Hey!! Let's get some action going! What are we reading?

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Next up: The Casual Vacancy by J K Rowling. I picked this up in a sale for $1.49 out of curiosity. I'm not sure whether I'll finish it, but as I'm only a chapter or two in I'll give it a bit longer - we're just getting introduced to the characters at the moment.

Originally Posted by Yapyap

I'd give The Casual Vacancy a good try before deciding to discard it. It took a while for me to get going, but the way all the separate strands and threads tied together in the end, and the character .. well, I'm not sure I can really call it character growth, but with so many of them, there was a certain point where I suddenly understood a previously hated character a bit better, enough to near-sympathise with them, and for me, those revelations and moments made the book very much worth reading.

But it is a bit slow going at first, especially with the multiple POV characters and plot threads that don't seem to be connected or related at first.

I've finished The Casual Vacancy. Certainly not the kind of book I usually read. And not the kind of book I intend to look for in the future. Yapyap was right that it was worth finishing. I can't deny that it kept my attention, and that it was well written, and gets a deserved 4/5 from me. I suspect that someone who likes the genre (i.e. realistic fiction) would rate it even higher.

Next up: The Prize in the Game by Jo Walton. The third (& last) in her series about an alternate magical dark ages Britain. (Arthurian, but not.)

I bought this one in May in an Amazon sale for £0.99.

[Latinandgreek]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

That's a good point. I think for me it's half that, half just mental exhaustion - somehow it was a lot easier, when younger, to spend the day studying and the evening reading something relatively "heavy". Now, most of the time I feel like I can't handle anything that needs above-average focus or thought, because I'm just too tired from a day's work.

At least I do still sometimes get restless and want something a little different to the usual lighter fare.

I've gotten like that too, and I definitely think that it has to do with being tired in the evening. Also, I do a fair bit of academic reading during the day and in the evening want to get light reading done.

[Strether]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

That's a good point. I think for me it's half that, half just mental exhaustion - somehow it was a lot easier, when younger, to spend the day studying and the evening reading something relatively "heavy". Now, most of the time I feel like I can't handle anything that needs above-average focus or thought, because I'm just too tired from a day's work.

You're in good company. In Darwin's Recollections he talks about having lost his love of good music and poetry because his mind seemed to have become a kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts. And then says "On the other hand, novels, which are works of the imagination, though not of a very high order, have been for years a wonderful relief and pleasure to me, and I often bless all novelists. A surprising number have been read aloud to me, and I like all if moderately good, and if they do not end unhappily--against which a law ought to be passed. A novel, according to my taste, does not come into the first class unless it contains some person whom one can thoroughly love, and if a pretty woman all the better."

Jim

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Strether

You're in good company. In Darwin's Recollections he talks about having lost his love of good music and poetry because his mind seemed to have become a kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts. And then says "On the other hand, novels, which are works of the imagination, though not of a very high order, have been for years a wonderful relief and pleasure to me, and I often bless all novelists. A surprising number have been read aloud to me, and I like all if moderately good, and if they do not end unhappily--against which a law ought to be passed. A novel, according to my taste, does not come into the first class unless it contains some person whom one can thoroughly love, and if a pretty woman all the better."

Jim

I rate a good novel higher than most things, and there are few things I enjoy more, but perhaps they are junk food for the soul.

Helen

[Yapyap]

I think a good novel (no matter how "low" of class, even something as horrifying to a literary snob as a genre thriller, cheap romance or, good heavens, a children's book) is really in many ways a perfect solution and a cure, or an antidote, if one has taxed one's brain hard with "serious" work during the day - my work (foreign news editor when I was younger, technical translator for the last 10+ years) has always involved hours and hours of focused reading, so at least in my case there really isn't a lot of mental energy left for anything that even remotely requires "working" on it.

And if the options left are a "genre" novel or TV, I'll take the novel any day, no matter how simple the language and unoriginal the plot, as long as it keeps me interested - at least for me, reading still lets me exercise my imagination more than TV-watching does.

