|
+ Show Spoiler +You really think Gatsby is an easy read? Personally I think you should switch it's place with Slaughterhouse. Maybe since Gatsby is your favorite it makes sense to you, but upon the initial reading it can be very difficult to wrap your head around everything happening in that book. For one thing, almost nothing happens in the first 3 chapters. It's worth it by the end, but it certainly dosent make the read any easier. Sorta book you want to read 2-3 times at least.
Slaughterhouse? That "stream of consciousness" non linear story telling has been so totally digested by TV and Movies now that it's not really difficult for anyone to grasp.
My opinion.
You might be right about Gatzby. I read that book when I was 20 and had been in school for a couple of years. Plus I'm in love with that decade and knew a lot about the era and what not. I very well could be skewed on my rankings her, but the book while it might be slow, is still written from a fairly approachable place. It uses fairly simple language (no need to keep a dictionary next to me while I read it) and is concise with understandable characters. Relative to the other books on the list, I still think it falls in the easy category, not as easy as 1984 or catcher in the rye, but still easier than anything by Wolfe or Conrad
|
I've read many of those books, and some were pleasant to read and others were a chore. 1984 is probably the highest rated one that I've read and enjoyed. Animal Farm was pretty fantastic. I hated To Kill a Mocking Bird. Brave New World was alright, and Ulysses was fun.
If you want to pick up fantasy books I can't suggest anyone other than R.A. Salvatore's works. He writes with such visual clarity that you can see each sword swipe and I fight myself mimicking them while laying on my back at times in attempt to understand the full motion. He also is renown for his fantastic character depth, in particular Drizzt who makes many cameo appearances in video games and D&D books. (Suggested starting book: Icewind Dale trilogy -- here is a link to his website -- http://www.rasalvatore.com/bookstore/#RASBooks?selection=6)
If you're wanting more Sci-Fi or wanting more of a "classic" book go for Enders Game. It is about the world police abducting genius 8 year olds and training them to become the best combat generals ever in attempt to save the world from the return of some nasty aliens. The book was a blast and has far more depth than the shallow sounding plot gives it credit for!
|
On January 19 2011 05:01 IPA wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 04:54 Kickboxer wrote:
While some of these books are certainly outstanding, quite a few of them are incredibly boring and highly depressive.
Can anyone keep a straight face and say they enjoyed reading Ulysses?
Reading isn't always about enjoyment and satisfaction. It's also about challenge, personal growth, the ability to commune with minds long dead, etc. I read Ulysses and certainly didn't "enjoy it" like I enjoyed Dune; but Dune does not haunt me like passages from Joyce do. Basically I'm saying being a good reader means extrapolating more worth from true works of art other than (or in addition to) entertainment.
You raise a very good point by saying that reading can be also about personal growth. I find myself challenged, however, by being able to separate books that advance personal growth and are *not* entertaining to read from those that do none of those.
This is kind of a big dilemma for me in selecting books. They are a huge investment in time, and only afterwards or halfway through it you can judge whether it was actually worth it.
Do you have any advice on a smart selection process that minimizes the danger of spending too much time on stuff not worth reading?
|
I started reading again since I need to take the subway to the university and to work. I've only read 1984 from your list, but that is definitely a "must read" for anyone that enjoys the occasional reading session.
Some of those are still on my "to do" list, but I started reading the dresden files some days ago and already dug though the first two books (in my spare/sc2 time... that didn't happen for... ever  ).
for other fantasy/scifi-nuts out there I really recommend the "Tales of Earthsea" and "Starship Troopers" the movie is basically unrelated to the book (except the names, bugs and the fight with Ricos parents), even though I like both.
/edit oh and Bram Stokers "Dracula" ^^
|
James joyce is fun if you have other people to discuss it with, like a book club or something, but man is it a dense book. By the time I was done with it, I had to duct tape the binding back together from going back and forth so many times while taking notes in the margin. I wouldn't bother tackling it alone unless you really want to - reading it is more like piecing together a puzzle than reading a novel.
|
The Catcher in the Rye, J.D. Salinger (become adult)
1984, George Orwell (how to establish a totalitarian society)
Lord of the Flies, William Golding (creating a society)
Animal Farm, George Orwell ("some animals are more equal than others...")
Brave New World, Aldous Huxley (a society based on logic and math)
Ulysses, James Joyce (just read a part, very difficult to follow imo, more art than anything else)
Moby Dick, Herman Melville (looking for revenge by any costs)
I've read these books from your list.
All of those are recommendable, thus they are "world literature", well known also in non-english speaking countries for their timeless topics.
Especially 1984 turned around my point of view on many topics by 180 degress, the best distopia ever written imo.
