|
Kenzaburo Oe's A quiet Life. I love Oe's work and I think I read everything that has been translated so far but this one was difficult to get through. It took me several years of opening it, reading a few pages and putting it away again. It's not the depressive mood. Maybe the fact that it is written from the perspective of a truly passive (and slightly uninteresting) character that made it so dull.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2009 11:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 07:20 |
|
|
Emrys42 posted:The Silmarilion by J.J.R. Tolkien,I always got stuck on the Islands of Nemernor... I can't even remember where I got stuck. When I realized that half of the words in each sentence were made up names, I stopped caring. I can only take so much of "And then Glorthoriel asked Numendor about the battle of Goth Thorthrin, at which place Ceyendil defeated Thran Ethelthreth and Thththththt near the Pass of Gorthgorththethththththth ...." before wondering if there was any point to Tolkien writing the book in the first place except as an excuse to put his unnecessarily invented language to some goddamn use.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2009 01:59
|
|
|
I guess this won't make me popular but I have been stuck somewhere in the Iliad and just can't muster up the willpower to continue. I'm pretty sure it has to do with the terrible and extremely dull translation though. Maybe I should just skip ahead to the Odyssey.
Namarrgon fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Dec 12, 2009 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2009 21:43
|
|
|
Namarrgon posted:I guess this won't make me popular but I have been stuck somewhere in the Iliad and just can't muster up the willpower to continue. I'm pretty sure it has to do with the terrible and extremely dull translation though. Maybe I should just skip ahead to the Odyssey. It's completely reasonable to admit there are bad and good translations of foreign language texts. I once read the same Solzhenitsyn novel translated by two different people: Night and day. The translation makes a lot of difference.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2009 22:26
|
|
|
Neal Stephenson's Anathem. Heaving pile of neologisms, self-invented slang and just the usual thick prose style made for heavy going. I've read everything else he's published but I couldn't even get started with Anathem. At least it's sitting in the bookshelf, I suspect it's one of those books where you gotta get a fast start and it only starts to work a few chapters in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2009 06:02
|
|
|
I couldn't get through Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace. I've loved all his short-story collections, but stretched out to novel-length I find his style somewhat daunting. As beautifully written and, at times, funny as it is, I just could not motivate myself to plow through chapters upon chapters waxing poetic on tennis technique and politics. I know it's not really about tennis, but gently caress. Also, Tree of Smoke by Denis Johnson. Johnson is an author I don't see mentioned here, but in my estimation he's right up there with the modern greats, and his prose is some of the most gorgeous around. (Seriously, check out Jesus's Son or Fiskadoro or Already Dead). Tree of Smoke, however, is absolutely glacial. Whereas typically I lose track of characters and plot threads because too much is going on, Tree of Smoke is somewhat the opposite, in that the pacing is so slow and painful I couldn't motivate myself to keep track of anything at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2009 18:49
|
|
|
Namarrgon posted:I guess this won't make me popular but I have been stuck somewhere in the Iliad and just can't muster up the willpower to continue. I'm pretty sure it has to do with the terrible and extremely dull translation though. Maybe I should just skip ahead to the Odyssey. I have the Fagles translation and found it quite readable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2009 19:36
|
|
|
TeemuL posted:Neal Stephenson's Anathem. Heaving pile of neologisms, self-invented slang and just the usual thick prose style made for heavy going. I loved Anathem from start to finish, I literally couldn't put it done for like 4 days until it was done. Now Quicksilver...the first time I tried to read it I got maybe 80 pages in. After reading Anathem I started Quicksilver again but man, it is slow going. Made it up to page 400 or so in the past 6 weeks since Anathem, but have also read 3 other books in the meantime. I will finish it though at some point lol.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2009 21:56
|
|
|
1984. I'm not sure what it is, but I just can't do it. I've tried in paper form, and twice on audio book with two different narrators. I think it's just to depressing to read 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2009 13:41
|
|
|
