Books: Last Book You Read and Rate It

[Spring in Fialta]

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald (1925) - It was better than I remembered it - and I liked it even then - but my enthusiasm for the novel will never reach the level of Ceremony's. More than the prose - besides a few moments, I don't think there were many passages that particularly stood out to me, but my favorite was the one about Daisy believing her and Tom were part of a secret society as well as Gatsby's visions of the past - the structure of the narrative and Fitzgerald's story-telling abilities are on display in this one. There is not a single hint of clunkiness in the narration and I cannot think of a single hole in relation to the story itself. Every question is answered, every detail is formulated upon - to the point where everything is essentially put in the reader's beak, which I often rail against, but it worked well within this whimsical story - but I also felt that the sentiments and emotions Fitzgerald was expanding upon, while important, truthful and valid, gave way to certain overly sentimental scenes that could feel romantically wimpy which deflected from the emotional power they could have (Gatsby visiting Louisville after coming back from the war being the prime example). Still, I enjoyed the read and Fitzgerald could blow you away with a sentence here and there, he just goes overboard with the flowery writing as so many writers tend to do, instead of using a single, flowery line in a single passage like a pinch of salt to great taste and effect. I also wonder how flowery some sentences would have sounded if it weren't for Fitzgerald using obsure, seldom-used words which adds to that effect. But despite it's prose - although the dialogue is often great - the book is still accessible and a fine one.

 

[Oscar Acosta]

O.J. Is Innocent and I Can Prove It - William Dear

Disclaimer: I've always felt O.J. Simpson did not do the murders everyone has vilified him for, I've read a lot and followed the case closely over the past 20 years. It just doesn't add up.

William Dear, a private detective who's been world renowned for his cases and previous books, felt the same way. In the book, he details not only how it could not be O.J. but how it was in fact, his son Jason Simpson who committed the crime. While I'm not entirely sure that's true a lot of his theory adds up, and explains a lot of O.J's activities and evidence against him, as well as the evidence that doesn't fit on him. That O.J. was at the crime scene but after the fact, as if someone called him about what they did - and he showed up to see, the evidence actually speaks for itself that he was there afterwards but not the one to commit the murders.

It's written like a detective novel over the course of a decade, spanning from dealings with the LAPD, the district attorneys, OJ himself, and Jason Simpson. It's a fascinating read.

If you truly believe O.J. is guilty I'd just recommend reading the book and seeing if your opinion changes.

8.5/10

 

[kihei]

The Bone Mother, by David Demchuk

The Bone Mother is the first novel in the horror genre ever to be nominated for Canada's Giller Prize which is awarded to the best Canadian work of literature each year. The book is a collection of several personal portraits of very strange, troubled or evil people, though none of them would describe themselves in such terms. The vast majority of the mostly brief stories begins with a picture from a vast archive of photos taken by the Romani (Gypsy) photographer Costic Acsinte between 1935-1945. Although the characters in the novel hail from three villages on the Ukrainian/Romanian border, the hauntingly memorable photographs perfectly complement the decidedly odd tales that follow. Taken as a whole, this collection reads like traditional fairy tales from a lost Slavic culture. The tales contain disturbing ideas (for instance, marriage between brothers), distressing descriptions ("No question, good children taste the best"--children often come to bad ends), and a vast collection of mythical creatures I never heard of before including vengeful water sprites, a skeleton crone with iron teeth, and a ghost-like figure that impersonates its victims. Whoever's tale is being told the reader can be pretty sure that something unspeakably bad is going to happen to them. The sum total of all these homely, decidedly Eastern European stories is both brilliant and disturbing. The book is an easy, fast read but I was relieved to get to the end of it. I am now stuck with a lot of thoughts that I will not be able to erase from my consciousness, enough material to give me nightmares for the rest of my days.

 

[Thucydides]

O.J. Is Innocent and I Can Prove It - William Dear

Disclaimer: I've always felt O.J. Simpson did not do the murders everyone has vilified him for, I've read a lot and followed the case closely over the past 20 years. It just doesn't add up.

