another great survival book! this one was surprising because it didn't feel dated at all, even though it was written in 1959. i wish there were maybe another great survival book! this one was surprising because it didn't feel dated at all, even though it was written in 1959. i wish there were maybe 200 more pages, particularly about rita, who is how i would want to be in the aftermath: shotgun. high heels. stockpiles. i love the image, but the reality is that i would more likely be holed up in the library, probably rereading this book for tips. meta. to sum it up in a few words: armadillos, glasses, honey, kaboom. and two things i learned, to continue my lists: do not pick up jewelry after the blast, and buy extra glasses. helpful review?? nope, they never are...
sorry, david. this book is better than swann's way. to the extent that i may have to go back and give swann's way three stars so that when i give thissorry, david. this book is better than swann's way. to the extent that i may have to go back and give swann's way three stars so that when i give this book four stars it doesn't make them equals, and, having four books to go, i want to leave room for a five-star anticipation. the first half of swann's way had me understanding what people did not like about proust. there was a lot of me hating on the narrator and gacking over his precious daintiness. this one, though, phoar. it is true it took me a long time to read it, and it was partly because the lulling nature of his prose would cause me to drift off into my own batch of memories and i would realize that three subway stops had gone by, or ten minutes of my break had passed, or i was asleep (that happened a few times, not because it was boring, but because his style is so much like a gentle boat on a lazy stream and it's all memory and dreamy and suddenly i am actually dreaming. that's pretty powerful) and then, i realized my copy was defective, and eight pages were blank! that's like two proust-sentences - gone! so i had to get a new copy and transfer all my bookmarks, marking passages i liked, such as "In reality, there is in love a permanent strain of suffering which happiness neutralises, makes potential only, postpones, but which may at any moment become, what it would long since have been had we not obtained what we wanted, excruciating." which is just gorgeous. and there is so much like that in this book - so much delightfully neurotic stewing and examining every delicate memory of first, and second, love. marcel is a thinkier prufrock waiting and waiting and thinking and hesitating and eventually pouncing, but like my cat when she's just playing with me to please me; you can tell her heart is elsewhere. but everyone, not just you, david, said this book was a valley in between the literary heights of swann's way and guermantes way, but i thought it was stunning. i am taking a proust-break for a moment,maybe two or three books worth, because i can see myself getting wholly immersed in the proustiverse and becoming too introspective and examining the minutia of life and love and disappointments and that's something you really want to space out and not digest all at once, for the sanity's sake. but then i suspect i will not be able to stop until the bitter end. with brian's (deleted) aborted wedding scene.
how do i review cannery row? like all the steinbeck i have read, except the dead pony, of which i remember very little except not being too keen on ithow do i review cannery row? like all the steinbeck i have read, except the dead pony, of which i remember very little except not being too keen on it, it is saturated with these wonderful marginalized characters who are desperate and hopeless and yearning. but they are surviving. and there is so much beauty in the squalor. it reminds me in my feeling-parts of suttree, which is one of my all time favorite books. this book is full of such well-meaning ineptitude and many very serious things couched in an effortless prose that comes across as almost humorous, or rather, amused. i'm not sure how to articulate all that i am feeling for steinbeck right now. this one will never be my favorite, but its been so long since i read him, i am remembering why i always list him when rattling off favorite authors when cornered by someone who wants something "really american". this certainly qualifies. the frog story was the best thing i have read in a long time. it didn't escape five stars by much, but there's a visceral reaction i get to certain books that i didn't get here. but really - a fucking gem.
