Books only lying poseurs could claim to like

[kandwo]

Originally Posted by Ashjuk

How right you are!

Have you read any other of his works? The only other one I have is The Heart Of A Dog, which I would also recommend.

I went to see Patriarch's Ponds when I was in Russia a few years ago, it's just as you imagine it would be from the book.

There is also a good TV series adaption of M&M that was shown on UK TV (with English subtitles) a few years ago.

While M&M is a fantastic read with a lot of great quotes and insights, The Heart of a Dog belongs perfectly in this thread. It was such a drag. The book is short, but was a painful read. The tone preachy throughout and the point was being sledgehammered home. Bulgakov didn't care for the vulgarity of the communists, which became evident already in the beginning of the book - the rest was superfluous.

Another classic that just might belong here is A Confederacy of Dunces. I didn't laugh once reading it, hardly smiled. Yet it's lauded as a timeless classic at the apex of humorous prose.

I'd rather read Wodehouse.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by kandwo

Another classic that just might belong here is A Confederacy of Dunces. I didn't laugh once reading it, hardly smiled. Yet it's lauded as a timeless classic at the apex of humorous prose.

I'd rather read Wodehouse.

Right there with you on both. I’ve thought I should give Confederacy another try just in case “everybody” was right about it; I read it when it came out and I thought that overall it was a snooze. Needed to be shorter, among other things.

Wodehouse is nonpareil.

[Bookpossum]

Oh good, I'm glad I needn't bother with Confederacy. However, I am enjoying working my way through Wodehouse.

[astrangerhere]

Originally Posted by issybird

Right there with you on both. I’ve thought I should give Confederacy another try just in case “everybody” was right about it; I read it when it came out and I thought that overall it was a snooze. Needed to be shorter, among other things.

Wodehouse is nonpareil.

LeVar Burton's adult book club on Fable is reading Confederacy right now. I love LeVar Burton reads and am a child of the original Reading Rainbow, but I won't be going behind a paywall to see if the man himself can bring something new to me for Confederacy.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by issybird

Wodehouse is nonpareil.

A comic genius of the first water.

[Renate]

Wodehouse invented acronyms, TBH.

[Apache]

Originally Posted by Renate

Wodehouse invented acronyms, TBH.

In English, the first known acronyms (as opposed to plain old initialisms) cropped up in the telegraphic code developed by Walter P. Phillips for the United Press Association in 1879.

Apache

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Apache

In English, the first known acronyms (as opposed to plain old initialisms) cropped up in the telegraphic code developed by Walter P. Phillips for the United Press Association in 1879.

If they were used in telegraphy, a non-spoken medium, how can they NOT be plain old initialisms?

[Quoth]

I'm sure acronyms in English predate telegraphic era and Wodehouse, though many txt speak abbreviations actually were first used with Morse and later Telegrams. It's inevitable some abbreviations are pronounced and are similar to or actual words. Cam be hard sometimes to know if deliberate acronyms or retronyms, Till more recent times retronyms were called acronyms. Acrostics are sometimes acronyms.

Ancient Romans and Greeks used them.

The Church used them from earliest times. The acronym ikhthū́s is over 1900 years old. Greek for fish and the initials mean

Iota (i), Iēsoûs (Ἰησοῦς), "Jesus"
Chi (ch), Khrīstós (Χρῑστός), "anointed"
Theta (th), Theoû (Θεοῦ), "of God", the genitive singular of Θεóς, Theós, "God"
Upsilon (y or u), (h)uiós[10] (Yἱός), "Son"
Sigma (s), sōtḗr (Σωτήρ), "Savior"

I suspect Shakespeare and others used them?

But Wodehouse is still a genius.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by ApK

If they were used in telegraphy, a non-spoken medium, how can they NOT be plain old initialisms?

Speaking is nothing to do with it. Also telegraphic messages might be dictated and telegrams would be read to others. Also the number of acronyms in a language in time correlates with written usage, not oral use. A rise in Literacy creates them.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Speaking is nothing to do with it. Also telegraphic messages might be dictated and telegrams would be read to others. Also the number of acronyms in a language in time correlates with written usage, not oral use. A rise in Literacy creates them.

The distinction from initialism in Apache's post refers to the fact of it being pronounced as a word, rather that simply saying the letters. (SCUBA or LASER as opposed to FBI or NBC). So if it's not pronounced at all, there's no distinction to make.

If you have evidence to contradict the Wikipedia article's claim that the word-type acronyms in English are a purely 20th century thing, I'm sure it would make for an interesting thread of it own in some other section.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Renate

Wodehouse invented acronyms, TBH.

Good reason to never read any of his books.

They can be the bane of many books where these acronyms are way overused.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Good reason to never read any of his books.

Strikes me more as grasping at straws to justify not even trying the work of the greatest humor stylist of the 20th century.

[Cyclops]

Don't know if its been mentioned here but The Great Gatsby has to be included. I found it a dreadful pretentious pile of poo. Same with Picture of Dorien Grey

[fduniho]

Originally Posted by gmw

I think Moby Dick is the big one for me. It's the one I have the most trouble understanding how anyone else could possibly have enjoyed it. Only the book's reputation as a classic had me force myself through to the end. There were a handful of excellent paragraphs to be found (including the first), but it was like panning for gold: lots of mud and very little shine. If ever a book was made to be summarised by Reader's Digest, this was it.

I read it for a college class. An abridged version might be good, but the book was filled with too much minute detail about whaling and sailing that didn't really move the story along and that I didn't really care about.