Spoilers What Book Are You Reading?

[Scepticalscribe]

Finally finished A Tale of Two Cities last night. Honestly I didn't expect Carton to come out of nowhere and do what he did, but in retrospect it makes sense for his character. I do feel that Dicken's prose is too wordy (he loves his run on sentences) but whatever I guess...I still enjoyed the book although at the times it felt like it was dragging.

Going to start Crime and Punishment later this week. I have 4 friends who have read this book, one works in an investment bank, one works as a software engineer, and 2 are in medical school. All of them have said this book is one of the best books they've read so I'm looking forward to this.

Well, I have long thought that the putative alcoholism, (which struck me as a form of escapism, mostly from himself) bitterness, cynicism, and apparent degeneracy of Carton was a front for a self-loathing element to his character. Granted, there was a redemptive element to the end, but I am curious to know why his clear promise never materialised and why he was so keen to sabotage himself psychologically.

The wordy sentences and verbose nature of the book was not just 19th century literary fashion (people had long winter nights to fill with reading and card-playing, and , possibly drinking - they liked long books), but was also in response to the fact that Dickens (and indeed, his French equivalents, such as Dumas) made much of their literary name and fortune from the serialisation of their works.

When you serialise your work, it is in your interest (and that of your readers) to to try pad the story out, and maybe string the story along for as long as possible.

 

[monokakata]

This week I've been rereading Alan Sillitoe's book of short stories The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner.

Today I'm going to start The Ginger Man by J.P. Donleavy.

If you like books about running, give "The Olympian" by Brian Glanville, a try. It's very good.

 

[millerj123]

All 40! Ogre, Ogre was one of the best.

I applaud your endurance.

I made it through the first four novels of Terry Goodkind's "Sword of Truth" series. I think I'm giving up on it.

For speculative SciFi, I just read John Sandford's "Saturn Run." It reminded me very much of Robert Forward's "The Flight of the Dragonfly" from 1984. Both try very hard to include plausible science as the basis for an extended space voyage. Sometimes it's nice to get away from vampires and witches, with science that doesn't have to include "midi-chloridians" and light-up swords.

On the other hand, I couldn't help returning to Robert Asprin's Myth Series with "Myth-Gotten Gains". It wasn't terrible, but between the time Asprin stopped writing to fight the IRS, and getting back into his series, the magic of the first several books has been lost. Most likely won't finish that series, either.

 

[JamesMike]

Starting 'The Closers' by Michael Connelly.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

This morning's post brought my weekly subscription of The Economist (which I've not yet read), the deluxe double CD of Mike Oldfield's (double) album 'Incantations' (which I ordered last week after listening to it on YouTube, and belatedly realised I had forgotten just how very good it was as I can no longer play the vinyl version I have had since the early 1980s, though I must remedy that), and, lastly, but much anticipated, with avid, unalloyed, joy, (Professor) Mary Beard's just published 'SPQR - A History of Ancient Rome'. In lovely, solid, easy-to-read, beautifully produced, chunky, hardback.

 

[cdcastillo]

Just finished R. Galbraith's "Career of evil". I still enjoy JK's style, and although it is not the best of the 3 books published about Cormoran Strike, it is one of the most complex and captivating of the private detective's saga.

Have finished up 11 out of 15 books in Daniel Silva's Gabriel Allon series:

#1 The Kill Artist
...
#15 The English Spy

A friend of mine, whose taste is similar to mine recommended The english spy. Do you think it would be best to start from "the kill artist", or is it safe to start reading the last one?

 

[MRU]

Just finished R. Galbraith's "Career of evil". I still enjoy JK's style, and although it is not the best of the 3 books published about Cormoran Strike, it is one of the most complex and captivating of the private detective's saga.

The bigger mystery is after 'coming out' after the first books 'critical' success and publicly declaring she was Robert Galbraith - an arguably cynical marketing ploy to push increased sales of the book. Since then, why does J.K Rowling persist in playing the silly pseudonym game?

 

[Scepticalscribe]

The bigger mystery is after 'coming out' after the first books 'critical' success and publicly declaring she was Robert Galbraith - an arguably cynical marketing ploy to push increased sales of the book. Since then, why does J.K Rowling persist in playing the silly pseudonym game?

Actually, I don't see it as a 'cynical marketing ploy' - (whereas I do see the new play as a 'cynical marketing ploy'). Instead, I see it as an attempt to stretch herself and challenge herself as a writer, and see and test whether she could achieve success in another genre on her talent alone, which could not have happened to the woman known as the author of the Harry Potter books.

