What are you reading?

Currently reading 'Dodger' by Terry Pratchett. Not his best work by any means but a quarter of the way through it's finally starting to pick up pace.

The Devil and Tom Walker by Washington Irving

I finished "Name of the Wind" and it's sequel the other day.  They were fantastic.  Question though, "Ender's Game".  Is it as good as I have been lead to believe?

I love Ender's Game. You'll probably like it.

It wasn't bad by any means, but I wasn't overly excited about it.

Quote from: ataraxia on October 18, 2012, 08:07:14 PM

Quote from: Particle Person on October 18, 2012, 01:56:51 PM

I'm going through a series of short stories by Anton Chekhov. The one I read last was called Sorrow, in it a very poor man is taking his very sick wife to the hospital, to beg the local doctor for treatment. As he's describing how he'll do this to her, he notices that the snow isn't melting from her face and that she has gone stiff. Surprise, she's dead. The man regrets having beaten her all her life and treating her as a dog and begins to lose his mind. It is snowing very heavily, and he gets lost. He slumps over on his horse, and loses consciousness. He wakes up in the hospital, and he's lost all of his limbs to frostbite. End.

That one was called Sorrow. The very next story is called Misery. I can hardly wait.

What is the name of the series? It sounds similar to some work by Fredric Brown that I enjoyed.

It's just a very old collection published in the twenties. "Short Stories by Anton R. Chekhov" is all that's printed on the cover. There's no relation between any of the stories, except for the crippling depression that pervades every single one of them. Somebody should go to Russia and tell them about happiness. Spoiler alert: Misery was even more dreary than Sorrow.

Chekhov is a stunning writer. The Lady with the Dog is a wonderful story.

And if you come to Russia you might see why they're like that. When I walk to uni in the morning it is dark and about -5, and we still have about a month until the solstice. Luckily I won't be here for the cold bit of the year.

tl;dr read The Lady with the Dog. "To hell with realism!"

I currently have the Russian translations of Harry Potter, Artemis Fowl and Cloud Atlas on the go. Reading in a language you still aren't fluent in is quite draining so I find it helpful to swap around.

Has anyone read anything on Omm Sety? This bitch is crazy. She claimed she was a reincarnation of some 14 year old Egyptian priestess and has nightly love affairs with Sety. Unfortunately I have to write a paper on this one and I can't just say "this bitch is crazy."

That does seem unfortunate, because based on the simple facts you've presented thus far "crazy" seems a fair summation.

You can say that bitch is crazy, you just have to do it with style and eloquence. Something like, "The author's imagination and authenticity was stunning until one considers that Eady frequently visited mental hospitals likely as a result of brain damage from a nearly fatal fall at age three." [Pongo 39]

http://www.brown.edu/Research/Breaking_Ground/bios/Sety_Omm.pdf

You can say that bitch is crazy, you just have to do it style and eloquence. Something like, "The author's imagination and authenticity was stunning until one considers that Eady frequently visited mental hospitals likely as a result of brain damage from a nearly fatal fall at age three." [Pongo 39]

http://www.brown.edu/Research/Breaking_Ground/bios/Sety_Omm.pdf

i knew it must be brain damage. perfect!

Quote from: Pongo on December 08, 2012, 08:54:19 AM

You can say that bitch is crazy, you just have to do it style and eloquence. Something like, "The author's imagination and authenticity was stunning until one considers that Eady frequently visited mental hospitals likely as a result of brain damage from a nearly fatal fall at age three." [Pongo 39]

http://www.brown.edu/Research/Breaking_Ground/bios/Sety_Omm.pdf

i knew it must be brain damage. perfect!

Christine Garwood wrote one of the most comprehensive books on the Flat earth society. But its a shit read. And the reason for that is because she shows absolutely no empathy with her subjects. I would advise against just stacking evidence up against the author to discredit her. The top marks will surely go to those who deliver from her point of view and that of her detractors. Tough, but that's what separates a good read from a riveting one.