Bram Stokers "Dracula" -- I have to point out, that I love that book. ^^
|
I've read a whole bunch of them and I'd recommend the Dostoyevsky over the others.
My favourite book from him is Notes from the Underground though.
Lord of Flies is a great book. I really prefer heavily books that are philosophical in nature.
That's why I prefer fantasy/sci fi books over classics normally, they tend to hit the point more often & are not so tied to time and place.
|
On January 19 2011 05:01 IPA wrote:
Reading isn't always about enjoyment and satisfaction. It's also about challenge, personal growth, the ability to commune with minds long dead, etc. I read Ulysses and certainly didn't "enjoy it" like I enjoyed Dune; but Dune does not haunt me like passages from Joyce do.
Basically I'm saying being a good reader means extrapolating more worth from true works of art other than (or in addition to) entertainment.
Ok very well put and you have a great point. But you do need a "diamond league" level of reading affinity to get where you're aiming at and I was always rather concerned (observing my peers and younger brother) that the lack of imagination-stirring and straight up enjoyable works in the school curricula is turning your average kid away from reading and thus making them incapable of experiencing what you speak of altogether.
Like, there are exactly two books on that entire list that are simply "fun" to read - Catch 22 and Slaughterhouse. Another regular read that comes to mind is Dorian Gray. Almost all the rest represent "heavy" reading reserved for people with highly particular dispositions. Not everyone considers social criticism to be the pinnacle of literature or even interesting at all. Personally, I really can't stomach the holy scholastic disdain for fiction as something second-rate.
|
On January 19 2011 05:19 Thojorin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 05:01 IPA wrote:On January 19 2011 04:54 Kickboxer wrote:
While some of these books are certainly outstanding, quite a few of them are incredibly boring and highly depressive.
Can anyone keep a straight face and say they enjoyed reading Ulysses?
Reading isn't always about enjoyment and satisfaction. It's also about challenge, personal growth, the ability to commune with minds long dead, etc. I read Ulysses and certainly didn't "enjoy it" like I enjoyed Dune; but Dune does not haunt me like passages from Joyce do. Basically I'm saying being a good reader means extrapolating more worth from true works of art other than (or in addition to) entertainment. You raise a very good point by saying that reading can be also about personal growth. I find myself challenged, however, by being able to separate books that advance personal growth and are *not* entertaining to read from those that do none of those. This is kind of a big dilemma for me in selecting books. They are a huge investment in time, and only afterwards or halfway through it you can judge whether it was actually worth it. Do you have any advice on a smart selection process that minimizes the danger of spending too much time on stuff not worth reading?
Hey Man -
I just do a little research before purchasing my next book to be honest. If you know what you like (coming of age stories; philosophical/metaphysical musings; existential tales; family drama; post-modern zaniness; etc) it becomes infinitely easier to narrow down a set of authors and works that you'll likely enjoy. I'm a depressive bastard so I tend to gravitate towards Kafka, Beckett, Lowry, and other authors of their ilk. Basically ask yourself -- how and in what areas of my character do I want to experience growth? Then find the authors that appeal to those characteristics.
Good luck brother.
|
I've read most of these. Ironically I don't really consider myself much of a reader... And while these books are good, I wouldn't consider them my favourites neither for intellectual stimulation nor for entertainment.
Still, I often get recommended piles and piles of books, and I resent the people who do that to me. It lowers the bar for what a 'great book' is when you can't name just one. You start including anything that was sort of decent (with the help of selective memory for good passages in heaps of mediocrity).
I'm surprised Hard Times isn't on that list as well, though. Really there seems to be quite a bias for American books there, with a few random foreign books. I mean, Heart of Darkness? How many people are still interested in Colonialism? This doesn't really reflect the modern intellectual, it's just kind of canon masturbation.
edit: to be fair, Heart of Darkness has some interesting points about the inefficacy of words, but I do think there are books more worth one's time.
|
On January 19 2011 05:35 Chef wrote:
I've read most of these. Ironically I don't really consider myself much of a reader... And while these books are good, I wouldn't consider them my favourites neither for intellectual stimulation nor for entertainment.
Still, I often get recommended piles and piles of books, and I resent the people who do that to me. It lowers the bar for what a 'great book' is when you can't name just one. You start including anything that was sort of decent (with the help of selective memory for good passages in heaps of mediocrity).
I'm surprised Hard Times isn't on that list as well, though. Really there seems to be quite a bias for American books there, with a few random foreign books. I mean, Heart of Darkness? How many people are still interested in Colonialism? This doesn't really reflect the modern intellectual, it's just kind of canon masturbation.
