-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What are you reading? (December 2014)
- Thread starter Maklershed
- Start date
- Status
AngmarsKing701
Member
Awesome. Thanks! Hope you enjoy it!
nakedsushi
Member
My Salinger Year by Joanna Rakoff
Loved it! It's a late-coming-of-age memoir by a woman who ends up working her first job as an assistant at the literary agency that represents Salinger. Nothing really *happens* in the book, but it was one of those books where I was dreading the progress meter in my ebook ticking down because I didn't want the book to end. It's definitely a love letter to Salinger and made me want to re-read Catcher & his other books now.
What do you think of it so far?
BlueDogAnchorite
Member
My Salinger Year by Joanna Rakoff
Loved it! It's a late-coming-of-age memoir by a woman who ends up working her first job as an assistant at the literary agency that represents Salinger. Nothing really *happens* in the book, but it was one of those books where I was dreading the progress meter in my ebook ticking down because I didn't want the book to end. It's definitely a love letter to Salinger and made me want to re-read Catcher & his other books now.
I have to check this out now. I am a huge fan of Salinger's work. Nine Stories is my favorite out of the four books I read from him.
I'm just an hour in. The world / setting definitely sounds pleasing. No clue about the actual story so far. Also, some weird talents ('can read the stock market' lol). The reader is amazing tho.
RepairmanJack
Member
I thought Brilliance ended up being pretty decent, but so far I've failed a couple times trying to get into the second book. It just starts out too cheesy for me.
Christoff Yurievich
Member
I'm about 25% of the way through The Lies of Locke Lamora and I'm just not sure what the book wants to be. It's like Matchstick Men and Game of Thrones had a lovechild. The author's voice grates me a bit...it's a little too brusque and pointed at times and he is absolutely in love with italics. There are parts of his sentences that really don't need italics and it gets them anyway.
The Matchstick part is what is interesting to me, not so much the setting. Which reminds me: the setting feels so unnaturaly confusing, like there are lands and islands and castes and social strata and everything is just so large and it's only one book. I realize there is a series, but it's a lot to take in for one book, and only 25% of one at that.
The Matchstick part is what is interesting to me, not so much the setting. Which reminds me: the setting feels so unnaturaly confusing, like there are lands and islands and castes and social strata and everything is just so large and it's only one book. I realize there is a series, but it's a lot to take in for one book, and only 25% of one at that.
That's one of those books that I think I liked as much because the voice work was so good as the actual content. Audiobooks are the best! (Or worst, in the case of Bleeding Edge!)
'Unbroken' was among the books I bought my Dad for Christmas. I'll definitely have to read it myself as well soon, certainly before watching the movie.
Still deciding what to read next, trying ro avoid something heartbreaking again since Where Men Win Glory was heart breaking enough.
Still deciding what to read next, trying ro avoid something heartbreaking again since Where Men Win Glory was heart breaking enough.
Currently reading:
Slaughterhouse 5 - Kurt Vonnegut
Recommended by a colleague I have no idea what to expect, except that it takes place during WW2
Quicksilver - Neal Stephenson
Continuing on from Cryptonomicon I'm reading its spiritual successor. I already prefer the shorter chapters from Cryptonomicon, rather than the sub books that break up the narration. I'm definitely going to keep going though.
Slaughterhouse 5 - Kurt Vonnegut
Recommended by a colleague I have no idea what to expect, except that it takes place during WW2
Quicksilver - Neal Stephenson
Continuing on from Cryptonomicon I'm reading its spiritual successor. I already prefer the shorter chapters from Cryptonomicon, rather than the sub books that break up the narration. I'm definitely going to keep going though.
I have just finished The Red Pony. What an exquisite little book. If you want endearing commentary on birth, death, and life's various disappointments, as seen through the eyes of boy on a farm, do read Steinbeck's short novel. It is a novel in four parts really, as the stories were published first at seperate intervals, before being brought together in this novel.
Putting it on the to-read list, sounds like something I'd like.
I think Where Men Win Glory, which despite me giving it 4/5, may end up on my favourites of the year, if only for the factor that it's something that will always stick with me, as a big Football fan, and Pat Tillman is such a prominent name now with his foundation being so entwined with the NFL.
Will read this next for something lighter I hope, and perhaps something to reflect on my own life.
Now reading...
Walden on Wheels: On the Open Road from Debt to Freedom by Ken Ilgunas
macfoshizzle
Member
Currently reading this now..
