Henrik's comments (member since Nov 24, 2008)

Henrik's comments from the SciFi and Fantasy Book Club group.

Jim wrote: "Humans, arguably, are the only species we know of without instincts. ..."

Do you really mean to say that humankind has no instinct? If so, I am seriously wondering wherefrom my babygirl gets the notion to a lot (most) of the things she do--because she sure hasn't learned it from me or my wife:-P And where did she get the urge to seek out the breast after being born, and to pretty impressively start sucking shortly after?

I could go on, but I think you get the idea;-)

Personally I think the human race is just another animal race among the rest. And we're not the only ones who can think--but we certainly do seem to be much more efficient at it (for good and bad) and to have more (self) awareness and a lot of other things. So we're still unique, even if perhaps not as much as we'd like to;-)

Lara Amber wrote: "In formal settings women are still known by his first name and his last name. . . ."

Doesn't that depend on what country or culture you're from? I live in Denmark and perhaps excepting the close circle of the Royal House (which, incidentally, I am not that familiar with;-)) a married woman is introduced as "Mrs. Own Name + Last Name."

Even more, in Denmark it is now custome for the female to retain her original surname, so if she wants it changed to, say, the husband's, she must file a form to do so; same goes with the male. (My wife and I decided to combine and take both our surnames, both of which are rather unusual here in Denmark.)

When it comes to fiction I personally think it is a matter of how important any given formality is to the story. If it's important somehow, I don't have a problem with it.

People seem to forget that the print-on-demand houses also take a bite of the total price, as do the retail stores, incl. Amazon--both of which one must take into account when calculating if it's worth using this or that printing house:-) This, obviously, one must then add to the final price. And that's before taking into account what one wants to actually earn per book, heh (and here taxes, VAT and such things must be considered as well, where applicable).

Like Jim said, Lulu is rather expensive, all in all; but on the other hand their b/w paper quality is of such a fine quality that illustrations are well reproduced--which is not always the case with POD. Personally I think that if one wants to include illustrations they ought to be well produced, even if the price then rises.

I am sure Jim is also right, though, that a higher price is something that keeps a number of otherwise potential buyers from purchasing said book (I am the publisher of that book;-)). It's a matter of calculating pro et cons, obviously (both monetarian and quality-wise).

I was about 7 or 8, I guess... And I wasn't particularly systematic about it. The first years I rarely knew the author's name, if ever, since it was always the title or the cover that caught my fancy; and the story.

The only "system" I had was based on 1) reading whatever I found lying in my father's piles, or 2) starting from one row to another in the library's section of sci-fi books:-D

Mawgojzeta, I look forward to hear what you think of THE BOOK OF LOST THINGS. I have it on my to-read list. Sounds fascinating.

A few days ago I started reading, for the first time, Gene Wolfe's THE BOOK OF THE NEW SUN. I have heard many a praise of it. Anyone here read it? What did you think (if you can answer that without giving any spoiled that will be much appreciated, thanks;-)).

I agree with all you say, Becky. (Excepting, perhaps, that I personally prefer King's newer works, and remember the characters therein the most.) Well said:-)

No, we do not need to justify why we like or dislike something; but it's great fun engaging in discussions where we try to, isn't it? And, who knows, perhaps we even get a little wiser for it--even pertaining our own position?

That's often the case for me, anyway;-)

Hi,

I personally love reading Stephen King--and on the whole seem to enjoy his later novels more than his earlier ones (a heresy among fans, yes I know:-P). And I am quite confident that he will be remembered long and well after he too is passed away. But I think he will be mentioned on the list after Poe and Lovecraft; not above them but right below. Up near the top, but not at the top. And that's quite an accomplishment anyway, I think. (Personally I think that the much lesser known horror writer today, Thomas Ligotti, deserves the "3rd place".)

I have at times encountered people who say King will be remembered as the "greatest horror writer ever" merely based on his tremendous sale. C'mon--sale in your lifetime is no guarantee that you will be remembered 100 years after your death. Lovecraft didn't have much publication outside the pulp magazine (except in amateur magazines, and that's even "lower" in many people's eyes) and he died not only poor, but also unknown outside a very small group of fans.

Still he's the one talked about today and the one who's been widely acknowledged as the successor of Poe.

Kyle, you're right that Lovecraft couldn't write dialogue; a fact he himself was very aware of and therefore steered away from as much as possible. I don't see that as a problem with writing style--as long as you try to write what you can write. And Lovecraft sure did that. One of the reasons, I think, that he survived the test of time. (By the way, Lovecraft is a sort of paradox, I think: Yes, he wrote in pulp magazines--intended on the whole for "the people/common man"--but his thinking, style (most of the time) & ideas were way more literate and philosophical than that.)

Just a few pennies from me.

Jon,

"all could have been avoided if only communication had been possible"

Heh... Yes. But isn't that one of the hard facts of life as well? In frustratingly many cases (be that big scale or more common level of things) communication could probably solve a lot of serious problems.