A witty and eclectic tour of some of the more arcane byways of literature. Illustrated throughout.
How much heavier was Thackeray’s br... read full description
How much heavier was Thackeray’s br... read full description
reviews
Oct 18, 2009
Carol
rated it: 
Attention, all book lovers! If you're looking for a book on which to feast, you should try this book. You'll learn all kinds of curious things about your favorite authors. What does the ending of the "Grapes of Wrath" really mean? (Rose of Sharon, an impoverished character, offers her breast to an impoverished man, symbolically meaning that only the poor can give sustenance to the poor) Who is the worst novelist ever? (Amanda McKittrick Ros) Who is the best novelist? (Jane Austen) Who
More...
May 16, 2009
Adrienne
rated it: 
This is a book of trivia about books and authors, basically. Normally, I'm a huge sucker for that kind of book. My problem with it was the vast quantity of typos! If you're going to spend that much money to have a book produced in hardcover, wouldn't you take the time to check that sort of thing? I'm just saying.
Also, there were some fact checking problems. For example, he mentions that the 2005 movie of Pride and Prejudice has made about $121M. Then he says something about wom More...
Also, there were some fact checking problems. For example, he mentions that the 2005 movie of Pride and Prejudice has made about $121M. Then he says something about wom More...
Aug 13, 2010
Oxford University Press published his earlier books but I guess Sutherland has come down in the world. Teaching at Cal Tech doesn’t strike me as slumming but maybe to OUP it is. This book is from Skyhorse Publishing, and I’ll go out on a limb here and posit that Skyhorse doesn’t hew to the same standards OUP does.
This is even worse in its proofreading and typesetting errors than How to Read a Novel. It is rife with stray commas (”Baird’s Trilby is, significantly like …” p. 86; “downs More...
This is even worse in its proofreading and typesetting errors than How to Read a Novel. It is rife with stray commas (”Baird’s Trilby is, significantly like …” p. 86; “downs More...
0 comments
like
(1 person liked it)
Feb 19, 2011
Wm
rated it: 
The subtitle of this book is "a feast for book lovers" -- it's more like a bad buffet at a pseudo-upscale hotel. Oh, sure some of the stuff is amusing enough, but much of it come across as tossed off. There's less focus and depth than a decent blog here. And the glibness is often headscratching or cringing rather than amusing. I don't hate it. But it's just okay -- and not interesting enough for me to actually read it all the way through.
Nov 06, 2009
Karen C
rated it: 
I didn't find this book interesting, curious or entertaining - and I normally love books like this. My guess is that there are a handful of professors somewhere who thought this book was fascinating because they thought they were supposed to like it.
Pretentious. Uses big words for the sake of using big words. Skip it.
Pretentious. Uses big words for the sake of using big words. Skip it.
Nov 17, 2009
Dave
rated it:
Not nearly as good as his other, question-based miscellanies (e.g., "Can Jane Eyre be Happy?"), Sutherland seems to be writing to fit a 500 word limit, and many of the pieces are simply cute or seemingly unfinished, especially early in the book. The later pieces expand a bit, and begin to remind one of those other books. Read those other books.
Dec 08, 2011
Louise
rated it:
A nice little book. I took the recommendation on the cover to task and discovered that this is indeed good bed-time reading if like me you're all for a little light, literary pillow talk. It didn't cover any new ground but did chatter rather nicely about various bits and pieces of literary history that are always worth revisiting.
Jan 08, 2010
Meg Marie
rated it:
A well-written, fast paced collection of English nerd facts. I don't know that I will retain this book's trivia for years to come, but I definitely enjoyed reading it.
May 22, 2009
Donna Jo
rated it: 
I love books like this, filled with little snippets of useless information. This is a good bathroom book, as article is very short.
Dec 20, 2009
Ayelet
rated it:
Not as good as I expected, given Jasper Fforde's love of the book. I won't be reading the rest of his books.
May 01, 2010
Gillian
rated it:
Random and quirky things about literature and authors. Nice easy bath read but did spoil the twists of a fair few novels I haven't read yet. It also has a chapter on the infamous milk scene from Grapes of Wrath (which is even more disturbing reading than hearing).
Not sure how to rate this as not a novel so two stars as entertainment akin to reading a magazine rather than a proper read (although is 289 pages).
Not sure how to rate this as not a novel so two stars as entertainment akin to reading a magazine rather than a proper read (although is 289 pages).
Nov 28, 2011
Gloriavirtutisumbra
rated it:
I read this VERY SLOWLY. Tiny chapter by tiny chapter, crawling through odds and ends of book and author trivia, eyeballing disturbingly drawn caricatures, debating whether i really needed to know these things or not. I am still irresolute on that. Ask me again next year.
Mar 13, 2010
Heather
rated it:
I was a little disappointed with this book - I really like the idea of it, and I was really interested after reading one of the literature tidbits on the back cover. Once I started reading it however, I did not like the style of writing at all and found few of the "curiousities" to be interesting.
Feb 04, 2012
Jan 25, 2012
Jan 25, 2012
Jan 22, 2012
Jan 21, 2012
Jan 21, 2012
Jan 19, 2012
Jan 19, 2012
Jan 18, 2012
Jan 15, 2012