I have to say this book is a lot more interesting than the first. I don't know if it's just me but just didn't find the first book too interesting. Maybe I just had really high expectation from all the rave reviews, but to me it was just mostly reading about Kvothe and his daily life. I just don't know what to make of it.
I have to say this book is a lot more interesting than the first. I don't know if it's just me but just didn't find the first book too interesting. Maybe I just had really high expectation from all the rave reviews, but to me it was just mostly reading about Kvothe and his daily life. I just don't know what to make of it.
I'm about 2/3 of the way through Brandon Sanderson's Words of Radiance and finding it to be a bit of a slog. When Sanderson is good, he's really good - so I suspect i'll keep going and try to finish.
I understand why people like it as is, but I suspect that I would have enjoyed this book much more if he had worked with a good editor to keep the overall plot, but condense the 1000+ pages down to about 500.
I understand why people like it as is, but I suspect that I would have enjoyed this book much more if he had worked with a good editor to keep the overall plot, but condense the 1000+ pages down to about 500.
Maklershed, Don't read this book. It is terrible.
American Colossus was a supreme disappointment. The premise seemed fascinating, but the book was ruined for me by an absolute gross error and misrepresentation of history in the first 10 minutes. For example, Brands states that:
“Andrew Jackson embodied the democratic ethos, by both his humble origins and his reverence for the people as the wellspring of political legitimacy. Jackson waged political war on the pet projects of the big capitalists of his day, smashing the Bank of the United States, vetoing federal spending on roads and canals, and beating down tariff rates”
I don’t even know where to begin with that. This makes it sound like he was the champion of the little man against aristocracy and big business, which is simply ridiculous. How can he embody the democratic ethos when he owned slaves, murdered native americans for their land, and believed in White Supremacy? Moreover, Jackson’s party was the party of the slave-owner aristocracy and championed their interests of expansion, weak federal government, low tariffs and no bank. He certainly appealed to the common man, but he appealed to a certain type of common man. These were usually southern or western small planters who were cut off from the market and did not need things like canals, roads, and schools, or have any hope of seeing those built where they live. They were also favored expansion, expulsion of native Americans, enslavement of blacks, and the supremacy of the White man. They voted for Jackson since that is what his party also stood for.
The notion that the common man hated canals, roads, railroads and banks is also ridiculous. Those things were actually popular and many politicians said they wanted internal improvements. The issue came from who would build it, the state or the federal government. The Whigs felt that the federal government should be the one to build these improvements, but democrats rejected it. Even when the Whigs brought a compromise bill that gave funding to the states to build internal improvements themselves, this was rejected by the democrats. Why? Well, my guess is that democrats wanted to claim they were for something popular, but were actually against it, and rejected it on ‘principle’. They claimed state’s rights, but the real reason was that democrats did not want the federal government strengthened because they feared that a powerful federal government could threaten slavery. None of the powerful democratic politicians cared about canals, roads, or schools anyways since none of that benefited them anyways and cost them taxes, and they could appeal to the certain type of common man on other issues, like expansionism, white supremacy, and low taxes and involvement.
A lot of common people actually favored canals and roads because those were the ways that they actually got their farm goods to market. The bank was vitally important because farmers and people moving west needed credit to actually start farms and businesses The Bank of the United States closing actually hurt the little guy tremendously because it caused a huge recession several years later because the federal government no longer had control over their own currency. Luckily, farmers and small businesses were still able to get credit because a whole host of banks started up in every state to fill that credit need, but that created a whole host of other problems with some having shoddy standards, multiple bank notes, no central currency, etc. Obviously, they didnt get much credit during the recession
As for the tariff, that actually did help workers in the manufacturing cities since it kept them in business. The tariff certainly hurt slave owners, and that is why they opposed it. It might have also hurt wheat farmers and the like, but I am not totally sure on that. Maybe that wasnt tariffed since cotton had a lot more to do with industrialization than wheat.
I was so floored by that paragraph that I had to check the reviews to see if it got any better. I mean, I am fine with an occasional error, especially if it really doesnt relate to the book’s topic, but that paragraph totally does, and it isnt a simple error. It is a complete misunderstanding and simplification of history.
