Return of the Book Thread

[Johny Cee]

Man, that is some hilariously fucked up stuff there.  I need to see if the library has a copy of one of those I can skim through. 

It really, really, really reminds me of when Haemish did a book review of Piers Anthony's Firefly.

[lamaros]

So,  for your reading pleasure:

http://hradzka.livejournal.com/194753.html

OH JOHN RINGO NO.

Read that a while ago. I don't think there's much to the "review" beyond the first few paragraphs.

I'm not a big fan of explicitly ideological fiction in general. If you want to moralize and preach just do it, no need to pretend you have a story to tell.

How would you categorize C.S.Lewis' Narnia series? I would go:

"The Last Battle" = explicit ideological fiction = shit.
"The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" = fiction, more subtly ideological = quite good.

Explicit ideology in fiction is normaly just bad fiction IMHO.

Nothing wrong with explicit ideology, or fiction inspired by ideology, it's the attempt to disgise something didactic through fiction that pisses me off. (As opposed to the bildungsroman, which I would suggest doesn't go for the disguise in the same way)

[Margalis]

I haven't read the Narnia books since I was like 8 years old, so I have no idea. I remember becoming bored by them after a couple books (though I think I read them all), that's about it. I much preferred the Oz books, but don't ask me to explain why now.

[Johny Cee]

I haven't read the Narnia books since I was like 8 years old, so I have no idea. I remember becoming bored by them after a couple books (though I think I read them all), that's about it. I much preferred the Oz books, but don't ask me to explain why now.

Because you're secretly for the coining of silver? 

[Morat20]

I haven't read the Narnia books since I was like 8 years old, so I have no idea. I remember becoming bored by them after a couple books (though I think I read them all), that's about it. I much preferred the Oz books, but don't ask me to explain why now.

I remember being VERY confused by a lot of the books. It didn't seem terribly sensical.

Later on, when I was a few years older I realized it that Aslan was Jesus, and the end of the series was Armageddon (cut me some slack -- I was eight when I read them), it all made a hell of a lot more sense. I still think, story-wise, it fell down a bit -- but I think that of the Bible too, so I can't quite blame CS Lewis.

[Reg]

Yeah, the last book in the Narnia series pretty much sucked. That's when he completely sacrificed storytelling to ideology.

[Mazakiel]

The last book was very fucked up to read as a kid.  I'll be interested in seeing if they do make a movie of it.

[Reg]

IMO, Voyage of the Dawn Treader would be a good place to stop. That gives them a trilogy and after that book they lose most of the familiar characters and it just generally starts becoming less fun.  If the series is a huge hit maybe they could do Horse and His Boy as a standalone.

[HaemishM]

Man, that is some hilariously fucked up stuff there.  I need to see if the library has a copy of one of those I can skim through. 

It really, really, really reminds me of when Haemish did a book review of Piers Anthony's Firefly.

Yeah, it does, only it sounds like John Ringo is a worse writer than Piers Anthony could ever hope to be.

[WayAbvPar]

So, I finally took the plunge and bought the first two Dresden Files books (I wanted to buy the omnibus of the first 4 or whatever, but it is out of print apparently). Just getting into the first book, and I think I like it so far. Some mildly annoying aspects (not a big fan of the fae in general, and the name Nevernever is just grating), but also some fun stuff. Looking forward to reading more.

Was the SciFi channel show any good?

[HaemishM]

Was the SciFi channel show (Dresden Files) any good?

It had its moments. At times it felt way too "Monster of the week" to me, a lot like the old Friday the 13th series. It had some really sloppy continuity problems, as if the producers mixed up the order they showed the episodes in, so that one week we had characters knowing Dresden was a wizard and the next that same character had no clue. I think given time it would have gotten better as threads paid off. But on the whole, it was mediocre when compared to things like the first couple of BSG seasons.

[Ironwood]

Don't ever read 'The Historian'.



It makes your kidneys bleed.  It's that bad.

[Sky]

I'm still mostly reading non-fic. If you've never drywalled before, this is a good start. Also having fun with some electrical books, thinking about adding a circuit for my pc/tv/entertainment center and one for my guitar gear...

Trying to read Jonathon Strange and Mr. Norrel and also one of Modesitt's Ghosts of Columbia books.

[Viin]

Don't ever read 'The Historian'.

It makes your kidneys bleed.  It's that bad.

That's funny, my wife really liked this book - I haven't read this yet, so we'll see. Is it bad because of the story or bad writing or what? (I can't *stand* bad writing).

[Ironwood]

It's Boring.

Boring, boring, boring, boring.

Nothing happens for chapters and chapters and chapters and then, a third of the way in, you give up in suicidal despair and skip to the end.  I won't spoil it for you if you don't want, but you lose your sanity then.

It's a full 250 chapters of 'SUDDENLY, NOTHING HAPPENED !!!!'

Turning Dracula into a fucking librarian is weak.

[Rasix]

Was the SciFi channel show any good?

As a fan of the series (so take this as pure nerd-rage), hell no.  It was terrible.   