The General posted:1984. I'm not sure what it is, but I just can't do it. I've tried in paper form, and twice on audio book with two different narrators. I think it's just to depressing to read drat, you should turn to the final 4 words.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2009 14:53
|
|
|
LooseChanj posted:drat, you should turn to the final 4 words. It seems like you can choose almost any four words in 1984 and be imediately depressed. It is still an amazing book, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2009 15:43
|
|
|
War and Peace. I started reading at the beginning of a 17 day vacation, and only was half way by the end. It was difficult to read more than a few pages without getting sleepy, since a simple scene of greeting would last 10+ pages. Every time. Eventually I just skimmed through the rest, read the essays as the end, and realized I already understood his main point in writing the book. Also, I almost quit on Crime and Punishment. The first half was brilliant (only book to give me nightmares) but the rest was pity-love.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2009 04:35
|
|
|
Back when I was taking AP English, we went through quite a few difficult and unenjoyable books, but the one I hated the most was Heart of Darkness although Wuthering Heights was a close second. My teacher introduced it to us as "the longest 100-page book you will ever read" and we had to finish it over Christmas break. I thought he was joking, but it was so true. Any time I tried to read it, I would drift off to sleep after only a few pages, so progress was terribly slow. I ended up skipping large parts of it and just skimming the last few pages. I still remember having to struggle over the descriptions of the nuts and bolts scattered about and the endless descriptions of fog and foggy weather and fog in the jungle. The only good thing that came of that was our teacher let us watch Apocalypse Now, so we could see the differences.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2009 02:08
|
|
|
Wizard's First Rule - One of my coworkers basically assaulted me to start reading this series, so I obliged her. I got about 500 pages in. I'm giving it back to her tomorrow. This poo poo just hurts my head, and I've decided to start re-reading series I enjoy instead. Amazing how in 200 pages of The Blade Itself there is more characterization for 4 main characters and a handful of minor ones than there are for two main characters in this other poo poo. Also, I get it. Darken Rahl is evil and must be stopped! Snore.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2009 07:58
|
|
|
The Difference Engine by Bruce Sterling and William Gibson. Steampunk kicks rear end, and Neuromancer kicked rear end, and so naturally a steampunk book by the author of Neuromancer would have to, by definition, kick rear end as well. Only then Bruce Sterling decided to make it one intellectually-masturbatory "alternate history" escapade where every drat point of divergence is highlighted by a million-watt Fleshlight. "Disraeli was Prime Minister and Lord Byron was an author, but now Disraeli is an author and Lord Byron is Prime Minister! IT'S DIFFERENT!" The first few times were cool, but by the time I got to the turgid six-page sex scene with a fat Irish hooker I no longer gave a poo poo. And Bruce Sterling, when you can make a history major no longer give a poo poo about alternate histories, you know you've screwed up royally. Hellequin posted:Atlas Shrugged, a friend recommended it to me (before I knew who Ayn Rand was), I got twenty pages in before I realized it was a massive pile of poo poo. Ayn Rand was a huge douche. And I mean that in the most well-considered, intellectual way possible. Ayn Rand created objectivism, objectivists are selfish, and selfish people are douches. Quod erat motherfucking demonstrandum bitches.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2009 02:14
|
|
|
outlier posted:It's completely reasonable to admit there are bad and good translations of foreign language texts. I once read the same Solzhenitsyn novel translated by two different people: Night and day. The translation makes a lot of difference. This is very true. I'm Lutheran, have a degree in theology from a Lutheran university, and have still never finished The Bondage of the Will which is supposed to be Luther's best work. The translation I have is just unreadable and I should really get a different one and start over.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2009 04:22
|
|
|
IT I got as far as the weird group sex part and then I just had to drop it, I mean Jesus Christ.  Gravity's Rainbow I appreciate what Pynchon is doing, and I genuinely love his writing, it's just the book is such a cluster gently caress on my brain I just can't make it through. 1984 I have no explanation for why I haven't been able to finish this book. It's just every time I pick it up I get about twenty five pages in, then I set it down to do something else (sleep, eat, poop) and I never find my way back to it. I feel like a failure to the literary community for not finishing it.  The Terror It's just so loving boring. I have been developing an odd fascination with the sea however, so I might give it another go. On another note, I loved Blood Meridian Cormac McCarthy is a beautiful writer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2009 06:33