Well, I found this
http://www.sfgate.com/books/article/American-Colossus-by-H-W-Brands-3247928.php
He also had similar problems as me, and gives this doozy of an example
“This book's treatment of Reconstruction, such as it is, bewilders me. The state governments in the South, established through Congress' Reconstruction laws, were an unprecedented experiment in nonracial democracy, supported by African American voters and officeholders. They were overthrown in a wave of organized bloodshed in the mid-1870s, costing thousands of lives. Brands blandly writes that these governments fell because they "gained a reputation for corruption." The reputation was created by white-supremacist politicians as a cover in the North for a savage campaign that Brands essentially ignores.”
So, not only do you have a complete misunderstanding of the 1830s, but also of reconstruction? Jesus... that is when I said no more to this book and will try to get my refund from audible. I think this is the first history book that I have dropped after the first 10 minutes.
Like the reviewer states, it seems like Brands has been writing too many books, since that is probably the kindest explanation for his lazy scholarship. I really don’t understand how I have a better grasp of the democrat/whig/Jackson meaning as a casual reader of history when he wrote a freakin book on Jackson and is a professor at Austin. This really makes me worried about the errors in his FDR book that I read...
American Colossus was a supreme disappointment. The premise seemed fascinating, but the book was ruined for me by an absolute gross error and misrepresentation of history in the first 10 minutes. For example, Brands states that:
“Andrew Jackson embodied the democratic ethos, by both his humble origins and his reverence for the people as the wellspring of political legitimacy. Jackson waged political war on the pet projects of the big capitalists of his day, smashing the Bank of the United States, vetoing federal spending on roads and canals, and beating down tariff rates”
I don’t even know where to begin with that. This makes it sound like he was the champion of the little man against aristocracy and big business, which is simply ridiculous. How can he embody the democratic ethos when he owned slaves, murdered native americans for their land, and believed in White Supremacy? Moreover, Jackson’s party was the party of the slave-owner aristocracy and championed their interests of expansion, weak federal government, low tariffs and no bank. He certainly appealed to the common man, but he appealed to a certain type of common man. These were usually southern or western small planters who were cut off from the market and did not need things like canals, roads, and schools, or have any hope of seeing those built where they live. They were also favored expansion, expulsion of native Americans, enslavement of blacks, and the supremacy of the White man. They voted for Jackson since that is what his party also stood for.
The notion that the common man hated canals, roads, railroads and banks is also ridiculous. Those things were actually popular and many politicians said they wanted internal improvements. The issue came from who would build it, the state or the federal government. The Whigs felt that the federal government should be the one to build these improvements, but democrats rejected it. Even when the Whigs brought a compromise bill that gave funding to the states to build internal improvements themselves, this was rejected by the democrats. Why? Well, my guess is that democrats wanted to claim they were for something popular, but were actually against it, and rejected it on ‘principle’. They claimed state’s rights, but the real reason was that democrats did not want the federal government strengthened because they feared that a powerful federal government could threaten slavery. None of the powerful democratic politicians cared about canals, roads, or schools anyways since none of that benefited them anyways and cost them taxes, and they could appeal to the certain type of common man on other issues, like expansionism, white supremacy, and low taxes and involvement.
A lot of common people actually favored canals and roads because those were the ways that they actually got their farm goods to market. The bank was vitally important because farmers and people moving west needed credit to actually start farms and businesses The Bank of the United States closing actually hurt the little guy tremendously because it caused a huge recession several years later because the federal government no longer had control over their own currency. Luckily, farmers and small businesses were still able to get credit because a whole host of banks started up in every state to fill that credit need, but that created a whole host of other problems with some having shoddy standards, multiple bank notes, no central currency, etc. Obviously, they didnt get much credit during the recession
As for the tariff, that actually did help workers in the manufacturing cities since it kept them in business. The tariff certainly hurt slave owners, and that is why they opposed it. It might have also hurt wheat farmers and the like, but I am not totally sure on that. Maybe that wasnt tariffed since cotton had a lot more to do with industrialization than wheat.
I was so floored by that paragraph that I had to check the reviews to see if it got any better. I mean, I am fine with an occasional error, especially if it really doesnt relate to the book’s topic, but that paragraph totally does, and it isnt a simple error. It is a complete misunderstanding and simplification of history.
Well, I found this
http://www.sfgate.com/books/article/American-Colossus-by-H-W-Brands-3247928.php
He also had similar problems as me, and gives this doozy of an example
“This book's treatment of Reconstruction, such as it is, bewilders me. The state governments in the South, established through Congress' Reconstruction laws, were an unprecedented experiment in nonracial democracy, supported by African American voters and officeholders. They were overthrown in a wave of organized bloodshed in the mid-1870s, costing thousands of lives. Brands blandly writes that these governments fell because they "gained a reputation for corruption." The reputation was created by white-supremacist politicians as a cover in the North for a savage campaign that Brands essentially ignores.”
