. Next? Likely something from Joe Abercrombie. Probably the First Law trilogy.
I agree with you. The first book I enjoyed a lot but the second wasn't as good. It was still a good read but only because you had the first book in mind. I had missed that the 3rd was out so thanks for that =) Have to see how it ends...
|
On February 17 2013 06:49 sam!zdat wrote:
I've read a few Chandler stories, it's pretty cool, I should get back to it. It's not exactly lyrical however. But he's a big influence on Gibson so I suppose I should read more of him.
You should definitely read all of Chandler and all of Gibson. Both have not written too much and nearly all of it is great. Although I must admit that the end of Gibson's last book was definitely a letdown.
|
On February 17 2013 16:04 Cambium wrote:
I heard Endymion and Rise of Endymion aren't nearly as good the Hyperion books, so I think I'm going to pass. I read the summaries of the other books, and the stories didn't seem too interesting. I'm glad the first two books covered most of the stories with regards to the AIs, Hegemony and Ousters.
Normally I wouldn't recommend that, but in this case I think it can be excused, and even be a good idea. Perhaps try Ilium instead later on? It's not as "deep" as Hyperion, but it has a better pacing. Simmons got talent, and it's easily to write him off from the point you now leave.
|
I just finished reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistakes_were_made_(but_not_by_me)
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/68/Mistakes_were_made_cover_image.jpg)
Which was quite interesting read for anyone into pop psychology, or anyone wondering why people are such assholes on the SC2 ladder. Basically we are hard wired to slate over our own faults, and enhance other peoples to make us feel better.
Next:
Alastair Reynolds - Revelation Space.
or
Kokoro : Natsume Sōseki (english translation).
|
On February 17 2013 21:06 lungic wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2013 16:04 Cambium wrote:
I heard Endymion and Rise of Endymion aren't nearly as good the Hyperion books, so I think I'm going to pass. I read the summaries of the other books, and the stories didn't seem too interesting. I'm glad the first two books covered most of the stories with regards to the AIs, Hegemony and Ousters.
Normally I wouldn't recommend that, but in this case I think it can be excused, and even be a good idea. Perhaps try Ilium instead later on? It's not as "deep" as Hyperion, but it has a better pacing. Simmons got talent, and it's easily to write him off from the point you now leave.
Thanks for the recommendation. I'll add that to my to-read list (it's a huge list though).
Just read the wiki page on Ilium and Olympos, I think I'll read The Iliad & The Odyssey before 
|
On February 17 2013 21:14 Cambium wrote:Just read the wiki page on Ilium and Olympos, I think I'll read The Iliad & The Odyssey before
You should definitely start with the Iliad. It is by far the more interesting book.
I do not know about the quality and readability of English translations (assuming you will not read the original ancient Greek), but it is probably worth it to invest some research into the characteristics of different translations. Those texts are not very accessible for today's reader, so a good translation can make a huge difference. When in doubt I would opt for the more readable translation over ones that follow the original more strictly. It will be a tough read anyway (although it is definitely worth it), but you should not make your life harder than necessary. You can still read stricter translations later for the parts you really like.
|
Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman.
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/Thinking%2C_Fast_and_Slow.jpg)
I've wanted to read this book for quite some time. Finally got around to reading it.
A very interesting discussion of human irrationality, cognitive biases, and behavioral economics.
I've been able to recognize many of these biases in forum posters. For example, the remembering self is different from the experiencing self. The remembering self focuses on the peak of the experience and the end of the experience, this explains the never ending demand for Blizzard to go back to WoW classic. People get nostalgia, remember the good times, and fail to remember that a lot of WoW classic was really really bad for a very very long time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