Back on topic, I'm tentatively enjoying The Luminaries; 22% into it and I'm sort of starting to see what the plot might be. It's also quite refreshing to read a well-written third person omniscient narrative since - well, ages, I think; I've really not come across too many modern books that use it (and use it well, and properly, unlike some that have probably attempted it but have ended up with limited 3rd person POV head-hopping) but since the book is set in the 19th century, it feels rather fitting.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by Strether

...On the other hand, novels, which are works of the imagination, though not of a very high order, have been for years a wonderful relief and pleasure to me, and I often bless all novelists. A surprising number have been read aloud to me, and I like all if moderately good, and if they do not end unhappily--against which a law ought to be passed....

Having read On the Origins of Species; one thing I never expected of Charles Darwin was a sense of humor. Thanks for that quote!

[alansplace]

Originally Posted by CRussel

Oh, you're going to have fun. The Spenser books vary from quite good to excellent, IMO. Parker's main characters, regardless of which series we're talking about, always have a somewhat strained main love relationship. But Spenser is a good character and the plot is well done. Hawk is way too good to be real, but one doesn't actually care. I've actually been considering a complete reread of the series. But it probably won't happen for a while yet.

I've certainly enjoyed Spenser so far, just one book, and I see the roots of Harry Dresden in the Spenser character. The only thing I know about Hawk is the the TV version was played by Avery Brooks before he joined Star Fleet. I did a little research and observed that Hawk doesn't show up till Promised Land (Spenser #4)!

Originally Posted by CRussel

And, speaking of rereading a series, I've been working my way through the entire Honor Harrington series, including the side series, all in chronological order. It has made me even more aware of how much better and tighter the writing was at the beginning, but I'm still enjoying it even now that I'm no the second to last book, A Rising Thunder.

A while back I started the HH series and gave up on it rather quickly. As I remember it seemed to be way too full of techno-babble and background filler about military hardware and objectives for my personal taste.

[Latinandgreek]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

I think a good novel (no matter how "low" of class, even something as horrifying to a literary snob as a genre thriller, cheap romance or, good heavens, a children's book) is really in many ways a perfect solution and a cure, or an antidote, if one has taxed one's brain hard with "serious" work during the day - my work (foreign news editor when I was younger, technical translator for the last 10+ years) has always involved hours and hours of focused reading, so at least in my case there really isn't a lot of mental energy left for anything that even remotely requires "working" on it.

And if the options left are a "genre" novel or TV, I'll take the novel any day, no matter how simple the language and unoriginal the plot, as long as it keeps me interested - at least for me, reading still lets me exercise my imagination more than TV-watching does.

Back on topic, I'm tentatively enjoying The Luminaries; 22% into it and I'm sort of starting to see what the plot might be. It's also quite refreshing to read a well-written third person omniscient narrative since - well, ages, I think; I've really not come across too many modern books that use it (and use it well, and properly, unlike some that have probably attempted it but have ended up with limited 3rd person POV head-hopping) but since the book is set in the 19th century, it feels rather fitting.

I'm glad that you are tentatively enjoying it. I've been meaning to read it but have been putting it off, but I just might pick it up after finishing the book that I am currently reading.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by alansplace

I've certainly enjoyed Spenser so far, just one book, and I see the roots of Harry Dresden in the Spenser character. The only thing I know about Hawk is the the TV version was played by Avery Brooks before he joined Star Fleet. I did a little research and observed that Hawk doesn't show up till Promised Land (Spenser #4)!



A while back I started the HH series and gave up on it rather quickly. As I remember it seemed to be way too full of techno-babble and background filler about military hardware and objectives for my personal taste.

The Spenser series are pretty bad IMO. A lot of running and a lot of stuff that never occurred in a Spenser novel. The movies are a bit better, but a lot of anomalies. Spike is in all of them and AFAIK never was a Spenser character, (he was a Sunny Randall character) and tough, not stout and soft.

Avery Brooks smiles constantly while Hawke never did. A discreet uplift of the corners of his mouth was a rare occurrence.

The Jesse Stone Movies are pretty good though, despite Tom Selleck playing a 30+ character when he was 65-70.

No doubt I will watch them all eventually as even bad Parker is better than no Parker

Helen

[Stitchawl]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Having read On the Origins of Species; one thing I never expected of Charles Darwin was a sense of humor. Thanks for that quote!