So, not only do you have a complete misunderstanding of the 1830s, but also of reconstruction? Jesus... that is when I said no more to this book and will try to get my refund from audible. I think this is the first history book that I have dropped after the first 10 minutes.
Like the reviewer states, it seems like Brands has been writing too many books, since that is probably the kindest explanation for his lazy scholarship. I really don’t understand how I have a better grasp of the democrat/whig/Jackson meaning as a casual reader of history when he wrote a freakin book on Jackson and is a professor at Austin. This really makes me worried about the errors in his FDR book that I read...
This was a good, but not great book mostly because of style and engagement. Still, it is a hugely important topic that everyone needs to know the actual history of, and not Lost Cause propaganda that has permeated our thinking of reconstruction. Though I think that is getting better in the last 10 or so years.
Luckily audible accepted my American Colossus return and I got this book
Which I will read after I finish this. But man, what is the deal with the huge gap between reconstruction and the Great Depression? Anyone have any audible recommendations for that period in US history?
Which I know will be good since his biographies on Washington and Rockefeller are fantastic.
Conkersbadfurday
Member
Finished Mockingjay. It feels so good to just loathe something sometimes. Not sure what audiobook I'll grab next to keep me company at work. I guess Steven King has a new one out. Maybe I'll go that route.
Maklershed
Member
Aww bummer. It looked promising. Thank you for the review.
If you want a biography on one of the famous robber barons of the period, I would strongly recommend Titan by Ron Chernow. It is simply fantastic and does a decent job of discussing the historical period as well.
The guy who wrote that review I linked did a biography on Vanderbilt than won a pulitzer, so I imagine that has to be pretty good as well. James McPherson spent a whole chapter of This MIghty Scourge discussing his book on Jesse James, which is very high praise. I'm tempted to check that out as well, but it kinda feels that I already read it
Most of the ones with the best world building are longer running series. Discworld actually has a fleshed out work and characters that you can imagine as real people, though the first two books bare almost no resemblance to what comes after and the first few beyond that are a little shaky. Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrel has a wonderful world and oozes atmosphere but large parts of the world building are in the form of footnotes, some of which can occupy whole pages. It's also set in the Napoleonic era which disqualifies it anyway. The Name of the Wind is good but it currently has what I call the Robert Jordan problem, or the G.R.R. Martin problem, that it's not even half finished and the author seems to be taking their sweet time. Three Parts Dead may be worth looking into, though it has large elements of... Hmm Steampunks not quite the right word, Magitech possibly. Perdido Street Stationis the same and tends to be hugely divisive on top of it.
I'm also assuming you've read Tolkien, his world building is second to none but dose have the problem where he'll spend five pages describing the leaves on the trees well forgetting to mention if elves have pointed ears or not.
macfoshizzle
Member
i can recommend this as a great and fascinating read on history..
Finished this last night, not to sure how I feel about the book, It was OK but never drew me in like a really good book, in my spare time I was not going through the story in my head trying to work out what was going to happen next.
I was going to move onto the second book but like a few other series I have read the 2nd book isn't available on Kindle which really pisses me off, if your not going to release the entire series digitally then don't bother at all. As I thought the book was quite average I don't think I will make the effort to get a hard copy.
hobblygobbly
Member
RIP Iain M. Banks
RepairmanJack
Member
Started The Martian, I only got about 6 chapters in but so far I'm hooked. I'm kind of worried if it continues being mostly explanation of the 'science' of it all. It has me hooked for now, but I feel it could get boring after a little while. It just seems tedious to go through it all and have him talk about how he's fucked every couple chapters if you know it continues. I know that's the same with most first person perspective, but it seems like it would be worse in this style if the majority of the novel is just going through his thinking the science and the risks out. It's just a whole lot of exposition in service of stuff that most likely won't happen, at least as planned.
sparky2112
Member
Best thing I can say is read it quickly. That way, the repeatedly dire situations don't feel like as much of a cudgel.
Right now I'm reading The Rum Diary by Hunter S. Thompson for the third Winter in a row.
It's absolutely incredible.
It's without a doubt my favorite book ever (and like most of you guys, there are a lot of books I really love). It's just pure joy to read and I feel like I'm enjoying it somehow even more than the first and second times I read it.
