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

[jamespowers]

I'm glad someone in here is like-minded !

Just a lone voice in the wind I suppose.

Regards,

J

 

[jamespowers]

See, this is the problem with saying you've had your final word. There's always something to clarify. Thusly:

The author should not be saddled with crimes committed by characters in a book written by the author.

The author generally does not appear as a character in a book and thus the characters cannot be seen as resembling the author.

Hmmm... Now how does that square with the symbolism and such used as literary tools?
I have no problem with the characters in the book. I have problems with the character creating them at times though.
The author never appears in his books? I suppose Steven King doesn't do cameos in his movies based on his books then.
Let's face it, authors draw from within and without. Characters are based on life experience and on those they meet. Even Conan Doyle based Holmes on a contemporary. Ian Fleming Based Bond on himself and his experiences. I hardly think these authors were the first to do as such.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Mr Nick]

Why do we read what we do?

Intersting going back and reading these posts on this topic. Good books, bad books, moral, immoral, character traits of the authors and how they affect the book etc. The answers to many of these questions may be found in why do you read and what are you looking for? Certainly books can open our eyes to many things. Ways of thinking we have never considered, seeing things from another's perspectives, information, entertainment. I find myself reading for many reasons but overall, I would say I read for my own personal benefit. Some things do not need to be experienced to know they are not beneficial. The same goes for books. I don't have the time or desire to waste on things books do not benefit me. Sure I've started books that did not meet my expectations. Most of them I dropped like a hot rock! Some I waded through hoping for a change, rarely has my persistence been rewarded. The other part is that read books are like lived out experiences, once done, they are in you mind and memory forever and they will always have some influence on your thinking because of that. I am so thankful I have not experienced the horrors of war and combat in my time in the military. Why would I want to be haunted by those through a book (or movie)? There are already too many negative influences that invade my life. I'm not going to knowingly invite more through choices.
The bottom line for me is I'm trying to add influences that will help me to be a better person and that will help me help others to be better people. My choice of books is part of that. Apologies in advance for the ramblings...[huh]

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I read to hear from the horse's mouth.

 

[jamespowers]

I read to hear from the horse's mouth.

I read to make sure that I am not getting anything from the other end.

Regards to all,

J

 

[mysterygal]

so BK, is that your final word?
the horses mouth: can many times be beneficial. An example, I love history, and I love reading about heros, reading first hand accounts, you can't beat that. There is a difference between that and immersing yourself in gross autrocities

 

[jamespowers]

There is a difference between that and immersing yourself in gross autrocities

So you wouldn't be interested in the Josef Mengele diaries eh?
Me either. :eusa_clap

Regards,

J

 

[Marc Chevalier]

So you wouldn't be interested in the Josef Mengele diaries eh?
Me either.

Let me be clear. Mein Kampf revealed what Hitler believed and what he was prepared to do for his beliefs. The problem was that most of those who ended up suffering under Hitler's aggression never read Mein Kampf. Heck, most Germans didn't, either. Had more people done so, appeasement would have never taken place: its consequences would have been forseen.
(By the way, there was at least one British politician who did read Hitler's book. His name was Winston Churchill.)

Know your enemy, even if it demands that you enter his/her evil mind.


.

 

[jamespowers]

Let me be clear. Mein Kampf revealed what Hitler believed and what he was prepared to do for his beliefs. The problem was that most of those who would suffer from Hitler's aggression never read Mein Kampf. Heck, most Germans didn't, either. Had they done so, appeasement would have never taken place. Its consequences would have been forseen. (By the way, there was at least one British politician who did read Hitler's book. His name was Winston Churchill.)

Know your enemy, even if it demands that you read his disgusting literature.

Churchill knew what Hitler was far before reading Mein Kampf. He was like every other tin plated dictator in manner and modus operandi. That book just backed up what Churchill thought of him.
If you want to really see into the mind of Hitler and what he really had in mind, you have to go further than Mein Kampf. That is child's play. Read Hitler's Second Book. It is a previously unpublished sequel to Mein Kampf and he sets out his real plans to finally take on America and his plans for Europe. That is what you need to read to get into the mind of a mad man if that is your choice. Man that guy was nuts with a capital N!
Perhaps the people in Europe at that time really weren't following their politics closely enough.

