Reading anything?

[AndyC]

Got in the mood for something Lovecraftian, so I picked up Cthulhu 2000. It's an anthology of Lovecraft-inspired stories, published around 1995. Pretty good so far.

About halfway through this book, and having mixed feelings about it. The stories are good, some more so than others, but most seem to suffer from the same problem. The authors use the mythology of Lovecraft, but they can't resist giving blatant nods to the stories that inspired them. It's fine to refer to the events and characters of Lovecraft's stories, or even create a fictionalized equivalent of Lovecraft if it serves the plot, but it gets kind of lame if Lovecraft and his stories actually exist exactly as they do in the real world. For me, it just wrecks a story to have a character praise the works of Lovecraft and his contemporaries for no reason other than fanboy self-indulgence on the part of the author. In one case, an actual copy of At the Mountains of Madness provides clues for the protagonist, when the story would have worked better without it.

It's all the more annoying, because the stories are generally good, and manage to evoke a Lovecraftian mood in a variety of settings. That mood suffers every time I get jerked back to reality by a direct reference to Lovecraft. Especially so when the story is treating Lovecraft's fiction as real events at the same time as it's referring to Lovecraft's fiction as works of literature.

[indianasmith]

Just finished Edmund Morris' last installment of his biograhical series on Theodore Roosevelt, entitled COLONEL ROOSEVELT.  He chronicles the last decade of TR's life, from his exiting the White House to go on an African safari, his grand tour of Europe, representing the U.S. at the funeral of Edward VII, and his doomed run for the Presidency in 1912.  Then it covers his disastrous expedition to the Amazon, in which he developed a severe infection in his wounded leg that nearly killed him, his return to the USA.  The last section of the book covers his reaction to World War I and his frantic desire to fight in that conflict.  When he was not allowed to form his long-dreamed of volunteer division and go to the front himself, he sent all four of his sons off to fight.  Three were wounded, two severely, and his youngest son Quentin was shot down flying a Nieuport fighter plane over the Western front.  This loss nearly killed the former President, but he hung on long enough to help the Republicans win huge majorities in the fall of 1918 mid-term election, and to see his name rise to the top of the list for the 1920 Presidential contest.  But, in January 1918, his great heart gave out at last, and the old lion left his cubs desolate.

A magnificent book about a magnificent man.  I have read many books on America's presidents, and this one is near the top of the list.  Roosevelt packed more living into the last decade of his life than most men do in a lifetime.

[BoyScoutKevin]

Ye-es.

Studs Terkel's "Working"
in graphic format, w/ Henry Pelker as adapter and Paul Buhle as editor.

Not a balanced account of working, as he talks to alot of union people, but--apparently--no one from management in an unionized company. And while not every union is good, the stories do show what a good union can do for its members

Nor do the stories represent that profession, but solely the person telling the story.

But . . . Studs has an ear, eye, and nose for an interesting story, which most of these are. Even though the original book was--apparently--written some 37 years ago.

Not all the stories are told by people unknown. Actor Rip Torn tells his story, and if you are a denizen of the sports world, one should recognize the names of baseball player Steve Hamilton and jockey Eddie Arroyo.

Each story is done by a different artist, so you get different layouts and fonts. Some of which are better than others.

Next time: Miscellaneous

[InformationGeek]

I recommend this story to everyone and sole reason that Richard Donner helped wrote.  It's the closest we'll ever get to a Superman 3 by him.

[The Burgomaster]

ANIMAL FARM

[indianasmith]

FELTON AND FOWLER'S BEST, WORST, AND MOST UNUSUAL.
If you love trivia, bizarre facts, and having a large volume of useless but utterly fun information to flip through during boring meetings, flights, waiting in the doctor's office, or marathon sessions on the porcelain throne, this book is awesome.  A bit dated - the hardback edition is simply a combination of the two paperbacks, one written in 1975 and one in 1976 - but in a wide variety of categories, both human, animal, and natural, the authors have compiled a list of the Best, the Worst, and the Most Unusual.  It is hard to turn a single page without finding a conversational gem.

[bob]

I've been reading The Catcher and the Rye for the last 2 weeks and enjoying every second of it.

[The Burgomaster]

I've been reading The Catcher and the Rye for the last 2 weeks and enjoying every second of it.

One of the best books I ever read.  I think I finished it in 2 days.  I need to read it again . . . it's been almost 30 years!

[Mofo Rising]

I recently read Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. (SPOILERS follow.)

I loved the book. I got so swept up I read most of the book in one marathon session until I got so tired I had to go to sleep. I then woke up and finished the book.