Reading it, I get a feeling almost like nostalgia but not quite. It's just a pleasant sense of bliss. There's never been a book that so consistently puts me in a certain mood like The Rum Diary can.
Has anyone else here read it? If so, what do you think about it? I get the feeling that I'm sort of unique in my massive appreciation for it, since I never really hear anyone else talk about it and since Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas gets all the attention (which I did enjoy, but didn't love).
RepairmanJack
Member
Probably what I'll end up doing. It doesn't seem too hard. It's definitely interesting and seems like an easy enough read.
bennywhatever
Member
Recommend an awesome audiobook to me GAF. I haven't read a book in over a month and I'm starting to go stir crazy - I just don't know what to read/listen to!
Just noticed that Legion: Skin Deep by Brandon Sanderson is free through Audible for a couple of weeks. Awesome!
Currently reading the "Author's Definitive Edition" of The Unremembered by Peter Orullian.
The original edition came out four or five years ago, and did well enough, but after some hiccups with his publisher (his editor is no longer with Tor, the manuscript for the second novel got metaphorically lost in a pile on a desk for a few years, the original manuscript for The Unremembered needed a lot of work that the original editor wasn't willing to commit to, etc.) Tor Books is relaunching the series.
This "Author's Definitive Edition" is a couple of hundred pages shorter than the original edition, and by all accounts cleans up a lot of the issues that readers and critics had with the novel (mainly pacing and overwhelming world building that got in the way of the story.) So far, I'm enjoying it quite a bit. The magic system, which is music-based, is engaging and interesting.
It's ehhh. Great premise, poor execution.
4 Chapters in......I'm really loving this book....I'll be done in like a week or two. It's going to be a quick read.
As if Stormlight Archive hadn't already, this has sealed it for me, I'm going to be reading everything by Sanderson.
Whole trilogy is great.
sparky2112
Member
Cool. I remember a lot of anticipation for this, only for it to be met with a big, wet 'meh'. Nice to know he got another crack at it and turned the ship around.
Atrocity Archives from Charles Stross. A novella from this series won Hugo 2014 (you can read it for free here: http://www.tor.com/stories/2013/09/equoid,
I really liked the theme: Geeky story with Cthulu, IT/Mathematics, Spies, burocracy and humour, so I went for the book.
So far I like it but it is not for everyone. The writing is a bit... flat? and there is a lot of jargon
I really liked the theme: Geeky story with Cthulu, IT/Mathematics, Spies, burocracy and humour, so I went for the book.
So far I like it but it is not for everyone. The writing is a bit... flat? and there is a lot of jargon
Currently reading the "Author's Definitive Edition" of The Unremembered by Peter Orullian.
The original edition came out four or five years ago, and did well enough, but after some hiccups with his publisher (his editor is no longer with Tor, the manuscript for the second novel got metaphorically lost in a pile on a desk for a few years, the original manuscript for The Unremembered needed a lot of work that the original editor wasn't willing to commit to, etc.) Tor Books is relaunching the series.
This "Author's Definitive Edition" is a couple of hundred pages shorter than the original edition, and by all accounts cleans up a lot of the issues that readers and critics had with the novel (mainly pacing and overwhelming world building that got in the way of the story.) So far, I'm enjoying it quite a bit. The magic system, which is music-based, is engaging and interesting.
This sounds interesting. I can't think of the last time I heard about an author's "definitive edition" that heavily cut down on a book.
Going to try and read The Stand before the year is out.
Finished American Gods last night. There are decent bits of story in there somewhere, it just is surrounded by so much filler and unnecessary material. Who knows, the TV mini series might be good if the source material is edited down to the core story and maybe moved around a bit.
Finished American Gods last night. There are decent bits of story in there somewhere, it just is surrounded by so much filler and unnecessary material. Who knows, the TV mini series might be good if the source material is edited down to the core story and maybe moved around a bit.
I honestly can't think of a single instance. The story as I know it is that Orullian's first editor acquired the manuscript a decade after it was written, but wanted to publish it as-is, rather than allowing Orullian to go back and revise it to match the vision that had coalesced for the rest of the series over the past decade. He realized that a lot of the tertiary and background information in the novel could be spread out more evenly through the subsequent volumes, rather than dumped on the reader right away.
Now, his new editor is giving him that chance. It's a fascinating story.
Hey look, you just reviewed The Stand as well! I actually read both of those back to back as well, but probably preferred The Stand. I'm not sure what the abridged version cuts out, but it did feel pretty bloated to me in the middle.
- Status