the person who was reading this used, 49 cent, copy of moll flanders before me stopped reading at page 26, judging by the abrupt cessation of circled the person who was reading this used, 49 cent, copy of moll flanders before me stopped reading at page 26, judging by the abrupt cessation of circled words like "prattle", "would you were, sir", "brother fell", and "he would" i like to think about this person, and their busy pen. it's so arbitrary - they are not even words that might be unfamiliar to a moderately-literate reader. i tried to find a code in it: "help, i am being held hostage by a mad librarian", but to no avail. almost every page has at least six circles or underlines and then suddenly - nothing. did the pen run out of ink? did they abandon moll flanders? did they fall out of a tree? it's mysterious. another thing that is mysterious is moll flanders. she swans through this book, dripping babies from her body like a tree sheds leaves, stealing and whoring and manipulating men to keep her head above water and yet i'm not in love with her. how can this be? i mean, it's a fine book, but i can't see falling in love with it or with her character. and honestly, i don't know what to make of the realization that if she had just stayed married to her brother in the first place, she would have avoided a whole lot of trouble and had a lovely son and a fruitful plantation. let this be a lesson to you: choose wisely; incest or a life of crime. there is no in-between.
i am so glad i give authors three books to make me love them. this was hesse's last chance to woo me, and he really almost got a five-star valentine fi am so glad i give authors three books to make me love them. this was hesse's last chance to woo me, and he really almost got a five-star valentine from me, but we will call it a four and a half - must be a little coy, after all. this is a book that i would love to go back in time and give myself upon graduating from high school. i would love to know whether it would have made me more or less insufferable than i am now. because i could see it going either way, at seventeen. i could see myself taking this as a cautionary tale, in a way, or i could see myself going whole hog into some sort of mystical, quasi-intellectual liter-orgical spree and alienating everyone around me. i can see myself smoking a pipe and holding court with my philosophies and my revelations ohhhh my revelations. as it is, i held no court - i just finished it on the subway, took moll flanders out of my bag, and started reading that, in some quiet bookish equivalent to chain-smoking. but o what could have been...
so this isnt a mystery novel in the traditional sense, but its got a very compelling pacing to it that makes the suspense parts both immediate and briso this isnt a mystery novel in the traditional sense, but its got a very compelling pacing to it that makes the suspense parts both immediate and british-leisurely. like a brisk stroll on the grounds where we mustnt go too quickly or geoffrey will tire. my love of law and order (the one on television) has ruined me for mystery novels. or maybe just mystery novels written before 1950. because i always know my whodunits too soon. i have this affliction where i can retain very little of what i hear, but if i see it written, i can remember it quite well (for a time - dont ask me about books i read 10 years ago). it is why i always took really extensive notes in lecture classes, and why i forget things people tell me allll the time. why is this important? i dont know, except that i remember little facts that stick out in my mind - inconsistencies and whatnot because i am a pretty good close reader. but even the most obvious and bad movie with a central mystery, i generally dont figure it out until the reveal. and thats me. oh right, the book? the family is pretty interesting, its got horses for dana, its full of british charm and restraint, and i should get back to my paper. damn....more
i feel a little dirty reading this sandwiched between all my children's books for class. kids, take three giant steps back from gide... i think i lovei feel a little dirty reading this sandwiched between all my children's books for class. kids, take three giant steps back from gide... i think i loved this book, but i think i may want to read another translation. who knows from translations?? i have the richard howard one here, and i know he's like a star in the french/english translation world but i didn't like his introduction to this so much, and was wondering if there might be another recommended translation? i liked this book a lot, despite some perceived smugness from that intro. what an appalling character to fall in love with! so many layers of unpleasantness! ingratitude, sexual deviancy, racial audacity. and the second french book i've read this summer with men embracing plants. what is with my people? ahhhh les arbres...
i'm not sure how i feel including this in my "summer of missed classics" jag, because out of all of my goodreads.com friends, NO ONE hpower through...
i'm not sure how i feel including this in my "summer of missed classics" jag, because out of all of my goodreads.com friends, NO ONE has read it, so it's not really in the same league as Pride and Prejudice or Notes from Underground, where it was just me who had skipped 'em. still, it's a book i've always meant to read, but hadn't gotten around to until now. that being said—it should have been read by all of my goodreads.com friends, real or faking it. it is an amazing piece of writing that gives me everything that i like out of a novel: family secrets, missed opportunities, misunderstandings and tragically bad timing. so it's like my beloved hardy, but in the american south and a little darker, racially. its your summer, too—read it.