Quote from: rooster on December 09, 2012, 10:25:53 AM

Quote from: Pongo on December 08, 2012, 08:54:19 AM

You can say that bitch is crazy, you just have to do it style and eloquence. Something like, "The author's imagination and authenticity was stunning until one considers that Eady frequently visited mental hospitals likely as a result of brain damage from a nearly fatal fall at age three." [Pongo 39]

http://www.brown.edu/Research/Breaking_Ground/bios/Sety_Omm.pdf

i knew it must be brain damage. perfect!

Christine Garwood wrote one of the most comprehensive books on the Flat earth society. But its a shit read. And the reason for that is because she shows absolutely no empathy with her subjects. I would advise against just stacking evidence up against the author to discredit her. The top marks will surely go to those who deliver from her point of view and that of her detractors. Tough, but that's what separates a good read from a riveting one.

Ehm, no.

When you read a review/critique you aren't interested in the author's point of view. You want to be able to make up your own mind from what the reviewer has written. Also laying down a convincing argument on behalf of the derranged sungod fapper will surely score the top marks.

Well, I finally finished William Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury. It was a tough read, but one of which I have relished every page, and I would certainly like to read it again someday.

I'm not sure what to read next, at the top of my pile are James Joyce's Dubliners and A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, but just below that, and equally tempting; Franz Kafka's The Trial. I would also like to read Aldous Huxley's Island following on from Brave New World, which I did think was brilliant.

When you read a review/critique you aren't interested in the author's point of view. You want to be able to make up your own mind from what the reviewer has written. Also laying down a convincing argument on behalf of the derranged sungod fapper will surely score the top marks.

Except that this paper isn't really a review. I have to summarize people's reactions to her throughout the book, summarize my reaction to her, poke holes in her argument, and point out any inaccuracies from a historian's point of view.

I just finished Holy Fire by Bruce Sterling, and I'm now reading The Prague Cemetery by Umberto Eco.


I keep forgetting about this thread.

Just started reading American Gods for the second time.

Earth not a globe

When you read a review/critique you aren't interested in the author's point of view. You want to be able to make up your own mind from what the reviewer has written. Also laying down a convincing argument on behalf of the derranged sungod fapper will surely score the top marks.

Normally I would agree with you, Thork, but in this case it's directly relevant if the person is question is brain damaged. 

Quote from: Thork on December 09, 2012, 11:56:50 AM

When you read a review/critique you aren't interested in the author's point of view. You want to be able to make up your own mind from what the reviewer has written. Also laying down a convincing argument on behalf of the derranged sungod fapper will surely score the top marks.

Except that this paper isn't really a review. I have to summarize people's reactions to her throughout the book, summarize my reaction to her, poke holes in her argument, and point out any inaccuracies from a historian's point of view.

You have to pick holes in the reasoning of someone with brain damage? Sounds like a tough course. Have you finished the potato prints and macaroni family collage for your practical coursework yet?

Quote from: rooster on December 09, 2012, 08:28:18 PM

Quote from: Thork on December 09, 2012, 11:56:50 AM

When you read a review/critique you aren't interested in the author's point of view. You want to be able to make up your own mind from what the reviewer has written. Also laying down a convincing argument on behalf of the derranged sungod fapper will surely score the top marks.

Except that this paper isn't really a review. I have to summarize people's reactions to her throughout the book, summarize my reaction to her, poke holes in her argument, and point out any inaccuracies from a historian's point of view.

You have to pick holes in the reasoning of someone with brain damage? Sounds like a tough course. Have you finished the potato prints and macaroni family collage for your practical coursework yet?

It's actually a bit harder than you'd think. She was an extremely knowledgeable Egyptologist so her depictions of things are crazy good.
But I didn't end up writing the paper. It was only 5% of the grade so I decided to spend the time studying for the final instead.

Abft some deliberand, I decided to start reading Dubliners.

Earth not a globe

The Trial by Franz Kafka.

Lord of Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

good choice

That is known to be a good book

Just finished The Hobbit for the second time; I'm more perplexed than ever at how they could possibly stretch that into three movies and make them good.

Now I'm reading The Man Who Knew Too Much by GK Chesterton.

I'm reading The Principia Discordia.

Just finished The Hobbit for the second time; I'm more perplexed than ever at how they could possibly stretch that into three movies and make them good.

Now I'm reading The Man Who Knew Too Much by GK Chesterton.

I can't wait for the second movie and see me kick some goblin ass