A number of writers, often female - especially those known for one genre, or one character - have tried something similar, writing something different under a pseudonym, or nom de plume.

However, it is interesting that she has continued once she has been outed. I'd say that she wants to have a distinctive persona and voice for the Robert Galbraith books.

 

[MacDawg]

A friend of mine, whose taste is similar to mine recommended The english spy. Do you think it would be best to start from "the kill artist", or is it safe to start reading the last one?

I always like to read from the first in a series, but that's just me
Silva typically does a good job of catching you up on the characters in each new book, so it is certainly reasonable to read them as a standalone
He does make references to earlier cases/people, but doesn't usually leave you in the dark about them

That said, if you enjoy the book, you will likely want to start over with them all

 

[cdcastillo]

I always like to read from the first in a series, but that's just me
Silva typically does a good job of catching you up on the characters in each new book, so it is certainly reasonable to read them as a standalone
He does make references to earlier cases/people, but doesn't usually leave you in the dark about them

That said, if you enjoy the book, you will likely want to start over with them all

So, the english spy it is then.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

A beautifully produced book by Mary Beard, which has just been published, called "SPQR - A History of Ancient Rome". Probably predictably, it is excellent, very well written, interesting and very well argued.

 

[jeremy h]

A beautifully produced book by Mary Beard, which has just been published, called "SPQR - A History of Ancient Rome". Probably predictably, it is excellent, very well written, interesting and very well argued.

Oooh... is it really good? Currently deciding which to get - that one or the Holland one? Got to get through Robert Harris' new one first though.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Oooh... is it really good? Currently deciding which to get - that one or the Holland one? Got to get through Robert Harris' new one first though.

Ah.

Now, there, @jeremy h - you have me on an interesting topic - namely, my thoughts on these two books.

At the moment, I am in the middle of Mary Beard's book, and yes, I have already read that written by Mr Holland.

Okay - deep, deep breath.

By background, I am - or was - a professional historian, (though not in this area) and I still love to read well written histories; I suppose it also means that I have some idea of the work & quality of research that is put into researching and writing history books, and have some idea, too, when the author is skating.

Anyway, I have read pretty widely in Roman history, and, for that matter, I have read quite a few of Tom Holland's books.

To my mind, his first book 'Rubicon' was a masterpiece - it was a brilliant, superbly argued, accessible, engaging, beautifully written book which dealt with the topic of the decline and fall (suicide even) of the Roman Republic. In essence, it argued that its constitutional edifice & structures meant that it was never able to build the constitutional & political institutions that would have served to bridge - (and attempt to contain) and simultaneously express - the profound divisions in that society, without destroying itself.

Another of his works 'Persian Fire' (Sparta versus Persia) is also - to my mind - first rate.

After that, I think he lost it a bit. I struggled with 'The Forge of Christendom' - (about the state of Europe, - and the world - around the first millennium AD, or CE), as I thought it a very disjointed and disorganised - and poorly-written - book.

And, possibly because - or despite - the fact that I have been reading quite a bit about Islam in recent years, I thought his stab at the topic, 'In the Shadow of the Sword' was not as good - in fact, was nowhere nearly as good - as it could have been. And yes, I struggled with it and haven't finished it.

Then, this year, he returned to the topic of ancient Rome, with 'Dynasty: The Rise and Fall of the House of Caesar'.

Dynasty is a very, very good book; it is about the rise and fall of the house of Caesar - basically, roughly Roman history from Augustus Caesar - (including a prologue or section about Julius Caesar) - to Nero, a terrific period you just cannot go wrong with.

Now, it is very readable, and exceedingly enjoyable, and I am the first to want to read well written, rollicking, readable, accessible history books, and to applaud the fact that they have been written, and well written (and to recommend them to students to read, because - as a teacher - you want students to thrill to the exciting stories in history).

Frankly, for far too long, history - a brilliant subject - has been bedevilled by the curse of tedious, and stupefyingly boring, writing. A rollicking good read is a pleasure to lose oneself in, especially when the subject matter is so rich and the raw material so rewarding.

But, and there is a but, the tone Tom Holland employs in 'Dynasty' is laddish in the extreme. He doesn't just write about sex, he writes about ****ing; there are whole paragraphs where this is the main - indeed only - verb used. This is history as shock and awe, almost a cliché to titillate and thrill a teenage male readership.

