Last Book You Read....

[Pink Freud]

Yeah, I read TDVC before it became huge and I quite enjoyed it. I can see why it became so popular. It wasn't fantastic, but it was very readable.

I just think, like the Music police, it becomes fashionable to slate people who become worldwide phenomena. Book recommending seems to become a hunt to find the most obscure author you can put up as a gem only you and 10 other people have discovered.

That said, to contradict myself, James Patterson is a dreadful author and sells millions, so it isn't always true that popularity equals quality.

Well the classic of this is JK Rowling of course. And to be fair again, she isn't a serious author - she's a childrens' story teller who also happens to be able to enthral adults. But the abuse she has had levelled at her from the "serious" literary world is pretty sad.

I think jealousy plays a part, as does the self defence mechanism of "my audience is smaller but more intelligent/refined/educated etc.

Why readers would choose to react like that is beyond me - anything that gets people reading is a good thing.

Again though, many of the middle brow authors - Martin Amis, Umberto Eco, Salman Rushdie seem to go out of their way to show how clever they are without actually bringing anything new to the party.

I've read books by all the above which have amazed, educated and entertained me (London fields and Times Arrow by Amis, The Name of the Rose by Eco and The Satanic Verses by Rushdie). I've also laughed out loud at books by them (in order Night Train,Foucalt's Pendulum and Rage) for all the wrong reasons. When you start to hear an author's voice coming through, and all he's saying is "my, what beautiful allusion that is", it's time to walk away.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Pink Freud

[T_S_A_R]

Again though, many of the middle brow authors - Martin Amis, Umberto Eco, Salman Rushdie seem to go out of their way to show how clever they are without actually bringing anything new to the party.

I've read books by all the above which have amazed, educated and entertained me (London fields and Times Arrow by Amis, The Name of the Rose by Eco and The Satanic Verses by Rushdie). I've also laughed out loud at books by them (in order Night Train,Foucalt's Pendulum and Rage) for all the wrong reasons. When you start to hear an author's voice coming through, and all he's saying is "my, what beautiful allusion that is", it's time to walk away.

if those three are middle brow what the hell qualifies as high brow?! midnight's children was voted the booker of bookers, amis has dominated the broadsheets this year and eco is probably the leading post modernist author. i hope there's not a secret level of literary snobbishness that i don't know about, i'm quite proud of my bookshelfs;)

the high vs popular culture debate will go on forever. it's got nothing to do with the actual art and more about people feeling uncomfortable about their tastes or wanting to be congratulated for what they like (or in some cases just consume). on pretty much every measure of assesing the quality of a novel midnight's children beats the da vinci code except for on personal taste which varies from reader to reader. if you prefer dan brown to rushdie don't feel the need to be defensive or to talk up it on the context of great literature just have confidence in your own opinion in the knowledge that no matter what others say the most important thing is how each individual reacts to a work of art.

anyway i'm reading the border trilogy by cormack mccarthy just now, all the pretty horses was wonderful and right now i'm 1/3 way through the crossing which is just as engaging but a lot darker so far.

i ordered some andrie makine last night after having a swatch of this thread and i'm looking forward to that. i also got moby dick for a pound the other day so after the trilogy i'll get wired into that.

[StewartyMac]

It's a pity Shawfield Stallion didn't persevere with Stieg Larsson's book, as the 2nd half of it is dynamite. It does have a slow(ish) start, but you understand why after it's finished. I'd recommend it to anyone without hesitation.

[Pink Freud]

if those three are middle brow what the hell qualifies as high brow?! midnight's children was voted the booker of bookers, amis has dominated the broadsheets this year and eco is probably the leading post modernist author. i hope there's not a secret level of literary snobbishness that i don't know about, i'm quite proud of my bookshelfs;)

My dear chap, one must be dead to be highbrow. Milton, the more obscure Shakesperian sonnets, Chaucer...or of course translated from the ancient Greek or Latin.

if you prefer dan brown to rushdie don't feel the need to be defensive or to talk up it on the context of great literature just have confidence in your own opinion in the knowledge that no matter what others say the most important thing is how each individual reacts to a work of art.