William Dear, a private detective who's been world renowned for his cases and previous books, felt the same way. In the book, he details not only how it could not be O.J. but how it was in fact, his son Jason Simpson who committed the crime. While I'm not entirely sure that's true a lot of his theory adds up, and explains a lot of O.J's activities and evidence against him, as well as the evidence that doesn't fit on him. That O.J. was at the crime scene but after the fact, as if someone called him about what they did - and he showed up to see, the evidence actually speaks for itself that he was there afterwards but not the one to commit the murders.

It's written like a detective novel over the course of a decade, spanning from dealings with the LAPD, the district attorneys, OJ himself, and Jason Simpson. It's a fascinating read.

If you truly believe O.J. is guilty I'd just recommend reading the book and seeing if your opinion changes.

8.5/10

I read somewhere that his son had a rage disorder. I'm going to check this book out. Thanks for the review.

 

[Puck]

The Man Booker Prize 2017 being announced tomorrow Oct 17th. Looks like Lincoln in the Bardo by George Saunders is the bookie favorite to win. Here is the shortlist:

https://www.ft.com/content/ec074556...egmentId=6a5e2d52-5588-6beb-4796-78f39b44531e

 

[Puck]

The American short story writer George Saunders has won the Man Booker prize for his first full-length novel, Lincoln in the Bardo.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...n-author-george-saunders-lincoln-in-the-bardo

 

[GB]

Ali Smith has been short listed 4 times now without winning. I wonder if that's a record.

 

[Puck]

Smith probably would have won if the Booker prize had not been opened up recently beyond writers in the Commonwealth. She was the favorite after the American Saunders. UK media seems to be rattled a bit by the 2nd American win in as many years. (it doesn't bother me personally).

 

[kihei]

Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki and His Years of Pilgrimage, by Haruki Murakami

This is probably the best novel that I have read this year. It is about a man, now in his mid thirties, who is still trying to get over a traumatic occurrence that happened 16 years ago when all four of his closest friends, a tight knit group of soulmates, abandoned him without a word of explanation. He revisits each of these friends years later because he knows he still hasn't fully come to grips with their action. The novel reads like a good mystery, though one which provides its fair share of profound insights into the nature of loss, longing and human complexity. As usual with Murakami there are subtle surrealistic touches that blend into the reality of his characters. It seemingly (I don't read Japanese) is a beautiful translations that captures Murakami's delicately phrased ideas, ideas that seem almost transient but carry real weight. I found the novel to be a real page turner as I was totally engrossed in Tsukuru's fate.

 

[Ceremony]

Do people really care about literary awards?

Or to be more specific, do people value literary awards as integral to a writer's standing, ability or reputation?

 

[Keggatron]

O.J. Is Innocent and I Can Prove It - William Dear

Disclaimer: I've always felt O.J. Simpson did not do the murders everyone has vilified him for, I've read a lot and followed the case closely over the past 20 years. It just doesn't add up.

William Dear, a private detective who's been world renowned for his cases and previous books, felt the same way. In the book, he details not only how it could not be O.J. but how it was in fact, his son Jason Simpson who committed the crime. While I'm not entirely sure that's true a lot of his theory adds up, and explains a lot of O.J's activities and evidence against him, as well as the evidence that doesn't fit on him. That O.J. was at the crime scene but after the fact, as if someone called him about what they did - and he showed up to see, the evidence actually speaks for itself that he was there afterwards but not the one to commit the murders.

It's written like a detective novel over the course of a decade, spanning from dealings with the LAPD, the district attorneys, OJ himself, and Jason Simpson. It's a fascinating read.

If you truly believe O.J. is guilty I'd just recommend reading the book and seeing if your opinion changes.

8.5/10

The author of this article shreds the novel's author and his "theory". I haven't read the book but the evidence was pretty heavily in favor of OJ being the only perpetrator, and from some of the things I've read, Dear's theory is all pretty much circumstantial (his theory about how OJ lost his glove and got blood at Bundy was that he nicked his hand on a chain link fence, not enough to cause a cut, then when he got to the scene he pulled the glove off opening up the cut on his hand and then left the glove there and bled all over the place). Reading that article Dear sounds delusional, he dressed as a doctor and wandered the halls at Cedar Sinai for a period of time in order to try and get Jason's medical records. He claims his stalking of Jason is for the kids own good. He's actually pretty scary.