Now, I have no quarrel with that word used in a proper historical context, or as a part of a translated text, - where it belongs - and God knows, Latin is an exceedingly rich, vulgar and biological language in the vocabulary it uses to describe sexual acts. But this is a word that needs to be used sparingly in print, especially in a serious text. In fact, it is more effective - and packs a greater punch - if used sparingly.

However, my sense is that he was using it to shock, in that teenage, laddish sense. And possibly to generate controversy. And possibly to generate sales among a younger (male) demographic.

Anyway, I wrote to him about this - because, frankly - his use of the word struck me as excessive in a book which is very good and which doesn't need this verbal tic of shock and awe. By reply, he blamed his copy-editor, which is utter tosh.

As it happens, I am a published author - of history books - and, frankly, the author has a huge say in what goes into the final book. Moreover, if you want to shock and swear, at least have the decency to own it.

Mary Beard's book, SPQR - A History of Ancient Rome - is excellent, and is every bit as readable, with an engaging use of modern English. She doesn't skate over the dodgy stuff, but discusses it openly without the need to try to shock. Her mastery of her material - and utter fluency in the Latin language and its slang, dialects, and idioms, learning she wears lightly - is very impressive.

Now, she covers a far longer period (than does Tom Holland) - her book covers the period from the early days of Rome, through the Republic, well into the Imperial period, up to the time of Caracalla; she ends her book with his decision to open up citizenship to every free man in the empire in 212 CE (AD), and one of the themes in her work is that of 'belonging & citizenship in a republic and empire' - who had the right to call themselves a Roman citizen and why.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Oooh... is it really good? Currently deciding which to get - that one or the Holland one? Got to get through Robert Harris' new one first though.

Ah.

I meant to ask you: What is the new Robert Harris book like?

A little over a decade ago, when I was in bed for well over a month with shingles, I did a lot of reading. One of the books I recall with fondness from that time was 'Pompeii' by Robert Harris, which I thought very good.

 

[Apple_Robert]

For those interested in Ancient Roman history, I highly recommend "Caesar: Life of a Colossus." It is a biography that reads like a novel. Thoroughly engaging. I also recommend getting the audible version, which can be purchased for $3.99 with the purchase of the Kindle version. Excellent narration.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

For those interested in Ancient Roman history, I highly recommend "Caesar: Life of a Colossus." It is a biography that reads like a novel. Thoroughly engaging. I also recommend getting the audible version, which can be purchased for $3.99 with the purchase of the Kindle version. Excellent narration.

Who is the author?

 

[Apple_Robert]

Who is the author?

I linked to the Amazon listing.

Adrian Goldsworthy.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I linked to the Amazon listing.

Adrian Goldsworthy.

It is a title I hadn't recognised, and thus, didn't know the author, either. Thanks for your reply & response.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I linked to the Amazon listing.

Adrian Goldsworthy.

Some years ago - not all that many - a very good friend of my mother's from their time at school (in the 1940s) - a school described - at the time (not entirely inaccurately) as a 'high class boarding academy for young ladies' in its brochure - was visiting us. Those were the days when my mother (who has dementia) was still lucid.

After school, my mother's friend - impossibly stylish and clever and funny - had worked in the local authority until the late 50s, whereupon she then married, travelled to the US (on her honeymoon) and spent decades of her life in the US, which radicalised and educated her, and transformed her.

I had never met her - indeed, as sometimes happens, had never heard of her - until the day I answered the door to her which was the day when I first met her in 1991 - in fact, the very same day that Mikhail Gorbachev was overthrown in a coup - when she turned up on our doorstep, impossibly chic, and American, and dry, and wry, and funny, and asked after my mother, who happened to be home.

Unfortunately, I was a little impatient, although I did make (real, proper ground) coffee for them - I wished to return to the news….which was the subject matter of my academic speciality...

They rekindled their friendship and became not just the best of friends, but the sort of friends who enthused, warmed, and thrilled both - each of - of them. They went to movies, talks, plays, concerts together. They talked endlessly, argued enthusiastically and laughed hysterically together. My mother - for a lovely period of a little over a decade and a half - had found a female soul mate.

It was a friendship which empowered and delighted them both. She moved back to where she had grown up for over a decade, - although she travelled over and back to the US a few times a year - until she once again permanently returned to the US (to be with her family, specifically, her grandchildren) - and her friendship with my mother was a source of positive intellectual, psychological, and personal delight, exploration & joy and pleasure to my mother and herself. They laughed at the same things, and delighted in each other's (liberal) outlook, thrilled to intellectual adventure, shared one another's delights, happinesses and traumas.