|
|
|
Dean Koontz has a very on again off again writing style for me. Some of his books flow well and others delve too deep in the mystical dog nonsense. Normally I use his stuff as airplane fodder but I could not even get 20 pages through Breathless which wastes not even 1 page before introducing the magical canines. I just can't even make myself take it seriously as guilty pleasure when he's been reusing the same magical dog character for 20 years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2009 19:40
|
|
|
Rujo King posted:The Difference Engine by Bruce Sterling and William Gibson. Steampunk kicks rear end, and Neuromancer kicked rear end, and so naturally a steampunk book by the author of Neuromancer would have to, by definition, kick rear end as well. I'm with you. I was so keyed up for The Difference Engine, I actually bought the hardback as soon as it was out. I still remember the growing feeling of dismay as I read it. There was an allegation that large parts of the book were written by doing search-and replace on contemporary scenes: s/car/carriage/, s/police/bobby/ and so on. This may or may not be true, but the book reads like it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2009 20:56
|
|
|
Dynastocles posted:I can't even remember where I got stuck. When I realized that half of the words in each sentence were made up names, I stopped caring. I think that Tolkien was basically writing the Bible for his world. The style is less a novel and more ancient tales and narratives. Also, I disagree that his invented languages were unnecessary - having an in-world language with actual roots and structure does a lot for me in terms of immersion. Otherwise you get stuff with unnecessary apostrophes. Classy Bastard posted:Gravity's Rainbow I appreciate what Pynchon is doing, and I genuinely love his writing, it's just the book is such a cluster gently caress on my brain I just can't make it through. For my part: Cryptonomicon I know that there are plenty of people, especially goonish people, whose jaws would drop at saying this but I was just bored stiff. I got about halfway through and realized that an engaging plot wasn't actually going to materialize.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2009 21:40
|
|
|
Just today I quit reading The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and there's no way in hell I'm going back to it. I had to stop when the brilliant self made engineer  , the beautiful and intelligent woman (with huge tits) x2 and the brilliant self made professor x20 all get together for a conversation on how the government should be run. I only started reading the book because people said it wasn't as bad as his other stuff, instead it's worse. You have garbage like the "enlightened" female character talking about how she wants to be a one man woman (although he can screw around as much as he wants.) Or the main character saying how stupid the moon farmers are for not being self reliant like his family and then goes on to talk about how they're self reliant by just stealing from the government.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2009 00:43
|
|
|
I liked Heinlein and Ayn Rand as a teenager. Then I grew up and realized that the characters were basically inhuman and societies just don't really work that way. I couldn't finish any of his Lazarus Long books like Time Enough For Love because of this same poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2009 01:16
|
|
|
Classy Bastard posted:IT I got as far as the weird group sex part and then I just had to drop it, I mean Jesus Christ. Wow, every book you couldn't get through is a book I've read at least 4 times, excepting Gravity's Rainbow cuz seriously Jesus Christ that book is awesome and maddening in equal doses. But I could read 1984 over and over and never get bored. As for It, the group sex happens so late in the novel you might as well just get through it. You've already gone like 900 pages or something. And with The Terror, how far into it did you get? It starts off as a history book and then it eventually takes a turn into supernatural. It made me read up on the Erebus and the Terror at least. Plus I just love the language used in the book. And yeah, Blood Meridian kicks 23 different kinds of rear end. Don't gently caress with the Judge.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2009 03:43
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:For my part: Brother, I hear you. Cryptonomicon is the point that Neal Stephenson decided that he didn't need an editor and that infodumps and zany vignettes were a substitute for a plot. The book does get better towards the end - it just putters around and stops.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2009 08:18
