What are you reading right now?

[Head Muggle]

Read the first part of Fahrenheit 451 and I gotta be honest, that's it? Hope the rest of the book justifies how popular it is.

It's not subtle, is it?

 

[hiringmayhem4]

It's not subtle, is it?

Solid concept, very poor execution. I did like the reasoning and speech Beatty gives on why they burn books when Montag skips work, I think Bradbury shows he can write in that part, and it wasn't what I originally expected (books being burned bc they're useless in that universe instead of le evil book).
But man! Did he write the book with lazy high school students in mind or was that an accident? It's like, the meaning of one sentence is x, but in case you didn't get it let me spell it out for you...

 

[Big Miss Steak]

Solid concept, very poor execution. I did like the reasoning and speech Beatty gives on why they burn books when Montag skips work, I think Bradbury shows he can write in that part, and it wasn't what I originally expected (books being burned bc they're useless in that universe instead of le evil book).
But man! Did he write the book with lazy high school students in mind or was that an accident? It's like, the meaning of one sentence is x, but in case you didn't get it let me spell it out for you...

I think I sperged about this already in the thread but he was seething with rage that one or two of his short stories had been shortened for inclusion in an abridged anthology. I would think that's why he went so heavy handed in F451.

 

[Jewthulhu]

Bradbury has some great stories but F451 isn't one of them IMO. Glad I'm not the only one who thought it was as subtle as a brick to the face.

 

[Old King Koaleamos]

Been dipping more into crime/noir stories. Any recommendations for classic mystery writers that aren't Doyle, Christie, Collins, Sayers, Chesterton, or Simenon? Been thinking of grabbing one of the John Dickson Carr omnibus volumes.

On a side note, I've been informed that Norbert Davis may be to my tastes so I got an epub first. Same with a Carr book but it's one of his earlier works.

As for my current reads. I'm like halfway through Saberhagen's first Berserker book. It's neat. You can tell he's got big ideas but can't execute them, so he just gives you a fun pulpy tale with tastes of those big ideas. I like how he's kinda aware of his limitations as a writer.

 

[Head Muggle]

Been dipping more into crime/noir stories. Any recommendations for classic mystery writers that aren't Doyle, Christie, Collins, Sayers, Chesterton, or Simenon? Been thinking of grabbing one of the John Dickson Carr omnibus volumes.

On a side note, I've been informed that Norbert Davis may be to my tastes so I got an epub first. Same with a Carr book but it's one of his earlier works.

As for my current reads. I'm like halfway through Saberhagen's first Berserker book. It's neat. You can tell he's got big ideas but can't execute them, so he just gives you a fun pulpy tale with tastes of those big ideas. I like how he's kinda aware of his limitations as a writer.

I can recommend the japanese mystery movement/circle that is Honkaku Mysteries. Seishi Yokomizo, Yukito Ayatsuji and Soji Shimada. Of each of these, The Inugami Curse, The Decagon House Murder and Tokyo Zodiac Killers.

Their writing is very sober. It's intention is to provide information for you to play a game of Whodunnit. Tokyo Zodiac Killers even goes so far as to tell you to stop reading and think for yourself before the solution is revealed.

 

[Dean Pentel]

The Rape of Nanking: The Forgotten Holocaust of World War II by Iris Chang. I bought it at a book signing setup for her at a local bookstore. She seemed like a nice lady so it's a shame she ended her own life 2 decades ago.

I wouldn't call it a "holocaust" (mostly because 6 gorillion Chinese people weren't killed in camps totally designed to do just that) but goddamn did the Japanese army do some despicable shit in Nanking.

 

[Sneed on Cloud 9]

View attachment 7606580


That one's on my bookshelf, how are you liking it so far?

It's fantastic. I can see how Robert Chambers was an influence on H.P. Lovecraft.

 

[Old King Koaleamos]

It's fantastic. I can see how Robert Chambers was an influence on H.P. Lovecraft.

https://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/texts/essays/shil.aspx

Lovecraft's essay, "Supernatural Horror in Literature", is still highly regarded as a great bit of work on horror. It's also a good spot to look for more of the writers that influenced him.