This is the woman who introduced me to George Mitchell, but that is another story.

Anyway, the point of this post, is that sometime, in the past decade or so, she had come to (a rather good dinner) dinner in our house (I was the chef, as always in such situations) and there was an excellent (and somewhat scathing) documentary on Julius Caesar on the BBC later, which (somewhat unusually - because I rarely watch TV, but I hugely liked her - and still hugely like her, she is still in touch with us, - phoning me from the US as recently as last week - grieving, as I do, at my mother's decline - and I massively appreciated the wonderful mutually supportive friendship she and my mother enjoyed) I watched it with them, all of us with our wine glasses in hand.

We watched it in silence, until the end, when the credits rolled, and I still recall her remark, delivered, with a twinkle in her eye as she turned and looked at us, and expressed her verdict in her impeccable and inimitable Boston accent: "Julius Caesar: Wasn't he an absolute jerk?" Somehow, I had never heard that perspective expressed quite as succinctly as I did that evening - I burst out laughing. Since then, I can never read about him without hearing a Boston accent whispering in my ear "wasn't he an absolute jerk?" and laughing at the incongruity - and accuracy - of the verdict delivered that night.

 

[jeremy h]

Ah.

Now, there, @jeremy h - you have me on an interesting topic - namely, my thoughts on these two books.

At the moment, I am in the middle of Mary Beard's book, and yes, I have already read that written by Mr Holland.

Okay - deep, deep breath.

By background, I am - or was - a professional historian, (though not in this area) and I still love to read well written histories; I suppose it also means that I have some idea of the work & quality of research that is put into researching and writing history books, and have some idea, too, when the author is skating.

Anyway, I have read pretty widely in Roman history, and, for that matter, I have read quite a few of Tom Holland's books.

To my mind, his first book 'Rubicon' was a masterpiece - it was a brilliant, superbly argued, accessible, engaging, beautifully written book which dealt with the topic of the decline and fall (suicide even) of the Roman Republic. In essence, it argued that its constitutional edifice & structures meant that it was never able to build the constitutional & political institutions that would have served to bridge - (and attempt to contain) and simultaneously express - the profound divisions in that society, without destroying itself.

Another of his works 'Persian Fire' (Sparta versus Persia) is also - to my mind - first rate.

After that, I think he lost it a bit. I struggled with 'The Forge of Christendom' - (about the state of Europe, - and the world - around the first millennium AD, or CE), as I thought it a very disjointed and disorganised book.

And, possibly because - or despite - the fact that I have been reading quite a bit about Islam in recent years, I thought his stab at the topic, 'In the Shadow of the Sword' was not as good - as it could have been.

Then, this year, he returned to the topic of ancient Rome, with 'Dynasty: The Rise and Fall of the House of Caesar'.

Dynasty is a very, very good book; it is about the rise and fall of the house of Caesar - basically, roughly Roman history from Augustus Caesar - (including a prologue or section about Julius Caesar) - to Nero, a terrific period you just cannot go wrong with.

Now, it is very readable, and exceedingly enjoyable, and I am the first to want to read well written, rollicking, readable, accessible history books, and to applaud the fact that they have been written, and well written (and to recommend them to students to read, because - as a teacher - you want students to thrill to the exciting stories in history).

Frankly, for far too long, history - a brilliant subject - has been bedevilled by the curse of tedious, and stupefyingly boring, writing. A rollicking good read is a pleasure to lose oneself in, especially when the subject matter is so rich and the raw material so rewarding.

But, and there is a but, the tone Tom Holland employs in 'Dynasty' is laddish in the extreme. He doesn't just write about sex, he writes about ****ing; there are whole paragraphs where this is the main - indeed only - verb used. This is history as shock and awe, almost a cliché to titillate and thrill a teenage male readership.

Now, I have no quarrel with that word used in a proper historical context, or as a part of a translated text, - where it belongs - and God knows, Latin is an exceedingly rich, vulgar and biological language in the vocabulary it uses to describe sexual acts. But this is a word that needs to be used sparingly in print, especially in a serious text. In fact, it is more effective - and packs a greater punch - if used sparingly.

However, my sense is that he was using it to shock, in that teenage, laddish sense. And possibly to generate controversy. And possibly to generate sales among a younger (male) demographic.

Anyway, I wrote to him about this - because, frankly - his use of the word struck me as excessive in a book which is very good and which doesn't need this verbal tic of shock and awe. By reply, he blamed his copy-editor, which is utter tosh.

