Time for another "what book are you reading?" thread...

[Baron Kurtz]

Has ... anyone ... read ... Louis ... Ferdinand ... Celine ... ?

If ... not, ... he ... uses ... a ... lot ... of ... these ... ... ... ... ...

whew. Hard to get through. His books are pretty much one big long run on sentence.

Very fine books, though.

bk

 

["Doc" Devereux]

When one writes of. One should use. Let us say complete.
Sentences.

I must admit to using that style myself occasionally. But the emphasis is very much on occasional: I use it mainly for fights told from character POV. The idea is to give a sense of immediacy, to reflect that there's no real time to think about much other than how you're going to beat a guy up before he does you too much damage in return. Once the moment of stress is over it's back to proper English.

But I'm writing a thriller, and have no delusions of Literature. There are different ways of getting a story told, and the challenge is getting the story down in such a way that it's easy to read and conveys a sense of involvement. The best tool I've found for making text easy to read is proper grammar, and it's something I'm very careful indeed about straying away from.

Some writers play with language very successfully, others... Well, yes.

For example ... Would this put you off at first glance, and the book would be back on the shelf? I was hooked.

That's got to be Eco! I have to be in the right mood for him, but when I am he's tremendous.

 

[scotrace]

Last Year

Last year I read The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold. It's in pre-production with Peter Jackson as a film.

The story of a young woman who is raped and murdered by a serial killer. She tells her story from the afterlife, observing the grieving process of those left behind.

It sold well, I think?

 

[Baron Kurtz]

[QUOTE="Doc" Devereux]
But I'm writing a thriller, and have no delusions of Literature.
[/QUOTE]

Eco! Thrillers of the highest order. And first rate works of art, to boot.

bk

 

["Doc" Devereux]

Eco! Thrillers of the highest order. And first rate works of art, to boot.

bk

Alas, I am but a dim candle next to the star of his genius.

 

[Miss_Bella_Hell]

I read "The Lovely Bones" as well. It was ok, but forgettable. In the same category as "My Sister's Keeper".

 

[Slate Shannon]

My latest "conquests" are Watership Down by Richard Adams, which I thought was pretty good, and one called Dreams Underfoot by Charles de Lint. That was the first de Lint I've read, and I liked it so much that I intend to pick up another one the next time I go by the library.

 

[jamespowers]

For example ... Would this put you off at first glance, and the book would be back on the shelf? I was hooked.


That was when i saw the Pendulum.

The sphere, hanging from a long wire set into the ceiling of the choir, swayed back and forth with isochronal majesty.

I knew - but anyone could have sensed it in the magic of that serene breathing - that the period was governed by the square root of the length of the wire and by Pi, that number which, however irrational to sublunar minds, through a higher rationality binds the circumference and diameter of all possible circles. The time it took the sphere to swing from end to end was determined by an arcane conspiracy between the most timeless of measures: the singularity of the point of suspension, the duality of the plane's dimensions, the triadic beginning of Pi, the secret quadratic nature of the root, and the unnumbered perfection of the circle itself

It would go back on the shelf post haste. Conan Doyle is bad enough this is just inane.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Baron Kurtz]

I suspect that inane is not the word you were looking for ...

bk

 

[jake_fink]

Has ... anyone ... read ... Louis ... Ferdinand ... Celine ... ?

I love Celine. He's hilarious. But he was also a facist. WHY IS LIFE SO COMPLICATED!?!?!?!

Another funny facist was Knut Hamsun. Hunger is a masterpiece of comic misanthropy.

 

[jamespowers]

I suspect that inane is not the word you were looking for ...

bk

It works for me if there were pages and pages of this. It is ridiculous for me to slog through it. :eusa_doh:

Regards,

J

 

[Baron Kurtz]

I WHY IS LIFE SO COMPLICATED!?!?!?!

It's not. Just enjoy the books. The author is irrelevant (or so some would have it). An awful lot of people were fascist back then ... still are. Not worth worrying about. Were Hitler a good writer, or a good painter (he was neither) he would still be remembered as such - regardless of his politics and general nastiness.

bk

 

[jamespowers]

Were Hitler a good writer, or a good painter (he was neither) he would still be remembered as such - regardless of his politics and general nastiness.