Here's a discussion from another forum about the book as well.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Rabbit Run by John Updike (1960) - Tossed aside a third of the way through. An utter bore where lackluster observations are obscured by masturbatory writing. A prime example of how the '' perfect '' sentence - whatever that means - can take the life out of whatever story you're trying to tell. Skill means nothing if the sensibilities aren't there. Burn him at the stakes.

Edit: Reading other's people reviews on Goodreads, the opinion either seem to be: I hated it or it's a bitch to plow through at first but it keeps getting better and better until the end. Has anyone read it? If anyone has, should I keep going?

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Do people really care about literary awards?

Or to be more specific, do people value literary awards as integral to a writer's standing, ability or reputation?

This has never rung so true to me after having gotten gypped by Updike. I can't believe they chucked Pulitzer Prizes at this guy.

 

[kihei]

Do people really care about literary awards?

Or to be more specific, do people value literary awards as integral to a writer's standing, ability or reputation?

I value literary awards only in the sense that nominees may provide me with new books that I want to read. That's about it. I never remember who wins what anyway. The Nobel Prize for Literature, that one certainly impresses me (though I lost a sucker bet in Dublin once because though I was certain I could, I couldn't name correctly the four Irish winners of the Nobel Prize for Literature--so I guess even in that case I don;t pay as much attention as I think I do).

 

[alko]

Nobody reads "easy stuff"? Books, you have not to think much about. You already know the finale, but you read it anyway.
Something like Brad Thor. Yesterday finished Foreign Agent.

 

[Ceremony]

Some time ago a pretty girl in my work told me she liked Flannery O'Connor. I got a copy of her Complete Stories from my university's library and read near enough all of it, but as I was spending the summer avoiding writing my master's dissertation I never finished it. Despite this I bought the book anyway, and finished it today. Unlike previous collections of short fiction like Fitzgerald or Munro which I whizz through in about two hours this one is large and has lots of stories in it which I think contributed to my taking some time to finish it. But then when I read Blood Meridian recently I went through it in stages and found it easy to follow, which is at odds with my usual approach to books. I have to read them as quickly and in as few sittings as possible otherwise I forget everything that's happened. Not that any of this is relevant when the longest story is ~40 pages, mind you.

So, carrying the dedication of Winner of the Best of the National Book Awards Fiction and with testimony to its quality from luminaries such as Dean Koontz, V.S. Pritchett, the New York Times and the Times Literary Supplement we enter a comprehensive collection of all the short stories O'Connor wrote. Two collections and an assortment of unpublished titles are combined, and as I'm pretty sure I wrote when reviewing Munro I'm unable to consider short stories from any perspective besides comparing them to Fitzgerald's. So to go from the high life of the Jazz Age to the grim reality of the rural south, it's quite the jump. Yet throughout nearly all of these stories there is the same unerring humanity, a certainty that what you're reading, however surreal, is genuine, sincere and accurately reflective of the society which inspired them.

Surreal maybe isn't the right word. There's a lot of stories where through some contrived series of events a person who believes themselves to be of a high moral or social standing is challenged somehow. They're undermined throughout to the audience but never in a condescending way, then something happens and most of the time it's the reader left trying to make sense of the events. There's usually a conflict between, I don't want to call them ignorant, but someone firmly entrenched in the southern location and the prevailing way of thinking and an outsider. Often the outsider is someone either educated or apparently more enlightened, often a relative who's been away and come home to be appalled by the conditions in which they grew up. Sometimes one side has their world altered, sometimes the other, sometimes both.

Even in stories where this payoff comes within the last paragraph (such as A Good Man is Hard to Find or The Comforts of Home, two titles which even suggest the clash between values present) there's a consistent ability shown by O'Connor to draw you in to what you read, as if the descriptions of the people and their lives is as stupefying to you as it is to them. Twenty-odd pages of something regular before a twist at the end which comes and goes so quickly you barely realise it was there at all. And I think that's supposed to be the point. Any society which has a certainty in its righteousness, religious or otherwise, is never going to quickly adapt to and consider that any outside perspective is worth considering, and the people depicted are so convincing that this same thing happens to you. This is done to great effect in multiple stories and never gets boring or repetitive.