At the same time, it was a troubling and deeply untrustworthy book. In looking up discussion on the book (and if there's one thing the internet is sorely lacking, it's decent discussions on literature), it shocked me how many people take Humbert Humbert's narration at face value. One of the not-so-hidden aspects of Lolita is Humbert's craven and self-serving view of life. If you trust his side of the story, he's a desperate romantic who just happens to have a penchant for young girls. You may even excuse his pedophilia as a broad metaphor about Europe and America.

Hogwash, of course. Humbert is a truly detestable human being, and only at several crucial points in the narrative does he let slip the true damage he has done. I watched the Kubrick film, and it's a pretty good movie, but it also lets Humbert present his side of the story.

However, as a work of literature, Lolita is a masterpiece. In Humbert, Nabokov created a wordsmith nonpareil. The embedding of Quilty into the narrative was as good a mystery (with an obvious answer) as any potboiler.

I own the annotated version, but since this was the first time I read the book, I didn't read them. I plan on going back, but I want to put some distance between me and the book first.

[BoyScoutKevin]

Ye-es.

Several miscellaneous and short graphic novels.

"Kickass"
In graphic format. One of the few graphic novels I actually found unreadable. Once I started it.

The prequel to Jim Henson's "The Dark Crystal" and the sequel to Jim Henson's "Labyrinth." As "The Dark Crystal" had fewer characters that looked alike, had fewer characters in double roles, and no two worlds with the characters traveling back and forth between them, I found it alot more readable than "Labyrinth."

Joss Whedon's "Buffy, the Vampire Slayer." Some people need to be on a short leash and a tight budget. The TV show lasted seven seasons, but Whedon had an idea for an 8th season, which he made into a graphic novel, and if he had gotten the money to do it, it would have just sucked (IMHO.)

"The Unwritten" subtitled "Tommy Taylor and the Bogus Identity" w/ words and art by Miles Carey and Porter Gross.

There are three ways to do a fantasy novel. One world that is all fantasy such as Tolkien's Middle Earth. Two worlds: one reality based and one fantasy based, but separate from each other, such as Carroll's Wonderland or Lewis' Narnia. One world where reality and fantasy are based together, such as Hamilton's Anita Blake series.

These are all great fantasy series. "The Unwritten" is none of these, as while it is readable, it is no where near being a great fantasy series.

Next time: "The Star Wars" omnibus.

[InformationGeek]

"Kickass"
In graphic format. One of the few graphic novels I actually found unreadable. Once I started it.

Best to stick with the movie adaption which is actually enjoyable and isn't as bad.

Anyways, I just finished reading Fables: Deluxe Edition Vol. 1  DAMN!  That was awesome.  Probably one of the best comic series I ever read.  It's just awesome.  You got to read this!

[bob]

I've been reading The Catcher and the Rye for the last 2 weeks and enjoying every second of it.

One of the best books I ever read.  I think I finished it in 2 days.  I need to read it again . . . it's been almost 30 years!

Wow, that makes me feel kind of young as i'm not even 30.

[The Burgomaster]

I've been reading The Catcher and the Rye for the last 2 weeks and enjoying every second of it.

One of the best books I ever read.  I think I finished it in 2 days.  I need to read it again . . . it's been almost 30 years!

Wow, that makes me feel kind of young as i'm not even 30.

I did a book report on it in high school.  That's the last time I read it!

[The Gravekeeper]

Reading through Poe's works (including his non-horror short stories and poems; yes, he wrote for other genres!) and some key Lovecraft stuff.

[Rev. Powell]

I recently read Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. (SPOILERS follow.)

I loved the book. I got so swept up I read most of the book in one marathon session until I got so tired I had to go to sleep. I then woke up and finished the book.

At the same time, it was a troubling and deeply untrustworthy book. In looking up discussion on the book (and if there's one thing the internet is sorely lacking, it's decent discussions on literature), it shocked me how many people take Humbert Humbert's narration at face value. One of the not-so-hidden aspects of Lolita is Humbert's craven and self-serving view of life. If you trust his side of the story, he's a desperate romantic who just happens to have a penchant for young girls. You may even excuse his pedophilia as a broad metaphor about Europe and America.

Hogwash, of course. Humbert is a truly detestable human being, and only at several crucial points in the narrative does he let slip the true damage he has done. I watched the Kubrick film, and it's a pretty good movie, but it also lets Humbert present his side of the story.

However, as a work of literature, Lolita is a masterpiece. In Humbert, Nabokov created a wordsmith nonpareil. The embedding of Quilty into the narrative was as good a mystery (with an obvious answer) as any potboiler.

I own the annotated version, but since this was the first time I read the book, I didn't read them. I plan on going back, but I want to put some distance between me and the book first.

My favorite novel.  Personally I prefer to accept Humbert's assertion that he is redeemed. The story has less impact if you don't allow yourself to trust him a little, despite all the warnings not to.

Dying, dying, Lolita Haze,
Of hate and remorse, I'm dying.
And again my hairy fist I raise,
And again I hear you crying.