i feel like, as a lady, i should have liked this more. i thought it was okay; i liked some of the gentle satire poked at recontextualizing the things i feel like, as a lady, i should have liked this more. i thought it was okay; i liked some of the gentle satire poked at recontextualizing the things we take for granted about our society, which is supposed to make us laugh and blush. but i think i would go mad here. it's a little too wide-eyed stepford wives-y for me. and in a land without men, who would i get to boss around? i just don't think this has aged well, overall, and i'm not sure why i was under the impression that it was some seminal work that i had to read during my summer of overlooked classics.
this book is touted as "edith wharton's most erotic book". the introduction blabs on and on about its eroticism, and how scandalous it is. so i have dthis book is touted as "edith wharton's most erotic book". the introduction blabs on and on about its eroticism, and how scandalous it is. so i have devised a little drinking game. i invite you - i entreat you - to prepare a shot glass with your favorite scotch or whiskey, and do a shot every time you start feeling a little hot from all the sexy good times. i pretty much guarantee that shot glass will be untouched by the end of your readings. this book is not erotic, even in the broadest, most mormonic sense. i think there is a kiss or two, which for wharton is hot, but it's a stretch to call it "erotic". this is a book where people get preggers by proximity: two people of opposite genders are seated beside each other, and suddenly - the lady is up the pole. this might be the first appearance of the "sexy librarian" stereotype, but erotic?? far from it, ms. white gloves...
why haven't i read borges before?? no one knows. and he was always pushed upon me - "how can you like marquez if you haven't read borges??" "you like why haven't i read borges before?? no one knows. and he was always pushed upon me - "how can you like marquez if you haven't read borges??" "you like donoso - you should read borges." "machado is good, but you should read borges." so - fine - i did. and i am utterly underwhelmed. so there. i am learning during my "summer of classix" that most of the books i have for some reason or another overlooked were probably overlooked for a reason. i naturally gravitate towards what i like - and i seem to have a filter that prevents me from picking up too many books i don't. when i force it, this happens. and i liked some of the stories. but borges isn't for everyone (although scrolling down my "friends who have read" list, it looks as though all my friends gave it five stars.) and i'm not accusing you bitches of inflating your ratings, but i have the sense with borges that some people are guilted into liking him. or pretending that they like him more than they do because he's borges. but i won't be. because i am not ashamed of my intellectual shortcomings. i embrace them. i am incapable of abstract thought. fact. as hard as i try, that whole achilles/tortoise thing? does not compute. so all of this hexagon spiraling into hexagon on top of hexagon... i feel like i am back in college (where every single person i ever knew had a copy of this book. and was a stoner.)but this is classic stoner thinking-chains. reflections, labyrinths, it's perfect for that kind of mindset. "dooood, imagine we were in a hexagon right now??" and i know this makes sense to some people with philosophical and theological mindbents, but for me its almost pain. there were about 6 stories i liked, but the first few almost made me weep with trying to find the value in them. sorry, borges. we were never meant to be.
mmmmkay - it seems that there are those who think it would be valuable "in a book review" to list the stories i did like. so: the shape of the sword, theme of the traitor and the hero, death and the compass, the secret miracle, three versions of judas, story of the warrior and the captive, emma zunz, the house of asterion, and the waiting. more than i thought i liked, but still - a sad minority.
this is a weighty relic of a book. it's pretty enjoyable, just don't expect any surprises, unless you have missed the last 20 years of police procedurthis is a weighty relic of a book. it's pretty enjoyable, just don't expect any surprises, unless you have missed the last 20 years of police procedurals on the television set. i'm sure in its day it was chock full of surprises, but i have to shudder at the contrivance of characters talking aloud to themselves while unknown to them, people hide in cupboards or whatnot, overhearing exactly the information they are most desirous of. it does make me yearn for these times when it seems pulling a con was child's play: no paper trails, no integrity of the postal service... so much trust.. so much weakness... in this society, i would be some kind of pirate queen, stealing identities at will, capturing heiresses, forging signatures.. and i would never, ever, make private, compromising, confessions in my chamber.