|
|
|
Red Pyramid posted:I couldn't get through Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace. I've loved all his short-story collections, but stretched out to novel-length I find his style somewhat daunting. As beautifully written and, at times, funny as it is, I just could not motivate myself to plow through chapters upon chapters waxing poetic on tennis technique and politics. I know it's not really about tennis, but gently caress. Coming back to update this - I'm about a third of the way through my second attempt at Infinite Jest and wow, what was my deal? I'm really loving this book. Everything about it - the complex and precise but still organic, lovely prose, the way characters blip into existence for seemingly trivial roles and then work their way back into the story, the balancing of hilarity and despair, even the tennis stuff, which I find deeply fascinating despite my built-in disdain for sports - is superb. To be fair, my attempt took place a few years ago, and I've since read through Don Quixote, some Pynchon, Delillo, Dostoevsky, and McCarthy, so perhaps I just needed to suffer a bit to realize how accessible IJ actually is if you're willing to get into it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2009 22:18
|
|
|
outlier posted:I'm with you. I was so keyed up for The Difference Engine, I actually bought the hardback as soon as it was out. I still remember the growing feeling of dismay as I read it. There was an allegation that large parts of the book were written by doing search-and replace on contemporary scenes: s/car/carriage/, s/police/bobby/ and so on. This may or may not be true, but the book reads like it. I was in 8th grade when I tried reading that book on my dad's recommendation. I didn't make much progress.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2009 07:39
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:I think that Tolkien was basically writing the Bible for his world. The style is less a novel and more ancient tales and narratives. Definitely this. The thing about Tolkien is that you do not read it for the engaging plotlines or the compelling characters or the revolutionary thematic examinations, because there aren't any. (Yes, I will probably be crucified for saying that, but if it aids my defense, I do actually like Tolkien.) You read it because it is the literary equivalent of a massive effortpost. The amount of richly-imagined and impeccably-researched historical and linguistic detail is what really separates this from run-of-the-mill sword and sorcery poo poo, but it is also what makes it horrifically tedious to a lot of people. Put another way, if you are the sort of person who can happily read an encyclopedia about a subject previously entirely unknown to you, then you will like Tolkien. Otherwise it is just a pointless, interminable grudgefuck of singing pygmies. Classy Bastard posted:The Terror It's just so loving boring. I have been developing an odd fascination with the sea however, so I might give it another go. Oh gently caress yes, I gave in after about 2/3 of this book when I completely lost the ability to give a poo poo what happened next- and I've always been ridiculously fascinated by anything even remotely connected to the history of the Franklin Expedition. I rushed out to buy this book when I heard about it, because drat, it was like my two nerd loves of pulpy horror and obscure historical incident had a baby and now that baby was about to punch me right in the brain with almost 800 pages of improbably loving awesome! But the reality just pissed all over the warm dryer-fresh blanket of my dreams. I'm not entirely sure how it was possible to make one of the most viscerally horrible and tragic episodes of arctic exploration and man-eating demon polar bear ice gods boring, but by god, Dan Simmons managed it. It's probably pretty silly to ask if anyone's got any tips on how to make what is more or less a dumb airport novel more readable, but if they do I'd love to hear them, because I really wanted to enjoy the hell out of this book. For content, I have never been able to finish: The Stranger by Albert Camus. Maybe this is going to sound retardedly goony or something, but this book is just too depressing for me to finish. Or maybe it's more than that, because depressing books generally do not bother me like this at all- I can get through things like Blood Meridian and A Prayer for the Dying and really enjoy them. But The Stranger just left me with this gut-freezingly weird and evil feeling that's sort of impossible to explain. About the fourth time the narrator mentions how Maman died and it was so hot at the funeral something in me snapped on some primal level like an ape that's just spotted a snake coming through the long grass. Yes, I get