As it happens, I am a published author - of history books - and, frankly, the author has a huge say in what goes into the final book. Moreover, if you want to shock and swear, at least have the decency to own it.

Mary Beard's book, SPQR - A History of Ancient Rome - is excellent, and is every bit as readable, with an engaging use of modern English. She doesn't skate over the dodgy stuff, but discusses it openly without the need to try to shock. Her mastery of her material - and utter fluency in the Latin language and its slang, dialects, and idioms, learning she wears lightly - is very impressive.

Now, she covers a far longer period (than does Tom Holland) - her book covers the period from the early days of Rome, through the Republic, well into the Imperial period, up to the time of Caracalla; she ends her book with his decision to open up citizenship to every free man in the empire in 212 CE (AD), and one of the themes in her work is that of 'belonging & citizenship in a republic and empire' - who had the right to call themselves a Roman citizen and why.

Great reply thanks - I'll re-read properly when I have a mo'. But, Tom Holland - interesting views... I too loved Rubicon, Persian Fire* and tried In the Shadow of the Sword but gave up about a third of the way in. (Thought it was just me). I also have just read his novel Sleeper in the Sands and was very disappointed with it.

I think that's why asked... I'm confused about him.

So, decision made - it'll be Mary Beard in hardback and then Holland in paperback.

Haven't started the Harris one yet but will report back...

* Sort of related - I'd also recommend Lords of the Sea: How Athenian Trireme Battles Changed History, which is broader than the titles suggests.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Great reply thanks - I'll re-read properly when I have a mo'. But, Tom Holland - interesting views... I too loved Rubicon, Persian Fire* and tried In the Shadow of the Sword but gave up about a third of the way in. (Thought it was just me). I also have just read his novel Sleeper in the Sands and was very disappointed with it.

I think that's why asked... I'm confused about him.

So, decision made - it'll be Mary Beard in hardback and then Holland in paperback.

Haven't started the Harris one yet but will report back...

* Sort of related - I'd also recommend Lords of the Sea: How Athenian Trireme Battles Changed History, which is broader than the titles suggests.

Ah. That does sound interesting. Is it really worth reading - and - well written?

Now, I must confess that I don't have anything like the fascination for Greek history that I have for Roman; I can read a well written book about ancient Rome endlessly, but ancient Greece doesn't grab me in quite the same way.

 

[jeremy h]

I thought it's a really clever book in that although its ostensibly is about Greek naval warfare it really is actually about how Greek nations and ideas were created through the building of ships (and the resulting naval arms race requirements). I think its a point about a technology leading and building a society rather than a society looking for a specific technology to solve a known problem. I guess we're seeing it now - the web is a technology that's now remodelling the society that it was born from - if that makes sense?


I do agree about the Romans always trumping the Greeks - in my mind, while the ancient Greeks always have a whiff of public school arrogance about them the romans always feel like they've got a more comprehensive school boy made good attitude to everything.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I thought it's a really clever book in that although its ostensibly is about Greek naval warfare it really is actually about how Greek nations and ideas were created through the building of ships (and the resulting naval arms race requirements). I think its a point about a technology leading and building a society rather than a society looking for a specific technology to solve a known problem. I guess we're seeing it now - the web is a technology that's now remodelling the society that it was born from - if that makes sense?


I do agree about the Romans always trumping the Greeks - in my mind, while the ancient Greeks always have a whiff of public school arrogance about them the romans always feel like they've got a more comprehensive school boy made good attitude to everything.

Yes, you are quite right: The point about technology leading, or driving, social/political/economic change - and building a society - rather than a society looking for a specific technology to solve a known problem is a perspective that would interest me very much to read further about.

Okay. I'll mull over ordering it, and thanks for the comments, much appreciated.

 

[Centris 650]

Just finished "Ender's Game"
Just before that "Murder on the Orient Express".
Just before that "Dave Barry: You Can Date When You're Forty"
and just before that "And then there were none"
And just before that "Dune"

Averaging a book every week or so depending. Dune REALLY slowed me down as did "You Can Date When You're Forty" for some reason!

Tore through Agatha Christie's two books and Ender's Game.

I've taken a break for the past few days, mainly because I had to than wanted to, but I'm about to run by the library and pick up "Cell" by Stephen King.

After this I might pick up some old science fiction and read some of the Jules Vern books I never read as a kid.

 

[Susan159]

Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. A great History book that collects information from the past and explains why each country is like it is today. A long, in-depth, and educating reading.