Regards,

J

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Read Hitler's Second Book. It is a previously unpublished sequel to Mein Kampf and he sets out his real plans to finally take on America and his plans for Europe.

I take it you've read it, then? lol

.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

so BK, is that your final word?

Word!

bk

 

[scotrace]

'scuse me...

*small voice in back*

How does one go back further than Mein Kampf by reading it's sequel?



Also, I'm in the "You can lay the blame for 99% of the blood of the 20th century at the feet of William Howard Taft" camp.

 

[jamespowers]

I take it you've read it, then? lol

.

Actually there was a program on the History channel concerning Hitler's sequel. You can go on their site and see the particulars.
One actually goes further ahead in Hitler's plans with the Second book. Even more funny is that the profits from that book are going to benefit a Jewish group. Maybe I will buy and read that one just to make Hitler spin in his grave like a lathe. lol That would be the definition of irony.

Regards,

J

P.S. Taft the Fatman being responsible for everything?! [huh]

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Taft had an extra large bathtub intalled in the White House. D--n him!!!

 

[LeFonque]

For me anything by James Ellroy.

 

[Jack Scorpion]

Hmm. Things have changed since I've last visited this thread.

Sometimes literature is pushing the limits on purpose, shocking the world, and sometimes literature is revealing taboo and quote-on-quote immorality as a kind of Waste Land social commentary. Immorality is pretty necessary in literature just as it is pretty necessary in life. The bible says so in the first chapter. In literature, the bad side of life tends to need even more focus practically by definition. Take a look at America's banned book list and try not to be disgusted. There's a difference between trash, serial fiction made solely for the carcrash-loving culture and Lolita. Heck, one of the most violent pieces of fiction in history is The Iliad.

Sometimes we forget that the author of The Education of Little Tree and The Outlaw Josie Wales was top KKK, but then again, hardly anyone knows that (or, rather, knew that). The crimes of the father sometimes do and sometimes don't find responsibility in the son. As for me, I would never have guessed Forrest Carter's true form, and often times the darkest souls create beautiful things, for really there are beautiful, very morally upright things in those books.

Personally, I think that there is always a drawback to the artist's freedom of expression, and that is a loss of social guidelines (or moral compass, if you will). I tend to forgive Charlie Chaplin. I tend to forgive Edgar Allan Poe. I know someone who refuses to watch Chinatown because of Roman Polanski's crimes. Well, that's just ridiculous.

The thing is, in a good book, immorality is always either punished or used to establish some kind of outlook unto life. A good book doesn't just throw it in there to bother you. I don't go looking for terrible things to read, but I don't pull wool down over my eyes when something "questionable" happens on the next page. I'm a good dude and I don't feel threatened or attracted by bad forces; understanding certain flaws in the human race only strengthens a person's character.

Speaking of bad forces, I saw James Ellroy speak at Noir City in San Francisco; he was great! "I saw my mother get killed as a child. That's why I write all these #$^#&ed up stories... You can laugh." What a character.

As for what I am currently reading: A Little Yellow Dog by Walter Mosley. Easy Rawlins mysteries are spectacular!

(P.S.: I now have a B.A. in English Literature!)

 

[Feraud]

Sometimes we forget that the author of The Education of Little Tree and The Outlaw Josie Wales was top KKK, but then again, hardly anyone knows that (or, rather, knew that).

That is correct. And yet, I enjoyed both books very much in spite of knowing of his KKK association. Time and distance lends a buffer to accept literature that is either offensive or created by despicable people.

How about we swing this back to topic? I just bought a book called Sharks Over China: The 23rd Fighter Group in World War II from Barnes and Noble. The author claims this is the hightest scoring fighter unit in the CBI theater. It sounds like a good read.

 

[mysterygal]

With any book, there is going to be a 'bad guy'. I just don't go purposely towards books that have a lot of violence and crime, it just does not hold a lot of interest for me...I also think that since I counsel, I hear so much of it already, that to read about it in my liesure time, just is so unappealing. I really don't try to pull the wool over my eyes, but at the same time I'm careful not to become desensitized by what I see or hear. Like the Raymond Chandler books, there's murder, but, for the most part it's still pretty clean.

 

[Etienne]

The Case For Christ--Lee Strobel.

 

[mysterygal]

Etienne, that's a good one!:eusa_clap