Yeah right! By who?

Regards,

J

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Yeah right! By who?

Regards,

J

By anyone who enjoys good writing. The point was ... IF he was a good writer he should be remembered as such (not remembered solely for that, but at least the literature output of such a man should be considered good writing). Note: Hitler was not a good writer, or a good painter (meaning that the vast majority of people who read his writing or have seen his art consider it to be abysmal). So, in addition to going down in history as a mass murdering lunatic, he is also remembered as a bad writer and a bad painter.

If a book is good, it's good ... independent of the person who wrote it. The writer could have been out putting babies on spikes in the jungle for 20 years - therefore a pretty loathsome fellow - but if the book he wrote is good, it's always going to be good, and always going to be worth reading.

One good example is William S. Burroughs. Regarded by many (most?) as a fine writer, but all in all a pretty loathsome person by all accounts.

The author is irrelevant (some say He's dead).

bk

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Another good example is Wyndham Lewis. An excellent British artist of the early C20th. Also a promoter of fascism in the 30s (he later recanted his fascist beliefs). Does his promotion of fascism in any way detract from his art?

bk

 

[jamespowers]

By anyone who enjoys good writing. The point was ... IF he was a good writer he should be remembered as such (not remembered solely for that, but at least the literature output of such a man should be considered good writing). Note: Hitler was not a good writer, or a good painter (meaning that the vast majority of people who read his writing or have seen his art consider it to be abysmal). So, in addition to going down in history as a mass murdering lunatic, he is also remembered as a bad writer and a bad painter.

If a book is good, it's good ... independent of the person who wrote it. The writer could have been out putting babies on spikes in the jungle for 20 years - therefore a pretty loathsome fellow - but if the book he wrote is good, it's always going to be good, and always going to be worth reading.

One good example is William S. Burroughs. Regarded by many (most?) as a fine writer, but all in all a pretty loathsome person by all accounts.

The author is irrelevant (some say He's dead).

bk

The author is not irrelevant to the countless people who were affected by WWII and its travesties. He would be remembered as a megalomaniacal evil tyrant just as he is now. The context in which you write is just as important as what you wrote. You still didn't name one person who would think he was a good writer or painter right up there with Gainsborough or Twain even if he were as such.
I suppose you have the various writing of the Marquis de Sade in your library as well?

Regards to all,

J

 

[jamespowers]

Another good example is Wyndham Lewis. An excellent British artist of the early C20th. Also a promoter of fascism in the 30s (he later recanted his fascist beliefs). Does his promotion of fascism in any way detract from his art?

bk

It depends if you want to support someone who believes that or not. I don't and I won't. I find voting with your wallet on the popularity of such people puts them in the place they have earned.
You might as well include Henry Ford in your group of Fascist supporters and anti-Semites. fftopic:

Regards to all,

J

 

[jake_fink]

The problem comes up when the politics make it into the art. If the baby spiker were to write a compelling sonnet in praise of baby spiking, is there a problem there?

Of course moral absolutism will get you nowhere, but casuistry can get you anywhere. Where do we draw the line.

fftopic: and proud of it!

 

[jake_fink]

It depends if you want to support someone who believes that or not. I don't and I won't. I find voting with your wallet on the popularity of such people puts them in the place they have earned.

I don't think the very dead Wyndham Lewis really cares what you do with your wallet, and there are many fascists who haven't heard of Wyndham Lewis who care even less.

I think your verb, "support" has to be redfined, though I don't know how to do it exactly. Reading is something very personal, it's putting somebody else in your head, making room for them and being receptive... Aren't htere some people we don't want in our heads?

And, sure, Henry Ford was a first rate creep. But I haven't wasted one minute of my life reading his fiction or poetry or admiring his paintings, I've never hummed a Henry Ford tune. So, he's a different kind of creep for a different kind of list.

 

[jamespowers]

The problem comes up when the politics make it into the art. If the baby spiker were to write a compelling sonnet in praise of baby spiking, is there a problem there?

Of course moral absolutism will get you nowhere, but casuistry can get you anywhere. Where do we draw the line.

fftopic: and proud of it!

Good points.

Regards to all,

J