that this is why it's called The Stranger, and I get that this response is sort of the whole purpose of the novel and it just means that whatever Camus did, it's working, but jesus, dude. Thing gave me the bad evils. So while I recognize that it's brilliant, I feel sort of ashamed by the fact that it's apparently just too damned effective a brilliance for me. The Crying of Lot 49, oddly enough, even though everyone says it's like Pynchon Without Tears. I honestly got through Gravity's Rainbow solely by pretending that it was nothing but the ramblings of a homeless schizophrenic who inexplicably knows a lot about hookers and rocket science, and he had cornered me in a bar to relate his gibberish while all I had to do was smile and sip my drink and enjoy the show. Made the whole thing seem way less frustrating and overwhelming. However, I'm pretty sure I completely missed the point this way, but what the hell, it's still a fun ride even if you throw up when you get off at the end. So that worked out all right, and I tried doing the same thing with The Crying of Lot 49, but for whatever reason, I developed this bizarre, irrational hatred of Oedipa and found myself way too annoyed to bother trying to sort it all out. This is a fantastically retarded reason to never finish a book, but there it is. I regret nothing. After by Melvin Jules Bukiet. I can't explain this one. Three times now I have picked this up, gotten about halfway, and then something comes up and I drift. It's baffling to me, because I honestly love this book. I love Bukiet's writing style, and I loved two of his other books- his prose is so beautiful and he's got a hell of a gift for characterization. Other people have told me things like the second half is a major slog, or the narrative falls apart, or any of the usual "I had trouble too" stuff, but I'm not even seeing any of that. I just can't finish it. Yet. Fourth time's the charm, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2009 13:45
|
|
|
LZEnglish posted:The amount of richly-imagined and impeccably-researched historical and linguistic detail is what really separates this from run-of-the-mill sword and sorcery poo poo, That's only because everyone since has ripped off Tolkein.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2009 05:32
|
|
|
Yet another loss to the Silmarilion here. I don't think I made it more than five pagers in, so not a very serious attempt, but I still felt a little bad about it. I don't even remember which Dune book I was on when I gave up; maybe the third? I hated all of them past the first, and they just got less and less interesting as I went. Finally, I don't feel even remotely bad about putting down Michael Crichton's Sphere. I mean, I try to keep my expectations reasonable when I'm reading somebody like Crichton, but when I got to part 3 and he'd killed off everyone but the two least interesting characters I've ever encountered I just gave up. gently caress that book. The list of books I wish I'd given up on but was too stubborn to is probably a lot longer; off the top of my head, I'm really sorry I wasted so much time on Quicksilver and I suspect I'm going to feel the same way when I finish House of Leaves, which I'm in the middle of now. Honorable gently caress Yous to Terry Goodkind and Robert Jordan. Finally, to all the people struggling with Blood Meridian: if you see anything at all remotely compelling in it, keep going. This was one of the strangest experiences I've ever had with reading a book and I honestly couldn't tell whether I liked the thing or not until I'd finished it. The end absolutely makes the story and now I love it; all the things about McCarthy's style that had seemed sort of off-putting throughout the book just clicked into place for the final few pages and it was all worth it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2009 19:13
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:Wow, every book you couldn't get through is a book I've read at least 4 times, excepting Gravity's Rainbow cuz seriously Jesus Christ that book is awesome and maddening in equal doses. But I could read 1984 over and over and never get bored. As for It, the group sex happens so late in the novel you might as well just get through it. You've already gone like 900 pages or something. And with The Terror, how far into it did you get? It starts off as a history book and then it eventually takes a turn into supernatural. It made me read up on the Erebus and the Terror at least. Plus I just love the language used in the book. Yeah, like I said the 1984 thing makes me feel like a total failure. But I got a copy for Christmas from my Grandma who will ask in a couple of weeks what I thought of it and I hate to disappoint my Grandma so that should help. I dunno so many people have told me this but I have never had a problem with just dropping a book. It annoys my friends to no end (god drat book nerds). I never got very far. I was thinking about giving it another go though. So let's hope I can make it through this time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2009 05:56
