10
votes
What are you reading these days?
What are you reading currently? Fiction or non-fiction or poetry, any genre, any language! Tell us what you're reading, and talk about it a bit.
What are you reading currently? Fiction or non-fiction or poetry, any genre, any language! Tell us what you're reading, and talk about it a bit.
I'm about midway through Ulysses by James Joyce right now, toward the tale end of episode 14, "Oxen of the Sun". If you're not familiar with Ulysses, here's the elevator pitch: In the age of modernity, why can't an advertising campaign manager and philanderer assume the role of Odysseus? Instead of a Homeric epic of gods and goddesses intervening and interfering with humanity, driving home the paradigm of humans-as-ants, picture streams of consciousness blending across characters and settings, a complete erasure of the line between prose and poem, and a refusal of convention. A paradigm of language-as-supreme, and since humans make language...
This episode is the only of which I've felt truly lost inside, having to rescan lines and paragraphs and pages just to get enough context to move on to the next. I'm not enjoying it. I've enjoyed the rest of the book immensely, however. I'm looking forward to rereading it soon enough.
You read some challenging books!
I've enjoyed your write-ups and meant to ask (feel free not to answer) what your process looks like. How do you choose what you read? Do you use any sort of guide or just jump in?
I really don't have much of a process, just too much free time, too little socialization, and an unchallenging occupation. I basically set out, long ago, to read Gravity's Rainbow, realized I didn't have those chops, and decided to make sure I could read anything, in spite. I've always loved linguistics and found formal experimentation the more interesting side of fiction, but now it's basically a compulsion to try and understand the craft of writing.
I use guides sparingly on first reads, primarily because so many of them focus on the petty reference rather than the actually challenging aspects of these big scary books. Of course, there are times which call for elucidation, like this section of Ulysses, and there I'll do my best to get through it anyway before looking back and comparing notes. The truth is that most of these challenging novels are so because they're not trying to communicate with the reader on the level of the words on the page, but a more "holographic" method of subconscious and thematic narrative, so it's mostly a matter of just assuming you understand what you definitely don't, in the hopes of digesting it later.
Thanks, and sorry for a slow reply!
There are a lot of people that are undersocialized or not stimulated at work that don't keep up with reading, I'm definitely guilty of that. I used to get dumped at a public library when I was young and while it was more Piers Anthony than Pierre Menard, it was a time I have fond memories of.
There were a lot of age-inappropriate books I got to. Some were difficult but ones I felt I took something from, and others like Finnegan's Wake that just felt so foreign I couldn't do anything with them, even with the Dropkick Murphys guide. I've always been curious about what could be taken from it, appreciate the insight.
I regret to admit that I’ve added a new hobby into my absence of free time, trying to resuscitate old small engine equipment that have been abandoned to Craigslist’s “free” section. To help with this hobby I’ve been flipping around in “Small Engines and Outdoor Power Equipment” (2nd edition), edited by Peter Hunn. It’s a fairly elementary overview of 4 stroke engines, with a some coverage of 2 stroke engines as well. The descriptions are very well written and informative. The book does a fantastic job of packaging not just basic technical information but also otherwise hard-earned wisdom about fixing up and maintaining small engines. Partly due to the inspiration from this book, my hobby “lab” has now expanded to include two lawnmowers, a 5000W generator, a string trimmer, two leaf blowers and one backpack blower (yeah, my neighbors love me).
I'm just completing Robert Harris's Cicero Trilogy, which I bought as an omnibus e-book (because I'm still loving the e-reader I bought a few months ago, and it's still revitalising my old love of reading).
I've read other works, fiction and non-fiction, about this period of history where the Republic of Rome implodes and leads to the Roman Empire. However, those other works have tended to focus on other, more influential people: Marius, Sulla, Pompey, and, of course, Caesar. This trilogy focuses solely on Marcus Tullius Cicero, who wrote an abundance of letters and literature, which became the basis for much of our knowledge of that period, and is one of the reasons we know so much about Caesar. (Cicero is also responsible for generations of schoolchildren having to learn Latin.)
The point of view is Cicero's secretary, Tiro, who is writing only about his master. If Cicero doesn't see something or hear about it, then Tiro doesn't write about it. It's a nice way of seeing Rome from a different angle. It also gives a different perspective on Cicero, who was one of the most famous and well-known politicians of his era, even called "father of the country" at one time for his actions in suppressing a revolution and saving the republic, but who always gets overshadowed by the later civil war between Pompey and Caesar. In these books, Caesar is a side character. The most important person in Rome at that time is a walk-on character with only a few scenes. That's a nice touch.
Because of the personal and intimate view we're given of Cicero, we get to see him as a real person, warts and all. Tiro, the narrator, doesn't make any judgements about Cicero's decisions and actions throughout his political life - that's left up to us, the readers. However, we are given some insight into Cicero's thoughts, through the literary device of Harris having Cicero say things to people that he actually wrote in letters. By means of this personal access to Cicero, we see him for the flawed, ambitious, vain man that he was - while being sincerely devoted to upholding the republic he admired. It's possible to be a good person and a bad person at the same time.
The style of writing is colloquial and accessible, rather than formal and stuffy. It's easy to read. I'm nearing the end of the third book, and I'm going to be sad to finish it.
I give these books 4 stars out of 5.
I recently read Azura Ghost by Essa Hansen and it was disappointing. The first book, Nophek Gloss was pretty solid but this one is just.. meh. I kept reading because I wanted to find out what happened to the characters I'd liked from the first book but ultimately it just didn't gel. It felt like Hansen had no idea how the story would resolve or where it would go along the way, and they kept throwing in more and more McGuffins to attempt to make things happen. Would not recommend.
Then I read Eversion by Alistair Reynolds and it was such a joy. I mean, it's a claustrophobic gothic horror story so the joy isn't really in the narrative - but he clearly had a great time writing it and it comes through in the text. Hard to talk too much about it without giving away too much but it's a well crafted story with a beginning, a middle and an end, and Reynolds is as adaptable a writer as he needs to be to do the things he does in it. Definitely worth a look.
I've just started Rich Larson's Ymir which is a cyberpunk dystopian retelling of Beowulf and it was only published a couple of months ago yet I have the weirdest feeling I've read it before. Not because it's Beowulf, but lots more about it feels very familiar. Perhaps it's just that particular style of cyberpunk world is so well-trodden that it will always evoke déjà vu. Anyway it's pretty good despite that and I'm looking forward to seeing where it goes.