One Word Book Titles

Deserve one word reviews, right? For Fury, I would pick misanthropic; for Ragtime, sumptuous.

Well, all right, they both deserve a bit more than that.I actually really liked both.

I've been making my way through Rushdie's' oeuvre. Nothing has surpassed or even come close to my love of The Ground Beneath Her Feet (The Moor's Last Sigh came the closest, and it was still a solid miss). That said, I do love Rushdie. Fury was very short, but it was so richly and tightly woven that it still had the decadence of any Rushdie. That said, it had a bit of a different feel, perhaps because it was so tightly focused and took place almost completely in the US. In some ways, it almost reminded me of Zadie Smith's works.

I will admit that Neela did not do too much for me. I was much more interested in Mila. This may reflect my age more than anything, though of course there's always the possibility that I liked her since she made me think of Mila Kunis, which is pretty much always a good thing.

I decided to stay in the city but jump back about 100 years for Ragtime. This is actually one that I wasn't excited about reading. I love the musical, but I had once tried to start this one about seven years ago and couldn't get into it, so I was concerned. However, I really loved it. There were some extremely beautiful passages (particularly the part that is Our Children and Atlantic City in the musical), and it really is masterfully constructed. The real historical characters get more room in this than the musical, particularly Nesbit and Houdini. I found Younger Brother's story a bit more compelling in the book as well, though I found Coalhouse less so.

It's interesting, actually, to see how the two different mediums work for this story. On the one hand, the novel is more leisurely and can explore its richly and again tightly woven world in these vignettes of detail that are lovely. On the other hand, the story simply aches for music.

It was also an excellent choice for Independence Day, I rather think.

List from the List!

Some authors appear on this list a lot. An awful lot. Here is how many I still have to read for some of those repeat offenders.

Phillip Roth = 4
Kurt Vonnegut = 1
Henry James <1 (since I’m reading the final one for him at the moment; fist pump!)
Charles Dickens = 2 (fist pump!)
J.M. Coetzee = 5 (gulp)
Salman Rushdie = 3
Virginia Woolf = 7 (gulp)
Ian McEwan = 3
Kazuo Ishiguro = 2
Margaret Atwood = 3
D.H. Lawrence = 3

250 Down, 751 To Go!

Yay! Go me! I'm not exactly sure that The Power and the Glory is quite epic enough for this milestone, but there you go. It was a fun enough read, and I'll write more on it and Slaughterhouse Five in a bit. However, I just wanted to write this little post in celebration. Next weekend I am going to have a cookie to celebrate (since there is a bakery I want to visit in Georgetown). I also do plan to buy my favorite book from the first 250; the challenge there is that I still can't decide between The Ground Beneath Her Feet and The Forsyte Saga. We shall see.

In other news, my next read is The Shining. This should be interesting, since I really have no idea what it is about or any preconceived notions about it. From reading the back of the book, I have learned that it takes place in a hotel. I think that's a good sign, since I rather like hotels.

It Said We Weren't Likable

Writers and literary critics always seem to take issue when someone (specifically, your average reader who reads for pleasure, rather than pretentiousness) says they didn't like a book because the characters weren't likable. As writers and literary critics rightly point out, just because you wouldn't want to take a road trip or go bowling with someone doesn't mean that they aren't interesting, compelling characters or that stories they are in aren't worth reading. Some of the best characters would be horrible human beings. Thus, they argue, finding characters unlikable is not a good reason to not read or enjoy a novel, it's just readers being immature.

I disagree. The real issue here is that readers are not being precise enough when they say that the characters weren't likable. Yes, I do not have to think, "man, I'd love to go to see spectacularly excellent action movies with this person" to find them compelling in a story (actually, there's really only one person with whom I really enjoy seeing spectacularly excellent action movies, but that's not the point here). However, I do have to think that they are not so annoying and/or boring and/or loathsome that I want to spend time with them. Average readers probably do need to be more precise when they say they found the characters unlikable, but I think annoyance with the characters is a perfectly excellent reason to hate the novel.

For example, I found every single character in The Corrections to be mind-numbingly dull and painfully irritating. Not only would I not want to be stuck on a Greyhound bus with them, I did not give a flying fig what happened to them as they bored me to tears. In real life, the heroine of The Ground Beneath Her Feet would be a rather terrifying person to know, the lead of The Joke is rather a bitter person, and the whole ensemble of The Secret History are essentially murderers, but these are all very compelling, rich, fascinating novels.

Ultimately, I do have to find something that I like in a story to enjoy it, and in general I would rather enjoy a story than admire it. This is coming from someone who mostly loves prose and the ways that words are put together, too; I'm not just a character person, but words are their most beautiful in service to an exquisite narrative and a richly created world and characters.

Masochism Tango

Take your cigarette from it's holder/ And burn your initials in my shoulder/ Fracture my spine/ And swear that you're mine/ As we dance to the masochism tango.