|
|
|
Classy Bastard posted:IT I got as far as the weird group sex part and then I just had to drop it, I mean Jesus Christ. quote:I'm stuck on the Dark Tower series. I picked it up almost a year ago, and I've gotten through the first four books (barely) and can't get past page 10 of the fifth. I just can't make myself care anymore, is there any reason I should bother to finish this? quote:Dean Koontz has a very on again off again writing style for me. Some of his books flow well and others delve too deep in the mystical dog nonsense. Normally I use his stuff as airplane fodder but I could not even get 20 pages through Breathless which wastes not even 1 page before introducing the magical canines. I just can't even make myself take it seriously as guilty pleasure when he's been reusing the same magical dog character for 20 years. To contribute, I could not for the life of me get past p. 150 or so of American Gods. I think it's because I was let down by the way Gaiman utilized Odin. And nobody should feel like a failure for not getting into 1984. It took me forever to like it, and I normally love dystopian fiction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2009 22:01
|
|
|
Irony.or.Death posted:Finally, I don't feel even remotely bad about putting down Michael Crichton's Sphere. I mean, I try to keep my expectations reasonable when I'm reading somebody like Crichton, but when I got to part 3 and he'd killed off everyone but the two least interesting characters I've ever encountered I just gave up. gently caress that book. I finished it. An interesting start, a so-so middle and a "you've got to be kidding me" end. You did the right thing. Taliaquin posted:And nobody should feel like a failure for not getting into 1984. It took me forever to like it, and I normally love dystopian fiction. Yup. To call 1984 grim, is an understatement. Not to take anything away from it's greatness or place in literature, It's a really depressing read.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2009 00:36
|
|
|
Sense and Sensibility . Got 3/4 way through before giving it up with a sigh of relief. Jane Austen's witty observations on the eighteenth-century middle-class marriage market aren't particularly witty or interesting. Objectively, I can see she was a talented author with layered plots and good characterisation, but the subject matter doesn't appeal. There's something irritating about the obvious moral message too - the 'bad' characters who don't conform to social niceties end up unhappy whereas the 'good' characters live happily ever after. Lots of authors do it, and there's no real reason why it annoys me with this book/author and not with others, but it does.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2009 00:38
|
|
|
One Hundred Years of Solitude. I finally got some time to read for leisure so I went and bought a few titles that have forever been on my to-read list. I made it to page 100 or so and had to switch to something else. I read reviews to see if it was going to pick up at some point. There are more positive reviews than negative ones but it doesn't sound like they are reviewing the same book. I haven't really followed this thread but what's the general opinion?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2009 02:14
|
|
|
Gardens of the Moon, the first Malazan Book of the Fallen book by Erikson. I got about halfway through it and haven't managed to drum up an ounce of interest in any character or the current events of the world. I put it down for about three months, but I don't want to just give up since my friends are all saying that it's an amazing story once things start weaving together. It's just very difficult to get through 2000 pages of prologue without a single sympathetic character to latch onto for life support. I also can't get past some of the ridiculous nicknames some of the characters have, especially when they conflict with who the characters are supposed to be. Whiskeyjack is the best example, a grizzled veteran trying to keep his comrades alive, but all I can picture whenever I read the name is a drunkard. "Hey ladiesh... come sit next to ol' Whishkeyjack and I'll tell you a shtory about... aww shoot I just pisshed on myshelf." This might be just a nitpick but it sure doesn't help me become interested in the characters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2009 04:12
|
|
|