As you might expect from something set in America in the mid 1900s the issue of race is often at the forefront of the stories. Certainly it's not every day I read a sentence where someone ponders what they would do if Jesus told them they could be reborn as a Racial Slur or as white-trash. Although the majority of the black people featured are the classic, naive, slow, lazy farm workers they, much like the characters central to the stories - are at once genuine yet not-exploited, explored but not mocked. I'll always quite happily make excuses for depictions of outdated social conventions belonging to a certain time as being, well, that, but there's nothing especially unsettling about the way race is handled throughout these stories.

This brings me to what I really wanted to talk about instead of trying to praise these stories through technical details. While I admire Fitzgerald's short and long fiction so much for retaining a consistent, believable and sympathetic representation of humanity regardless of their surroundings which remains true a century later I admire, or appreciate, O'Connor for much the same reason. It's horrifying to read these stories and characters from a world which seems so old and which seems like something belonging to a different civilisation but which patently still dominates so much of western culture today. The ignorance, the unwillingness to deviate from a single viewpoint regardless of the destruction on an individual and wider level. It's never-ending. Every story is distinctly of its time yet feels as if it could have been written last week. I'm not sure if this says more about the stories or about the world as it is today.

If I went into detail about each story and how they do this I'd be here forever but they're all inherently readable and all worth reading. Even the earlier ones that maybe aren't as fully realised as the others are still interesting. The one way I'd try to sum them up if I had to is that while each story is largely set in the same place and focused on similar themes/characters they all feel distinct from one another. Certainly when you read them all together like this you can see the development in O'Connor's ability as a writer, which is a nice touch. I'd like to say the same can be said for Faber & Faber's printing abilities but towards the end I started noticing mis-prints. Letters missing from words. Embarrassing. But definitely worth persisting through.

Incidentally, the girl left last week and I'm not taking it well and probably won't for a number of years.

 

[Brownbeard]

The last book I read was Juggalo by Steve Miller.

It's a look into the world of the Insane Clown Posse and its fans (Juggalos) who were labelled as a gang (like the Crips and Bloods) in a 2011 FBI report. That means that anyone who's arrested and happens to be wearing their clothing or happens to have a tattoo can receive a stiffer punishment because they're considered to be gang members. As such, small misdemeanours can lead to greater jail time.

The book is about how ludicrous that is, and about how the band sued the FBI and won its appeal.

As someone who used to listen to them and has friends who do, I found it interesting. I know for a fact that the fanbase is not a gang, and anyone with common sense does. Most of the FBI's information is exaggerated, made up and/or outlandish.

Yes, there are some idiots in the group who've done bad things and stupid things to boot. Some are criminals. But this is the way it is with general society and with any group. There are always bad apples. Just because 3% of a group commits crimes and perhaps calls themselves Juggalos doesn't mean the entire fanbase is a gang that is equatable to the Crips and Bloods. Or anything close. Nor does the band -- which preaches family, love and inclusiveness through its music, while the violent lyrics are just a hook and are like a musical horror movie -- preach violence. They do pro bono charity concerts and food drives.

Overall, the book was very interesting. It wasn't the best written thing I've ever read, though, and wasn't laid out as well as it could've been.

 

[davemess]

Working my way through the Roy Grace series by Peter James.

Its somewhat your standard crime thriller series but done pretty well imo. Books are based in Brighton and its always nice to read something like this that isn't set in the US.

 

[jacobhockey13]

Javier Marías's Tomorrow in the Battle Think on Me is a book that tries to seduce the reader. It's fair to say that it had me with the opening sentence; the prose obviously clever and deceptively funny. The title comes from a line in Shakespeare's Richard III, but no need to worry–Marías isn't a snob, and his repeated motifs of Shakespearian lines hold meaning regardless of whether one has, or hasn't (like me) seen that play. The story unfolds and we learn more about a mysterious narrator, who was unfortunate enough to find himself with a dead woman whom he barely knew in his arms at the beginning of the story.

Oh, and did I mention that the woman was half-naked, and that before her death, the narrator and women were planning on consummating their liaison. The husband is away, and the child is asleep. Now it's up to the narrator to decide what to do.