No, I don't buy that I'm afraid. Colin M did this justice once in relation to music. The opinion of the true reader counts far more than that of the mere consumer. I don't think anyone should be ashamed of what they like or dislike, that far i would go with you, but I will not pretend that my appreciation of a book lends it the credibility of say a Nobel or Booker prize.

anyway i'm reading the border trilogy by cormack mccarthy just now, all the pretty horses was wonderful and right now i'm 1/3 way through the crossing which is just as engaging but a lot darker so far.

Tremendous stuff. I have to say though that I simply couldn't finish The Road. Probably the mood I was in.

i also got moby dick for a pound the other day so after the trilogy i'll get wired into that.

Highbrow! Highbrow!

[madwullie]

Just finished reading the classic Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnigut

Easily my favourite book of all time, and f**k anyone who disagrees.

EDIT: Should probably say I'm trying to plough my way through "The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao" at the moment, but it's a total slog. I've really lost the buzz for reading in recent years

Edited February 17, 2010 by madwullie

[WendyWho?]

Just finished The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test by Tom Wolfe. It's very much a product of its time, but, f**k, what a time it seemed to be in that particular corner of the world. I suppose it's an early example - pre-dating Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by three years - of what would later be defined as Gonzo journalism. It follows Wolfe's adventures with a band of California LSD pioneers known as the Merry Pranksters, led by One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest author Ken Kesey. It's pretty out there in terms of style - wrapping a stream of consciousness narrative around the outside of some utterly weird set-pieces lends it a strange, undulating, psychedelic quality - but once you fall into the groove it takes you on a wonderful journey through a full-on, balls-out period in American history.

I've got the utmost respect for this text in a technical sense. It's seriously hard to use language in a meaningful way beyond the constraints of conventional grammar and structure. When it's done successfully though, as it is here, it lends a smooth, natural feel, mirroring more accurately the way the mind assimilates and orders stimuli to create the narrative structure of memory... IN MY FUCKING OPINION.

Get it read, cuntos.

Edited February 17, 2010 by WendyWho?

[T_S_A_R]

No, I don't buy that I'm afraid. Colin M did this justice once in relation to music. The opinion of the true reader counts far more than that of the mere consumer. I don't think anyone should be ashamed of what they like or dislike, that far i would go with you, but I will not pretend that my appreciation of a book lends it the credibility of say a Nobel or Booker prize.

the key word there is credibility implying that the worth your experience as a reader is partly determined by what others think of the text. if you like dan brown then that should be enough for you, so many people get defensive about what they like for no real reason at all. at the same time a lot of people seem to want to put things which aren't to their tastes down to make them feel better about themselves, this actually seems to be the entire point of the internet. i can't read dickens or hardy but it don't think it reflects badly on me and i wouldn't deny the qualities other people find in his work.

kurt vonnegut is incredible. it's humbling to read him so simply explain the world and humanity.

[morrison]

Having read it when it came out (almost 20 years ago and really only to ingratiate myself with my then fiancee/now wife), it doesn't get any better and the ending is really weak.

You were right. I stubbornly refused to give up, but it was almost entirely garbage. Oh well.

Had a complete change after that (Weaveworld by Clive Barker - avoid it) and picked up P.G. Wodehouse's 'Ring For Jeeves'. Silly and delightful, it's just a shame it was so short. Just what was needed.

I'm now reading 'Misery' by Stephen King, and getting quite into it.

[WendyWho?]

the key word there is credibility implying that the worth your experience as a reader is partly determined by what others think of the text. if you like dan brown then that should be enough for you, so many people get defensive about what they like for no real reason at all. at the same time a lot of people seem to want to put things which aren't to their tastes down to make them feel better about themselves, this actually seems to be the entire point of the internet. i can't read dickens or hardy but it don't think it reflects badly on me and i wouldn't deny the qualities other people find in his work.

kurt vonnegut is incredible. it's humbling to read him so simply explain the world and humanity.