This wasn't me personally, but it was pretty funny so I thought I'd share. My grandmother of 80-odd years recently started reading a lot, and my mom hooked her up with a box of old books she'd read. It's mostly a mix of romance and mystery, and occasionally when I called her I'd get a fairly long spiel about how violent the mysteries were or something. But she'd always read them anyway. Fast forward to Christmas Eve, and while talking she complains about the book she's currently reading, and how awful it is, but if mom made it through it than she could to. The book? Dreamcatcher, by Stephen King. With it's constant swearing, poo poo weasels, and weird meander-y alien plot. I laughed for a bit, told her that it had probably been left at home by me or my uncle and that she should feel no compulsion to read it because it was pretty crappy. She has abandoned it now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 01:32
|
|
|
This may have been mentioned already but Revolutionary Road by Richard Yates. I bought this book after several people told me it was amazing. The story sounded interesting enough, not my usual type of book but I thought I'd give it a shot. Now I have tried reading it 3 times but this man has an unnatural love for semicolons. It's a book of constant run-on sentences that last whole pages sometimes and say nothing but "Hey I have a thesaurus, let's see how many adjectives I can fit in for this one object!! Book deal here I come". Curse you Yates, I really wanted to like you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2010 18:32
|
|
|
I'm sad to say I couldn't get through William Gibson's Neuromancer. I don't know why, as it really looked like a book right up my alley. Usually I love crazy cyberpunk stories but for some reason this book really dragged. About 75% through I was just not interested in the story and dropped it. Oh well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 07:44
|
|
|
/\ Neuromancer is definitely a slower book than stuff like Snow Crash. Keep at it if you can as the ending's great. Currently I'm struggling with Pratchett's Unseen Academicals which is odd since I usually breeze through his books. This one simply has failed to grab me. I think it might be a little too British when it comes to the football plot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 16:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 07:20 |
|
|
I couldn't get through Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell - it started out really well, I loved the concept and the footnotes and by the time I reached the Cathedral scene I was thoroughly enchanted. Unfortunately somewhere around the middle the story just meanders all over the place with no hint of returning to the main story arc. It still annoys me that I never finished it, and I will probably try again soon. I read the first book in Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series and enjoyed it, although for me it was a bit of a slow read because there were just so many characters. However, after taking a peek at Martin's blog it occurred to me that he is a lazy fat gently caress and will probably die before he finishes them, so I decided not to continue until they are done because otherwise I'll get too invested in them. So far I have seen nothing to suggest I was wrong, every time I check his blog he is talking about football or some poo poo he's doing to avoid writing. On a positive note I discovered Scott Lynch's awesome Gentleman Bastard series through his blog so some good came out of it for me even if he never gets his rear end in gear. James Ellroy's L.A. Confidential. I love pulp/noir fiction, but I gave up because his punchy writing style drove me up the wall and it suffered from having too many characters who are mentioned one time early on and then suddenly become important later - I found myself flicking back and forth through the book going "Wait, who the gently caress is that again?" I soldiered through American Gods because it's one of my husband's favourite books, but I really didn't care for it very much. Shadow is like Bella Swan for men or something, he's so blank and generic and I didn't care about him at all. I enjoyed some of the backstory for the gods coming over and the concept was good, but for the most part it was just so hard to give a poo poo. Also I don't know if he is a furry or what, but I have read 3 Gaiman books now and there is human/cat sex in two of them so I don't know what the gently caress. Twilight is something that I suffered through just because I couldn't believe how bad it was. Meyer spends two pages describing Bella making quesadillas at one point, like she actually walks you through each step of making a quesadilla like it's some sort of cookbook for spackers. I lost my poo poo the first time she described Edward as an Adonis with no hint of irony - it was fun to read out the worst passages to my husband, but unfortunately the funny stuff was buried in a giant swamp of boring. Even now though, I still have the urge to read the others because I hear Edward chews a baby out of Bella's womb at some point and it sounds hilariously awful - maybe I'll wait for the movie so I can at least use Rifftrax. I liked Jane Eyre but I could definitely see how that would be a slog for a lot of people. I absolutely love Austen's work too, but yeah it's not for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 23:51
|
|