 

[The bearer of arms]

Ghost soldiers by Hampton Sides

 

[Jewthulhu]

Been dipping more into crime/noir stories. Any recommendations for classic mystery writers that aren't Doyle, Christie, Collins, Sayers, Chesterton, or Simenon? Been thinking of grabbing one of the John Dickson Carr omnibus volumes.

A lot of noir movies were based on books. Might be a good place to start.

I'm a fan of Raymond Chandler (The Big Sleep, The Lady in the Lake). Others I haven't read that had good movies based on them were "The Maltese Falcon" by Hammett and "Double Indemnity" by James M. Cain.

 

[Big Miss Steak]

The Rape of Nanking: The Forgotten Holocaust of World War II by Iris Chang. I bought it at a book signing setup for her at a local bookstore. She seemed like a nice lady so it's a shame she ended her own life 2 decades ago.

I wouldn't call it a "holocaust" (mostly because 6 gorillion Chinese people weren't killed in camps totally designed to do just that) but goddamn did the Japanese army do some despicable shit in Nanking.

I've been wanting to read that one but not sure I can stomach it. "Holocaust" just means a mass killing. It doesn't need to be a planned, deliberate genocide.

 

[Dean Pentel]

I've been wanting to read that one but not sure I can stomach it. "Holocaust" just means a mass killing. It doesn't need to be a planned, deliberate genocide.

She's clear about what occurred and she includes many quotes from Japanese soldiers that committed those acts. While she doesn't shy away from describing the awful things that happened to the Chinese citizens she doesn't dwell on details to the point of grotesque absurdity. I think you'll like the book but it's one you'll likely only read once.

The joke about "Holocaust" was me noticing how ZOG-turfed search engine results are regarding the word more than anything.

 

[Old King Koaleamos]

A lot of noir movies were based on books. Might be a good place to start.

I'm a fan of Raymond Chandler (The Big Sleep, The Lady in the Lake). Others I haven't read that had good movies based on them were "The Maltese Falcon" by Hammett and "Double Indemnity" by James M. Cain.

I'm familiar with the big classic names like Chandler, Hammett, Cain, Woolrich, Graham Greene, Highsmith, Ross Macdonald, John D Macdonald, and so on.

Also movies are great. Seen all the Hitchcocks and Welles stuff.

Heard good things about Jim Thompson, Eric Ambler, and Donald Westlake.

Picked up three fat omnibus paperbacks of Mickey Spillane's Mike Hammer. 3 novels a piece. Finished I, The Jury.

Started reading A. Merritt's Ship of Ishtar. Good stuff.

 

[Castoreum]

I usually read classic literature and poetry, a little nonfiction, and old fantasy novels. I realized that I hadn't read any modern era fantasy younger than Discworld. So I'm running the gauntlet and reading some popular romantasy books. I thrifted my copies so the only one getting my shekels is the secondhand bookshop in town. Why am I doing this? Morbid curiosity. And, True & Honest, market research. I want to know HOW bad they are or if there is anything good about them. And I'd rather read the books myself in a day or two than give an unwashed YouTuber essayist with a grating voice hours of my time.

I read The Courting of Bristol Keats by Mary E. Pearson while on holiday.

Spoiler: sperging

The title is The Courting of Bristol Keats: A NOVEL, so I was under the assumption it was a complete story, which is why I picked it first. Boy was I wrong. Because everyone is writing a goddamn trilogy/quadrilogy these days.

So, it's an isekai. The MC has gone to THE fairy world, but has no reaction to any of the fantastical things around her. There are also mentions of Pagan things (namely Beltane and Samhain), but it is all surface level. On top of that, there is a complete disconnect from nature, which is, like, hello? What the fae are all about? Every fae character might as well have been human.

Pearson was simply making shit up as she wrote, which pissed me off the most. Something new happens, character explains what it is, everyone accepts it. Rinse and repeat. Lots and lots of exposition. No coherent theming. No message. Nada. The way Pearson writes made me feel as if everything was happening off-page and then I was being informed of what happened after the fact. The book reads like a fluffed up, incomplete outline rather than a novel. It's like on one hand she wanted to write a serious novel with serious world-building (since there is an expansive world), but on the other it seemed like she was rushed to fulfill a checklist by a certain deadline while her publisher held a gun to her head. Maybe Pearson just writes this way.