So, I just read two Coetzee's in a row. I don't mean to make him my punching bag or anything, but goodness, I just do not like these. At all. With some authors, after reading a few I start to understand and love their work. For example, I struggled with The Satanic Verses, and even Midnight's Children wasn't a favorite. Then, I read The Ground Beneath Her Feet and fell in love. With other authors, I may not like everything I had to read from them, but I have some favorites (Persuasion, Great Expectations, etc.). Maybe after a few more of Coetzee I'll start to enjoy them, but right now I am mostly excited to report that I have read half of the ones that I will have to read.

Let's start with Foe. It's fine, really. It's deliciously, blessedly short. Just 157 pages. Thank goodness. The story is sort of a re-imagining of Robinson Crusoe. I probably should have read Robinson Crusoe before reading this one. I have three main associations with DeFoe's novel:

1) Baby Island (again!), since the lovely ladies of that story reference Crusoe on occasion.
2) The Peabody and Sherman, where they split the island and make a horrible Friday the 13th pun.
3) A supremely trippy little animated show we watched in Germany where it was Robbins and Crusoe or something; it was really trippy (that may have been the language barrier, but man, we watched some fairly awesome TV there).

Now I can add this story. Apparently, the main point has something to do with the nature of reality and truth, and how literacy, language, and imagination shape that. Or something. I don't know. It's classic Coetzee, which is to say stark and bleak.

Of course, Foe has nothing on Disgrace for stark and bleak. Or grim and intense, for that matter. What a book. The plot essentially is, middle-aged divorcee may or may not rape young college student, loses job, goes to live with daughter out in rural South Africa, daughter is brutally raped, and then things sort of get worse. And meanwhile everyone is borderline depressed. Including me, the poor little reader.

The other thing about Coetzee is that I always feel like I am missing something, like the point or the resolution. Or else the books really do stop abruptly without any resolution.

Pacing

Clearly, many factors impact how much someone enjoys a book. Everything from genre, literary style, plot, characters, etc. plays a role. However, I think that one factor typically gets overlooked: pacing of reading. Some of this, I'm sure, varies person to person, so the following thoughts likely really only apply to me. That said, the pace with which I read a book certainly shapes my perception of the book, at least to a certain extent.

Some books may be best if you can luxuriate in them, taking your time, savoring each page. I remember that there were parts of The Ground Beneath Her Feet where I just had to stop reading and relish the previous passage. On the flip side, I read The Joke in a few short, intense bursts over the course of one afternoon. Being so intensely in the moment with the book increased my enjoyment in that case.

I tend to read books in two ways, depending on whether I start it on a Sunday or Monday, or if I start it on a Tuesday. If I start it on S or M, I usually read it very quickly, generally in one day. If I start it during my work week, I might take the whole of the work week to finish it. In some cases it likely matters less, but regardless, it does impact my experience of the book. I'm reading The Sun Also Rises more slowly than To Have and Have Not, and it's much more enjoyable (it's also a better book, but still, for me I need some breathing room with Hemingway). In other cases, dragging out a book just makes it painful (say, The Corrections).

Regardless of how long it takes me to read a book, I'm always glad with the serial novels that I am not stuck waiting for the next installment. If I had to wait months for the next chapters of each and every Dickens' novel, I'd go crazy.

Sense and Sensibility, The Moor's Last Sigh, The House in Paris, and Fingersmith

Well, I am extremely behind. Since my last post, I’ve read several. My run down n each will be short and sweet. It also won’t be chronological, since I want to save Fingersmith for last, given that it’s the most spoilerable one. As always, spoiler alert for the works mentioned in the post's title.

So, with that, let’s start with that, let’s start with Sense and Sensibility, since it’s not at all possible to spoil it. If you have read any Jane Austen, seen a movie based on any Austen novel, or heard a good joke about an Austen novel, you already know what happens. If you are a young, overly charming, and too good to be true male, you are a cad who will break the heart of one of our heroines on her path to getting with the wiser, quieter, older male who at first may appear rude. Like The Woman in White, my ships got off with this one. I would have had Elinor get with Brandon (and I guess put Marianne with Ferrars or given her a few years to grow up a little, since Ferrars was sort of a non character anyway).

I don’t know why, but I still have a minor fear of Rushdie. This is completely irrational, since once I start reading, I remember that I love his writing. It is so incredibly rich; every page is just overflowing. I don’t think you could ever describe his works as derivative, per se, but The Moor’s Last Sigh definitely re-explored similar territory to some of his other novels (particularly Midnight’s Children, I thought). That being said, the character of Aurora is probably one of my favorites of Rushdie.

The House in Paris had the most beautiful quote in it. “Good-byes breed a sort of distaste for whomever you say good-bye to; this hurts, you feel, this must not happen again. Any other meeting will only lead back to this. If today good-bye is not final, some day it will be.” Karen is an absolutely amazing character with such conflicting desires and loyalties. She certainly isn’t completely likeable, but she feels completely real. The quote captures the essence of the story’s themes, or at least the themes that struck a chord with me.

And now for Fingersmith. This novel had a number of twists, where you think you know what’s happening, and then the perspective shifts and you have to reevaluate what you thought you knew and understood, and the picture changes. In many cases multiple twists don’t work too well (not a high-brow example by any stretch of the imagination, but Titan AE anyone?), but in this case, they do work, mostly because Susan and Maud are excellent.

