Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor
did you finish it
it's one of those books that's entirely justified by pretty much the last page
|
I would agree. It's just so... what? You have GOT to be kidding me!
Quote:
Originally Posted by FETCHER.
This. If you are DM’ing etc, then you are being creepy.
|
Does that include sending a PM to see if she was okay? Cos I did that. But no more than that. We were worried about her - well, jwb wasn't of course but some of us were - when the fires were raging through Spain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGR
It's like Bogarting. It's a "Humph" because the book selfishly took her time that could be better spent reading almost anything else.
I view it as the Twilight of the '20s. A novel filled with vapid characters, a vapid love story, and a boring plot. At least the Great Gatsby didn't spawn sequels.
|
The Lesser Gatsby?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisnaholic
^ Yep, sensible advice that's simple to follow. An approach to kids that I consider unproductive is jwb's about avoiding them altogether, on the grounds that an adult and kid have nothing in common. Regardless of changing musical tastes across the generations, we all have this in common with kids: we were once their age.
As for books at school, it's a sad fact that we are obligated to study books whether we like them or not, and when it's the "not" we are likely to be put off them for life. That's a shame because some of those books we might have enjoyed if we first came across them as adults. That's why I'm mentioning these books and when I read them as well:-
At school:
Macbeth by Shakespeare - didn't like
Great Expectations - liked at first, then got bored
Lord of The Flies - liked and then re-enjoyed as an adult
Animal Farm - ditto
As an adult:
Moby Dick - unable to read even one chapter
Great Gatsby - enjoyed, partly by visualizing the movie of that elegant, doomed era. I was sufficiently impressed to read Tender Is The Night, which I preferred.
Tale Of Two Cities - the only Dickens I have so far actually enjoyed.
|
In order:
Hated this with a passion. The only Dickens, other than Martin Chuzzelwit, that I don't like. I just hated Pip so much. And what an ungrateful little bastard.
Had never read this but read it for Karen and liked it a lot. Read it twice actually.
Didn't read it but saw the, um, cartoon. Can't remember if I liked it.
Superb book, absolutely superb. But I'm surprised to find you don't like other Dickens. Which ones have you read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
The books I vehemently hate that I had to read in high school are The Power of One (had to read that Forrest Gump garbage twice) and Fahrenheit 451 (everyone zeroes in on the censorship but I see it as a technophobic screed). Catcher in the Rye used to be on the list but I've come around.
|
I don't get this take to be honest. What do you find so terrible about it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor
does Fahrenheit 451 really suck that bad?
it's been in my list to read, maybe I can take it off
|
No it does not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
Ray Bradbury is a fat sack of donkey dicks.
It's short enough that there's no harm in reading it though.
|
Stop that. What about
Something Wicked? Or
The Martian Chronicles?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGR
I haven't read it, but sounds like Frown dislikes it mostly because of tech-fear-mongering.
On a scale of 1 to Ted Kaczynski, how bad is the technophobia in it Frown?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
It's like a whiny old man talking about kids these days with their iphones and their Facebook.
|
No it's not. it's about the Nazi-like suppression of knowledge.
Linear Mode