Enjoying something on a personal level is fine and dandy, but I think the point the other guy's making is more to do with artistic "worth". It's a difficult argument to have because, of course, such "worth" is subjective by nature and bloody hard to quantify.

Value, I think, can be weighed up in a number of areas to a lesser or greater degree, based on intensely wanky, deconstructivisty factors, but there's nothing "a priori" about any of them. They're man made, and they don't rest on science, leaving them open to discussion. Despite that fact, I don't think it necessarily follows that differing levels of "worth" do not exist within texts. I doubt many people would rank the instructions on a packet of tampons, for instance, as being of equal worth to Hamlet. Similarly, while it's fine for lots of people to like Dan Brown, that doesn't make him as worthy as, say, Salman Rushdie.

What I'm trying like f**k to say is that taste is individual, while worth comes more as the result of wanky discussion.

Having said all that, I'm an incorrigible fucking snob, so who gives a cock?

[madwullie]

kurt vonnegut is incredible. it's humbling to read him so simply explain the world and humanity.

Completely agree. One of those authors that you want to force everyone you know to read as soon as you've finished, just so you can talk to them about it. It seemed to come so easily to him. I must be on my 5th copy of slaughterhouse because I've given them all away. Can't get enough of him, just a shame his stuff isn't endless.

[H_B]

while it's fine for lots of people to like Dan Brown, that doesn't make him as worthy as, say, Salman Rushdie.

Says who?

As Freud says, some of Salman Rushdie's work is unreadably bad. There is no such thing as "worthiness".

It depends why you read also. I have no idea why people read Salman Rushdie. I got halfway through "The Satanic Verses" and gave up - I read for entertainment, and that wasn't, well, entertaining.

[WendyWho?]

Says who?

As Freud says, some of Salman Rushdie's work is unreadably bad. There is no such thing as "worthiness".

It depends why you read also. I have no idea why people read Salman Rushdie. I got halfway through "The Satanic Verses" and gave up - I read for entertainment, and that wasn't, well, entertaining.

Well, indeed. That was a point I was attempting to make, albeit poorly. I should have said "worthy," rather than worthy.

As I said, individual taste is fine, in itself, and it's more than enough reason for anyone to read and enjoy anything they want to. However, notions of worth DO exist among those who consume books in a certain way. Whether or not you place any importance on those notions is entirely up to you.

It's the same with any subjective artform. Everyone will have an opinion, but some, inevitably, get precious about that fact. It's an attitude that's based on intense, moustache-twiddling wankiness, but it exists, and I suppose I subscribe to it to an extent.

[H_B]

It's an attitude that's based on intense, moustache-twiddling wankiness, but it exists, and I suppose I subscribe to it to an extent.

Yes, I think I get you now. I, as you have probably guessed, don't.

I feel self-confident enough to happily read Harry Potter on the train without worrying whether anyone thinks I am a bit simple.

I know of people who fill their bookshelves at home with books they consider show them in a good light intellectually, but which they wouldn't dream of reading. In fact, I understand this isn't unusual. "Ulysses" by James Joyce perhaps.

I've never bought a book I didn't intend to read.

[H_B]

I am also amused by the use of Booker or Whitbread nominations as any indication of, well, anything.

Anyone who reads Private Eye will know how these shortlists are compiled.

[Homer Thompson]

Well the classic of this is JK Rowling of course. And to be fair again, she isn't a serious author - she's a childrens' story teller who also happens to be able to enthral adults. But the abuse she has had levelled at her from the "serious" literary world is pretty sad.

I think jealousy plays a part, as does the self defence mechanism of "my audience is smaller but more intelligent/refined/educated etc.

Why readers would choose to react like that is beyond me - anything that gets people reading is a good thing.

Again though, many of the middle brow authors - Martin Amis, Umberto Eco, Salman Rushdie seem to go out of their way to show how clever they are without actually bringing anything new to the party.