I guess the theme of this post would be, amazing female characters. I’ll save Persuasion, Watchmen, and The Three Musketeers for the next one (technically, I’m still reading that last one, but it moves super quickly).

What do you recommend?

One danger of this project is that people seem to think that I should be a good source for book recommendations. This is very unfair, in my opinion. I don’t even like giving restaurant recommendations! I recently read an interesting article on Salon that argued that there are two different kinds of book recommendations, which I argee with wholeheartedly.

The first springs from the book review. Here, the reviewer offers her/his opinion of the work, perhaps recommending it in an abstract sense. The review is targeted at a general audience, however, not a specific individual, and more presents the reviewer’s thoughts and less tells the review reader that he/she should go out and read the book.

I can get behind that sort of recommendation (I give my thoughts on the various works in this blog, after all). It’s the second type of recommendation that makes me nervous. I liked The Sound and the Fury and The Idiot, after all.

This second type is the personalized recommendation. When someone asks e to tell her/him what to read based on what I’ve read, the person isn’t actually asking for my personal opinion, per se, but rather my thoughts on what he/she might think/like. This is a lot of pressure, particularly since I think people expect me to have a different taste in books than I do.

My love for God of Small Things, for example, has caused a number of people to read it. Most have told me they found it depressing and violent. Which it is, of course; I find it so beautiful, so painfully exquisite, that I have a hard time intelligibly discussing it. The repeated phrases! The way it mirrors a Kathakali dance! The unflinching pain! But it’s not for everyone, and you have to understand that I like that sort of thing.

Similarly, while no one has ever taken my Forsythe Saga or The Ground Beneath Her Feet recommendations seriously, I think there’s a not minuscule chance they’d be disappointed if they did. It took me a bit to start appreciating Rushdie, and if you just jump into The Ground Beneath Her Feet, you might feel like I felt about The Satanic Verses – I appreciated that one, but didn’t love it.

For people that I know well, I volunteer recommendations if after reading a book I think the person would like it (and I did succeed in getting people to read The Count of Monte Cristo and The Red Queen, among others, but they weren’t the same person, and I wouldn’t cross recommend). I’m still trying to find the right person to whom I should recommend Under the Net.

If pressed, I tend to just cite my favorites, but the art of recommending books is complicated, particularly if you don’t understand why I like what I like (my movie taste is similarly unexpected for most people, as I have been told by multiple individuals). I’ll try to write a post explaining my literary tastes in a bit.

The FAQ Part II

Continuation of the FAQ:

Which ones have been your favorites so far? I consider may favorites to fall into two categories: 1) ones that are fun to read (Love in a Cold Climate, Lord of the Rings, Dracula) and 2) ones that I wouldn’t have read without a push from the list, and that I am so glad that I have read.

I think the latter list is more interesting: The Ground Beneath Her Feet (some of the passages were so painfully beautiful that I had to stop reading and just breathe), The Red Queen (the Queen’s voice is distinctive and so fully realized; I read the rice chest piece coming home from work late one night, and I was shaky), The Forsyte Saga (yes, it’s long, but it is worth it; I had no idea what I was getting into when I started it, and it’s portrayal of the changing meanings of marriage, of the different ways love takes shape; I can’t articulate my love for this book in only a few words); Pale Fire (so hilarious; if you want something fun, go read this one); and many others (Remains of the Day; Never Let Me Go; Count of Monte Cristo; The Wings of the Dove; All Quiet on the Western Front)

Are there any books that you've wanted to stop? Yes.

All right, smarty, which ones? The Hunchback of Notre Dame, American Psycho, The Trial, Dr. Zhivago, The Unnamable, Molloy, Malone Dies. Sorry, Beckett aficionados and anyone else whose favorite books made this list. I would love to talk with you about why you didn’t hate every character in Hunchback, why the nihilist violence in American Psycho is more than just gratuitous, how you manage (if you manage) to not want to shove every character in a Kafka novel into a vat of hot oil, why there is anything romantic to be found in the suffering of Dr. Zhivago, and what in the world is happening in the Becket trilogy of “Oh my God, when will this end? Die, Malone, and put me out of my misery.”

What If you want to read something that isn't on the list? Then I do. The list is not meant to be restrictive. I definitely read the latest Mary Russel novel the day it was published. I also throw in non fiction on a fairly regular basis (in addition to the nearly 60 list books in 2010 thus far, I've also read Yes Means Yes, Dream City, When You Are Engulfed in Flames, Undercurrents, Half the Sky, I Was Told There'd Be Cake, You Say Tomato, I Say Shut Up, and All The President's Men; I also read for a book club, and I read The Economist cover-to-cover weekly)

What if they update the list? I've decided it's like when you enter college. The degree requirements/list of books when you start applies throughout (technically I think in most colleges you can later choose the new reqs if you want, but I don't intend to update the list for myself).

My apologies to the authors whose names did not appear in the labels for this post (apparently only twenty can per post).