I respect your idea of "canon masturbation"; however, I would argue Heart of Darkness is about a great deal more than colonialism and still very relevant today.
|
It looks like 1984 , Animal Farm and Brave New World is pretty overrated to be honest. Listing any of these books above Crime and Punishment ? Nah can't agree that , not one bit.
Don't get me wrong I love 1984 and Brave New World but the thing is , they are not particularly awesome literature pieces. Of course they are good , and everyone should read them if they got time but if you ask me , as literature pieces , they aren't even close to books of Dostoevsky , Goethe , Kafka and many other German&Russian writers. (guess I'm not a fan of easy reads)
I'm kinda biased here I guess , as I hate hearing how awesome they are , from anarchist wannabe hipsters weirdos.
|
If ur interested into Sci-Fi books,u can't start without reading the Dune series.Both the ones written by Frank Herbert and the sequels written by his son Brian Herbert.
Really awesome books.
If you're interested into fantasy,u can start with the Sillmarillion from Tolkien or the Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan.
|
On January 19 2011 05:39 Tiax;mous wrote:
I'm kinda biased here I guess , as I hate hearing how awesome they are , from anarchist wannabe hipsters weirdos.
Nothing's quite like hating them hipsters. I hate mines with a passion, more than mr.pink hated tipping. How do you hate them?
|
news - I hate them more like Mr.Blonde hates ears
|
I've read almost everything there, but I'm a high school English teacher. :D
I think the discussion has said what I'd say fairly nicely, which is that you should really just read what you might be interested in. Some of them are thoroughly hated by most people -- just because they fall under "English canon" doesn't mean you're supposed to like them, it's just that they all offer significant literary value in some way.
Chef, Heart of Darkness offers more than almost any other book in existence. If you think it's just canon masturbation...that's sad as hell, but it's your opinion. That and Grapes of Wrath are my two favorite "canon" novels.
On January 19 2011 04:52 IPA wrote:
Some recommendations from a lit nerd:
House of Leaves - Mark J. Danielewski
zomg <3
My favorite book of all time...but I have a hard time recommending it to anyone. I have one friend that loves it; every one else (all of my classmates in a Horror Theory class) absolutely hated it.
|
I had Catcher in the Rye to read as an assignment, and I got bored out of my mind. Animal farm was quite enjoyable though.
I read Dune this holiday and enjoyed it greatly.
|
You've never read til you've read The Wasteland by T.S. Elliot. That or the Bible kekekeke.
|
The Great Gatsby and Brave New World are good reads, definitely recommend.
|
To the lighthouse is my personal favourite. Read it when I was 14 and have reread it three or four times since.
"A sort of transaction went on between them, in which she was on one side, and life was on another, and she was always trying to get the better of it, as it was of her; and sometimes they parleyed (when she sat alone); there were, she remembered, great reconciliation scenes; but for the most part, oddly enough, she must admit that she felt this thing that she called life terrible, hostile, and quick to pounce on you if you gave it a chance. There were the eternal problems: suffering; death; the poor. There was always a woman dying of cancer even here. And yet she had said to all these children, You shall go through with it. To eight people she had said relentlessly that... For that reason, knowing what was before them — love and ambition and being wretched alone in dreary places — she had often the feeling, Why must they grow up and lose it all? And then she said to herself, brandishing her sword at life, Nonsense. They will be perfectly happy. "
Part I, Chapter 10
For our penitence deserves a glimpse only; our toil respite only.
Part II, Chapter 3
"Like a work of art," she repeated, looking from her canvas to the drawing-room steps and back again. She must rest for a moment. And, resting, looking from one to the other vaguely, the old question which transversed the sky of the soul perpetually, the vast, the general question which was apt to particularise itself at such moments as these, when she released faculties that had been on the strain, stood over her, paused over her, darkened over her. What is the meaning of life? That was all — a simple question; one that tended to close in on one with years. The great revelation had never come. The great revelation perhaps never did come. Instead there were little daily miracles, illuminations, matches struck unexpectedly in the dark; here was one. This, that, and the other; herself and Charles Tansley and the breaking wave; Mrs. Ramsay bringing them together; Mrs. Ramsay saying, "Life stand still here"; Mrs. Ramsay making of the moment something permanent (as in another sphere Lily herself tried to make of the moment something permanent) — this was of the nature of a revelation. In the midst of chaos there was shape; this eternal passing and flowing (she looked at the cloud going and the leaves shaking) was struck into stability. Life stand still here, Mrs. Ramsay said. "Mrs. Ramsay! Mrs. Ramsay!" she repeated. She owed it all to her.
Part III, Chapter 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