Another author that most folks never realize had an amazing sense of humor was Henry David Thoreau. "Walden" is page after page of clever sarcasm and 'in' jokes.

Originally Posted by alansplace

I've certainly enjoyed Spenser so far, just one book, and I see the roots of Harry Dresden in the Spenser character. The only thing I know about Hawk is the the TV version was played by Avery Brooks before he joined Star Fleet.

Hawk is the perfect foil to Spenser, especially after the first few books. As a pure 'nasty,' he's just so-so. But as a 'nasty with a personal ethic' he's great. Much better as Spenser's friend than as his enemy.


Stitchawl

[jgaiser]

Ok. So I'm reading Robert A. Caro's The Years of Lyndon Johnson - Master of the Senate and I can't believe how big of an a$$hole LBJ was. I have to stop reading because he pisses me off so much. I just finished reading the chapters about his destruction of Leland Olds, Chairman of the Federal Power Commission because LBJ's Texas oil buddies felt they weren't making enough money on natural gas. Holy Crap. I never was a big fan of LBJ, but the first third of this book is completely destroying *any* regard I may have had.

I'll finish the book, but it's a good thing it's not paper or it would have been thrown at the wall too many times already.

[jersysman]

Originally Posted by jgaiser

Ok. So I'm reading Robert A. Caro's The Years of Lyndon Johnson - Master of the Senate and I can't believe how big of an a$$hole LBJ was. I have to stop reading because he pisses me off so much. I just finished reading the chapters about his destruction of Leland Olds, Chairman of the Federal Power Commission because LBJ's Texas oil buddies felt they weren't making enough money on natural gas. Holy Crap. I never was a big fan of LBJ, but the first third of this book is completely destroying *any* regard I may have had.

I'll finish the book, but it's a good thing it's not paper or it would have been thrown at the wall too many times already.

Yeah, I remember my dad saying that he was a nasty SOB in Texas politics and the Senate. I was only around 10 at the time he took over president, so I know only of what i have read about him.

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by jersysman

Yeah, I remember my dad saying that he was a nasty SOB in Texas politics and the Senate. I was only around 10 at the time he took over president, so I know only of what i have read about him.

I'm a bit older. I was 16 when Kennedy was assassinated, but this is my first look at the politics of the late 40's and early 50's when the Southern Caucus really controlled the Senate. It's a huge eye opener to me.

[alansplace]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

The Spenser series are pretty bad IMO. A lot of running and a lot of stuff that never occurred in a Spenser novel. The movies are a bit better, but a lot of anomalies. Spike is in all of them and AFAIK never was a Spenser character, (he was a Sunny Randall character) and tough, not stout and soft.

Avery Brooks smiles constantly while Hawke never did. A discreet uplift of the corners of his mouth was a rare occurrence.

The Jesse Stone Movies are pretty good though, despite Tom Selleck playing a 30+ character when he was 65-70.

No doubt I will watch them all eventually as even bad Parker is better than no Parker

Helen

I assume you meant the TV show when saying "The Spenser series". I think I said before that I've never seen it. So it's not a reference for me. Also, I didn't know there was a movie (or movies). Now Jesse Stone is a different ball of wax as I've seen, if I remember correctly, two of them, Night Passage and Sea Change and I've read Night Passage and Trouble in Paradise so far. Like both the TV movies and the books.

[Apache]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

The Spenser series are pretty bad IMO. A lot of running and a lot of stuff that never occurred in a Spenser novel. The movies are a bit better, but a lot of anomalies. Spike is in all of them and AFAIK never was a Spenser character, (he was a Sunny Randall character) and tough, not stout and soft.

Avery Brooks smiles constantly while Hawke never did. A discreet uplift of the corners of his mouth was a rare occurrence.

The Jesse Stone Movies are pretty good though, despite Tom Selleck playing a 30+ character when he was 65-70.

No doubt I will watch them all eventually as even bad Parker is better than no Parker

Helen

And if you can accept Tom Cruise as Reacher, then Selleck as Jessie Stone is easy.
Apache