 

[Oscar Acosta]

The author of this article shreds the novel's author and his "theory". I haven't read the book but the evidence was pretty heavily in favor of OJ being the only perpetrator, and from some of the things I've read, Dear's theory is all pretty much circumstantial (his theory about how OJ lost his glove and got blood at Bundy was that he nicked his hand on a chain link fence, not enough to cause a cut, then when he got to the scene he pulled the glove off opening up the cut on his hand and then left the glove there and bled all over the place). Reading that article Dear sounds delusional, he dressed as a doctor and wandered the halls at Cedar Sinai for a period of time in order to try and get Jason's medical records. He claims his stalking of Jason is for the kids own good. He's actually pretty scary.

Here's a discussion from another forum about the book as well.

Absolutely, at times reading the book I thought he was crossing a lot of lines and acting like a creep. Do I really believe it was Jason Simpson like Dear did with his vendetta? Not as much. But the book and investigation certainly raises a lot of questions as to who did it, and how in equal likelihood - it wasn't O.J.

But I get that this is an unpopular opinion, and to not hijack the thread into a discussion of a two decade old cold case, I'll just say if anyone is interested it raises a lot of questions without coming across as a crazy conspiracy theory.

 

[Oscar Acosta]

Do people really care about literary awards?

Or to be more specific, do people value literary awards as integral to a writer's standing, ability or reputation?

Couldn't care less really. It might make me consider buying a book I had never heard of if it's a Pulitzer winner - like I did with "All the Light We Cannot See", or actually I think I picked it up off the recommendation of someone in this very thread. It was a valiant novel, and I enjoyed it. I don't know what the criteria is for a Pulitzer but seemed fairly low if this was the book of the year. Don't get me wrong, it's really good and suspenseful but 20 years from now I can't imagine it's any different than most novels on the shelf of Value Village.

Or Cormac McCarthy winning for the Road. Another excellent book, really great, really bleak. But he won it for that one of all the books he's written? Not Blood Meridian or Sutree? Just seems odd.

So I value literary awards about the same way I value an Oscar. "Yeah you guys might think a black and white silent film throwback the Artist is the best movie of the year, but I'll take Ant Man"

 

[Oscar Acosta]

The Dark Knight Returns - Frank Miller

Not sure at all that this belongs in our thread of literature, but I'm making the judgment call that it is.

A couple years ago you wouldn't catch me dead reading a comic book, or let alone making this kind of post. But then I had a son who instantly loved superheroes that I didn't growing up, and it turned out to be far more interesting than I had realized. Long story short, eventually went and bought this book.

It's exceptional. Simply put.

Story of Batman years after he's the Batman we all kind of knew. He's older and he tried his best, but certain events come to be that he needs to put the suit on again in his late 50s. Gotham never ended up safe, the Joker returns, and outside of that, the US is in a nuclear crisis that only Superman can solve. As they battle wills, and eventually each other.

9/10

 

[rt]

I use the big awards for shopping reasons. I'm really struggling with how to locate good books I want to read.

Here's the last handful I've read:

The Buried Giant - Kazuo Ishiguro
A Short History of Nearly Everything - Bill Bryson
The Tea Girl of Hummingbird Lane - Lisa See
Blood Meridian - Cormac McCarthy
A Little Life - Hanya Yanagihara
Beneath a Scarlet Sky - Mark Sullivan
The Orphan Master's Son - Adam Johnson
Island Beneath t he Sea - Isabelle Allende
The Sympathizer - Viet Thanh Nguyen
The Son - Philipp Meyer
The Handmaid's Tale - Margaret Atwood
The Goldfinch - Donna Tartt
The Nightingale - Kristin Hannah
A Tree Grows in Brooklyn - Betty Smith
The Moor's Account - Laila Lalami
Brother Fish - Bryce Courtenay
All the Light We Cannot See - Anthony Doerr
Under the Volcano - Malcolm Lowry
Slaughterhouse-Five - Kurt Vonnegut
A Farewell to Arms - Ernest Hemingway

Most of them were pretty good. Some I enjoyed much more than others. I really liked The Goldfinch and The Son a whole lot. Maybe more than many of the other from the list. I'm considering reading The Patriots next, but I'm really not sure what to purchase. Maybe a Tale of Two Cities. Maybe War and Peace. I really have such a hard time selecting a book to read. I feeling like I'm just reaching out randomly to whatever catching my eye that people consider "good".