I've read books by all the above which have amazed, educated and entertained me (London fields and Times Arrow by Amis, The Name of the Rose by Eco and The Satanic Verses by Rushdie). I've also laughed out loud at books by them (in order Night Train,Foucalt's Pendulum and Rage) for all the wrong reasons. When you start to hear an author's voice coming through, and all he's saying is "my, what beautiful allusion that is", it's time to walk away.

But things that really arent very good but are massively popular are going to draw criticism in any field. I doubt Avatar is the best movie ever made by any stretch of the imagination.

I dont have a problem with Rowling in a literary sense, as you say its basically a childrens story that has become popular across all ages, although because of this she is passed off as a serious author by many. My criticism of her, though, would be the way she has cashed in on this with a seemingly endless raft of merchandising. Its hard to think of another author who's done this.

[Thundermonkey]

I've never bought a book I didn't intend to read.

Anyone who does is a moron.

I've given up with Alan Bisset's Death of a Ladies Man. The fact it's been in my bag untouched for well over a month suggests I'm not going back to it pretty soon. The boy Charlie is a complete cock and I have no desire to see how his story develops.

I've moved on to Pride and Prejudice and Zombies by Jane Austin and Los Angeles screenwriter Seth Grahame-Smith. It's been a blast. In fact (and this will no doubt feck off any serious book types out there) I can't wait for the movie

[H_B]

she is passed off as a serious author by many.

What is a "serious author"? Is Colin Bateman for example a serious author? His books aren't very serious, but they are adult.

Or do you have to write glum foreboding books about personal traumas to be a serious author?

For TM:-

Yeah there is a point where you have been pretending you are going to carry on reading a book for too long isn't there? I have a number of books I am various ways through dating back years and I never officially give up on them - I just never go back to them.

[WendyWho?]

Yes, I think I get you now. I, as you have probably guessed, don't.

I feel self-confident enough to happily read Harry Potter on the train without worrying whether anyone thinks I am a bit simple.

I know of people who fill their bookshelves at home with books they consider show them in a good light intellectually, but which they wouldn't dream of reading. In fact, I understand this isn't unusual. "Ulysses" by James Joyce perhaps.

I've never bought a book I didn't intend to read.

I'm perfectly comfortable reading and enjoying anything, too, hence the "to an extent," qualification, but I will judge what I'm reading in an inwardly wanky fashion as I go. I can't help it. Nonetheless, I try my best not to be a p***k about my views on books. Alas, sometimes I fail.

As far as Ulysses goes, I thought it was hard work. Perhaps too hard. But then there's the question - which you've already raised - about WHY you're reading it.

Horses for courses innit. There's no point reading Italo Calvino, for instance, if you're after an entertainingly mindless, summer romp.

[JMDP]

Says who?

As Freud says, some of Salman Rushdie's work is unreadably bad. There is no such thing as "worthiness".

It depends why you read also. I have no idea why people read Salman Rushdie. I got halfway through "The Satanic Verses" and gave up - I read for entertainment, and that wasn't, well, entertaining.

Says me.

There is such a thing is worthiness, you just don't seem to understand the concept. I have no problems with people reading for their entertainment. Indeed, that's why I read. It's just funny to try and watch people become defensive about their choice of reading and dress it up as something it's not.

I know people who love Transformers 2, but to say it's as worthy a cinematic adventure as, say, Hotel Rwanda or Frost/Nixon wouldn't be true. It's throwaway tat. And that's fine, it serves it's purpose. Also, if someone put it in their top 5 films, fair enough, that's their taste but I'll still have a good chuckle at them.

Anyway, "Tender is the Night" was excellent. Not as good as Gatsby, but what is? I will be moving on "Facing Tyson" by Ted Cluck at the weekend. Purely for entertainment, of course.

ETA: I agree with WendyWho's post above with regards to his horses for courses point.

Edited February 18, 2010 by JMDP

[H_B]

Says me.

Well I says differently.