oh, dear. this is not a character that it is healthy to relate to, is it?? he is a scootch more pathetic than me, and more articulate, but his pettineoh, dear. this is not a character that it is healthy to relate to, is it?? he is a scootch more pathetic than me, and more articulate, but his pettinesses are mine; his misanthropy is mine, his contradictions and weaknesses... i have to go hide now, i feel dirty and exposed...
so i figured i would finally read me some proust, get in touch with my roots or whatnot. and i have to say, for my introduction, it was kind of a mixeso i figured i would finally read me some proust, get in touch with my roots or whatnot. and i have to say, for my introduction, it was kind of a mixed bag. the first part i had real problems with. i am not a fan of precocious or sensitive children, so the whole first part was kind of a wash for me. i know, that's terrible, right?? here is this Monument of Great Literature, and i am annoyed, as though i were watching some children's production of oklahoma, or any musical, really. (shudder) there are some truly beautiful moments in it though - the varnish scene, those madeleines, the little secret room... and the transitions between these memories are so well-executed, you don't even really feel like you are reading them, you are just kind of flowing along with the words. but when he started hugging the flowers goodbye and crying because he was going to miss them, i'm a monster, really, i was so full of eye-rolling, it was almost seizing. seriously - buy the kid a football. but then the second part - ah - here's where i understand it! such minute and perfect details. such insight into love and obsession and betrayal. it was like high school, but only the really painful first-love bits. i'm looking forward to reading the rest of these, but i need a break and some sensitivity training first.
it is official: now everyone on the planet has read this book. i was the last holdout, and being the last person (excluding those who are just being bit is official: now everyone on the planet has read this book. i was the last holdout, and being the last person (excluding those who are just being born...... now) i am sorry i didn't like it more. i knew going into it that i was not a jane austen girl; i had read two others and thought them bloodless and mercantile. but everyone said to me, "well, you haven't read pride and prejudice is why you don't like her." which i thought might be valid. but it's not. because i still don't care. this is not the greatest love story of all time. it's more like the most amiable alliance of compatible feelings that ends up in a mutually agreeable union and merging of fortunes and temperaments. i mean, really. this book needs heathcliff to come barreling in on a stallion all wet from the moors to ravish all five of these daughters and show them what a real man is all about. now there's a love story...
so i have decided that this is the summer i read all the books i "should" have read by now—all the classics i have not gotten around to. this was, oddso i have decided that this is the summer i read all the books i "should" have read by now—all the classics i have not gotten around to. this was, oddly, sparked by an asshole customer who said to alyssa "this is why small bookstores are better—no one in big bookstores knows anything about books." which is, of course, inaccurate and ridiculous—poor alyssa is a nineteen-year-old girl who has not read any philip roth, and wasn't able to recommend a title to the (fifty-year-old) man, but she's probably read more books than most people you will pass on the street today. (unless you live on bookland ave) and i, too, love small bookstores, but that is not the point. another thing that is not the point is that there are other people in the store besides the nineteen-year-old girl (who is really not the target audience for philip roth), and between tom and greg alone, every philip rothbook has been read by our staff. anyway, so i just started thinking about all the books i haven't read that are canonical (not philip roth—i've read four and that's plenty) but, say, fahrenheit 451. so—long review short, i read this yesterday. and it's pretty much what i expected. even if you haven't read it, you know what it is about. i think it makes some important points, but it won't be making my all-time-favorite list. still, i'm glad i read it. his afterword is very good—i think i may have liked it more than the novel itself. so.
and here i thought thomas hardy was cruel to his characters...this book doesn't take long to turn into slow torture for crimes committed, and it gets and here i thought thomas hardy was cruel to his characters...this book doesn't take long to turn into slow torture for crimes committed, and it gets darker and more dramatic until it reaches the heights of opera-vengeance. it's very tempting as a modern reader to question the characters' motivations (why not just leave?? really?? just...leave), but it was high time i read some zola, and i can continue my summer of "missed classics" with confidence.
Loading...