Can anyone take a look at that list and think of some books I might enjoy? I like fiction. I prefer longer books. I like a lot of detail. I like emotive narratives. I enjoy reading about people, places, and/or times that are different from my own.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

I use the big awards for shopping reasons. I'm really struggling with how to locate good books I want to read.

Here's the last handful I've read:

The Buried Giant - Kazuo Ishiguro
A Short History of Nearly Everything - Bill Bryson
The Tea Girl of Hummingbird Lane - Lisa See
Blood Meridian - Cormac McCarthy
A Little Life - Hanya Yanagihara
Beneath a Scarlet Sky - Mark Sullivan
The Orphan Master's Son - Adam Johnson
Island Beneath t he Sea - Isabelle Allende
The Sympathizer - Viet Thanh Nguyen
The Son - Philipp Meyer
The Handmaid's Tale - Margaret Atwood
The Goldfinch - Donna Tartt
The Nightingale - Kristin Hannah
A Tree Grows in Brooklyn - Betty Smith
The Moor's Account - Laila Lalami
Brother Fish - Bryce Courtenay
All the Light We Cannot See - Anthony Doerr
Under the Volcano - Malcolm Lowry
Slaughterhouse-Five - Kurt Vonnegut
A Farewell to Arms - Ernest Hemingway

Most of them were pretty good. Some I enjoyed much more than others. I really liked The Goldfinch and The Son a whole lot. Maybe more than many of the other from the list. I'm considering reading The Patriots next, but I'm really not sure what to purchase. Maybe a Tale of Two Cities. Maybe War and Peace. I really have such a hard time selecting a book to read. I feeling like I'm just reaching out randomly to whatever catching my eye that people consider "good".

Can anyone take a look at that list and think of some books I might enjoy? I like fiction. I prefer longer books. I like a lot of detail. I like emotive narratives. I enjoy reading about people, places, and/or times that are different from my own.

If you enjoyed Slaughter-House Five, I strongly recommend Breakfast of Champions by Kurt Vonnegut. A phenomenal - and hilarious - work. The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway is also a must if you enjoyed A Farewell to Arms.

 

[jacobhockey13]

I use the big awards for shopping reasons. I'm really struggling with how to locate good books I want to read.

Here's the last handful I've read:

The Buried Giant - Kazuo Ishiguro
A Short History of Nearly Everything - Bill Bryson
The Tea Girl of Hummingbird Lane - Lisa See
Blood Meridian - Cormac McCarthy
A Little Life - Hanya Yanagihara
Beneath a Scarlet Sky - Mark Sullivan
The Orphan Master's Son - Adam Johnson
Island Beneath t he Sea - Isabelle Allende
The Sympathizer - Viet Thanh Nguyen
The Son - Philipp Meyer
The Handmaid's Tale - Margaret Atwood
The Goldfinch - Donna Tartt
The Nightingale - Kristin Hannah
A Tree Grows in Brooklyn - Betty Smith
The Moor's Account - Laila Lalami
Brother Fish - Bryce Courtenay
All the Light We Cannot See - Anthony Doerr
Under the Volcano - Malcolm Lowry
Slaughterhouse-Five - Kurt Vonnegut
A Farewell to Arms - Ernest Hemingway

Most of them were pretty good. Some I enjoyed much more than others. I really liked The Goldfinch and The Son a whole lot. Maybe more than many of the other from the list. I'm considering reading The Patriots next, but I'm really not sure what to purchase. Maybe a Tale of Two Cities. Maybe War and Peace. I really have such a hard time selecting a book to read. I feeling like I'm just reaching out randomly to whatever catching my eye that people consider "good".

Can anyone take a look at that list and think of some books I might enjoy? I like fiction. I prefer longer books. I like a lot of detail. I like emotive narratives. I enjoy reading about people, places, and/or times that are different from my own.

Hmmm. First book that came to mind was In The Light of What We Know by Zia Haider Rahman. It fits most of your tastes. That, or maybe My Brilliant Friend by Elena Ferrante would be a better recommendation for you. It's the first in a series of four. It's a breath of fresh air in so many ways.

I loved both, perhaps read the start of both on Itunes/Amazon and then buy/borrow from the library whichever you prefer.