Much to my surprise, nothing tied the story up in a ribbon and the book just ended. Like it was going to lead on into the next chapter, but there were no more pages.

Am I surprised that this modern romantasy novel sucked? No. Well, kind of. I like fantasy. I like silly fantasy, I like high fantasy, I like low fantasy, I think I like romance when it's done right. I'm surprised that my favorite thing overall in this book was a goddamn HORSE who was in two or three scenes. He just stood out among the crowd of 20 or so characters who had only brief mentions of how they looked or acted. The sole focus is on the blank slate MC, who is supposed to be 20 but acts like she's 15 and it's kind of gross. None of the other characters have arcs or their own personalities. In fact, everyone acts the same, even the love interest.

I find it interesting how the fantasy is just a backdrop. There is an assumption made by the author that her readers know everything and nothing is elaborated on. Something is written and therefore we as readers must accept it as true without being shown why it is so. Magic use is a plot device. There is no lingering on scenery or emotions. I don't believe for one second that people read this book for the romantic intrigue and sex, because they also sucked. There are three or four sex scenes and since the story is written in 3rd person, it felt voyeuristic.

I was chatting with an acquaintance of mine who said, "Oh romantasy books are all kind of like that. Sometimes people just want to be entertained without thinking too much." Then she suggested to me other novels that I was planning on reading anyway.

tl;dr - 3/10. It sucked. No surprise. I'll be posting again my thoughts when I finish the next book on my list.

When I can't take reading these romantasy books anymore, I'm going to read some Dungeon Crawler Carl as a palate cleanser since I just heard about it. Also got The Last Unicorn and The Little Prince on my list since I've only seen their film counterparts.

ETA - clarity...

 

[Old King Koaleamos]

I find it interesting how the fantasy is just a backdrop. There is an assumption made by the author that her readers know everything and nothing is elaborated on. Something is written and therefore we as readers must accept it as true without being shown why it is so. Magic use is a plot device. There is no lingering on scenery or emotions. I don't believe for one second that people read this book for the romantic intrigue and sex, because they also sucked. There are three or four sex scenes and since the story is written in 3rd person, it felt voyeuristic.

I was chatting with an acquaintance of mine who said, "Oh romantasy books are all kind of like that. Sometimes people just want to be entertained without thinking too much." Then she suggested to me other novels that I was planning on reading anyway.

I always respectfully state that romantasy is not and will never be for me. I keep hearing that romantasy books are quite unhinged.

Then again, my fantasy preference is Robert E. Howard, L. Sprague de Camp, and Fritz Leiber.

 

[AnsemSoD1]

My neg-rates and sticker farm reactions on here.

 

[Castoreum]

I always respectfully state that romantasy is not and will never be for me. I keep hearing that romantasy books are quite unhinged.

I knew they would be. I want to witness HOW unhinged.

I think the massive popularity of these books is deeply revealing about the kind of women who read the genre. Similar to how isekai anime or gacha games reflect a population of people who are overworked or demoralized and would rather consume a fantasy than change something. That's not always the case, of course. I just think it's interesting.

 

[Old King Koaleamos]

I knew they would be. I want to witness HOW unhinged.

I think the massive popularity of these books is deeply revealing about the kind of women who read the genre. Similar to how isekai anime or gacha games reflect a population of people who are overworked or demoralized and would rather consume a fantasy than change something. That's not always the case, of course. I just think it's interesting.

I remember some shitpost on this site that mentioned one of the major romantasy authors having a fairy dude with a disproportionately massive penis as a romantic interest

 

[Chickenpolar]

Trying to read more fiction/classics. Started with Lolita because it was on a dumb woman's list of red flag books for men linked in the A&N article thread "why aren't men reading fiction?"

I'm not well read or astute but it was interesting. Humbert was so obsessive and full of himself. An interesting character.

Im thinking Hemingway next. Maybe The Sun Also Rises