They dumbed down (if that's even possible, this shit's written for consumption) a lot of nuances (especially character ones), and did moronic crap like making Bob corporeal.  The plots were just horrid mishmashes and chop jobs of some of the series plots or your standard monster of the week.

The casting of Dresden wasn't bad, but they made him a bit too smooth.  The casting of Murphy was terrible. 

I watched a few episodes and just couldn't take it anymore.

BTW, the books keep getting better as you go.  If you're not feeling it by book 4 or 5, that's when I'd say to put down the series.  They're all quick reads, anyhow.

[WayAbvPar]

I got hooked about Chapter 5 or so in book 1. Read book 2 in a day, and bought 3 and 4 the next day. Also found Bigger Deal in trade paperbook, which I reading during a quick interlude between Dresden books. I am a little surprised by how dark the books have been so far, but pleasantly so.

[Chenghiz]

It's Boring.

You didn't like the Dark Tower series either, did you?

Anyway, I just finished reading Rainbows End which was an utterly fascinating book I would recommend to anyone that likes near-future speculative fiction or even just good fiction. Also read Earth by David Brin, which was a bit hit or miss but mostly good. Has anyone read any of his other novels?

[Reg]

Most of Brin's other novels are better than Earth IMO. The Uplift series in particular was interesting.

[Ironwood]

It's Boring.

You didn't like the Dark Tower series either, did you?

It was ok.

I'm not seeing your point though....

[Lt.Dan]

Just finished House of Suns by Alistair Reynolds.  High concept space opera about a line of clones who travel the galaxy at light speed, rendevousing every 250k years or so.  A pretty cool interpretation of how a starfaring civilisation might without a traditional faster-than-light travel mcguffin.  For the first 100 pages I could have sworn I was reading Iain M Banks which really threw me for a loop.  On the whole not as good as his earlier novels but generally pretty enjoyable.

Now reading the "The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Commission".  Fantastically interesting, telling the stroy of the 9/11 commission from multiple viewpoints.  Reads like a Le Carre novel.

[Chenghiz]

It's Boring.

You didn't like the Dark Tower series either, did you?

It was ok.

I'm not seeing your point though....

Like the Dark Tower series I got the impression that a great deal of The Historian was about the journey, not the ending. I wasn't thrilled by the ending either, but it fit with the overall tenor of the story a lot better than anything I could have imagined.

[Ironwood]

The difference being an interesting and unpredictable  journey.

[Chenghiz]

I'll give you that. (:

[Margalis]

I started reading Gaiman's American Gods last night, I have not read anything by him before other than his Sherlock Holmes short story.

I like the concept a lot but I have to agree with lamaros (?) in that the writing itself is medicore. I've been reading a lot of Clive Barker and I just finished a collection of Lovecraft stories, coming off of those this can't compare prose-wise.

It hit me around page 3 when a character was described as being "pretty much shaved." Pretty much? I know in my own writing I use "pretty" and "very" when I get lazy.

[Phildo]

Gaiman is a comic writer, he's used to describing things vaguely so that artists can have their fun with it.  That's my theory anyway.  Try Good Omens, the one he cowrote with Terry Pratchett, it's shorter and (in my opinion) a better book.

[Margalis]

I almost wonder if he is purposely trying to adopt some sort of "muscular American prose" or something because what little else I did read of his was much more sophisticated.

I mean when you can make a guy's whole body getting sucked into a giant vagina mundane you have issues.

[Engels]

Ya, when it comes to Gaiman, its best to stick to the Sandman comics, which are, from someone who NEVER reads comics, not even so much as a child, a work of art. Possibly a classic in literature, and definately in the comic world.

[Endie]

Perhaps unsurprisingly, given his background, the Gaiman stuff seems to adapt to the screen well.  I enjoyed Stardust, and loved the BBC adaptation of Neverwhere.

[Viin]

There's a BBC Neverwhere?! Doh!

I like all of Gaiman's books - they aren't amazingly well written, but they are good enough and entertaining.

[Phildo]

Be careful with Neverwhere if you're not used to BBC production values.

[Brogarn]

I liked American Gods, but thought Anansi Boys and Good Omens were better reads.

[Endie]

Be careful with Neverwhere if you're not used to BBC production values.

Yep: it's the BBC of a decade ago, not the glossy, current version, so it's a bit old-school Dr Who in places.

[Johny Cee]

I almost wonder if he is purposely trying to adopt some sort of "muscular American prose" or something because what little else I did read of his was much more sophisticated.

I mean when you can make a guy's whole body getting sucked into a giant vagina mundane you have issues.

The style is really understated and subdued,  which pairs with Shadow's basic personality. 


Have you tried any of Gaiman's short story collections?  The man writes a mean short story,  and I think it mixes up his style of writing alot better.

[Morat20]

So I was digging through the garage yesterday, and stumbled across a book I hadn't laid eyes on in ten or fifteen years. I took it to work with me (I'm babysitting a computer, lots of reading time).

Holy fucking shit, I had totally forgotten how funy it was. It's a Star Trek novel -- an old one. How Much For Just the Planet?. It's a musical comedy.

It ends in a pie fight. As far as "books of a show", I can't think of anything even remotely like it. It explains why I held onto that copy. :)