bookshelves: to-read
So I'm about ten pages in and I gotta say, so far I'm impressed. It's been a while since I've read Grapes of Wrath, but I certainly don't remember it being this clean. There's not a word wasted and I like the style--it's a sort of 'let's you and I sit down and talk about my biography' sort of thing and it's grasping as well as comfortable... even though I hate most nonfiction? I'll be honest and say that I'm coming into this book with a prejudice of what everyone's said about Steinbeck's in-your-face arrogance. At this point, though, the only thing I can see ruining this book is the actual content. Which, once I get out of the pretty introductions, I see that being a strong possiblity.
12-01-09 Alright so I had to shelf this book about a month back because it was a library rental and it was running out before I had even gotten into the hundreds :( There's too much content to be squeezed between tertiary schoolbooks and essays! Winter break is almost here... ]]>
bookshelves: modern-fiction, thriller
If only I could put a question mark after Thriller in my bookshelf tags. I read this book at Barnes & Noble today, over the duration of one coffee. Short of the Wishbone series as a kid, I've never read a mystery in my life and I still don't think I have. This book had all of the lingo one might expect from inside of an author's head inside of a police officer's head--when hotshot detectives need to project their arrogance into dialogue, it's not a patrol car; it's a white and blue. I can't entirely bash that charisma, though, because it's probably responsible for the chuckles you'll get, probably every other page. In that way, at least, Rook is like Castle.
I read this book because I love the show. Castle provides my only source of literary humour and wit from this century, but Heat Wave was paradoxically more dull than the ABC series. I wasn't expecting much, but now I'm scared to whether they'll get some ideas from this book for the relationships on the show! To me the book just read far too quickly and with little to say. ]]>
bookshelves: fantasy-sci-fi, short-stories, thriller
Yet another questionably assembled anthology. Yet another women's lit assignment. Fortunately it has inspired me to read Dracula because Stoker has a short story in here and, day-um, the man is a goldmine of aesthetic language.
Update:
Alright, so I didn't get to read all of the stories, but I gotta say from what I've seen this compilation is not too shabby. In addition to the one I mentioned in my preliminary interpretation, the short story "Unicorn Tapestries" (since adapted into a novel, Vampire Tapestry) would be an interesting read for a feminist. It's an interesting approach on showing the mortal woman who is perhaps physically weak but emotionally cunning and not afraid to take what she wants. The Anita Blake series comes to mind, and surely Anita Blake does it better, but "Unicorn Tapestries" is worth its 50 some-odd page read. Only thing I hated: she's totally one of those writers who gives you the pointless details like some chip on a coffee mug in the middle of some metaphysical revelation, then doesn't say a god damned thing about the coffee mug or its chip being in any way relevant or developmental elsewhere.
And I have no idea whether "Cabin 33" has been adapted into a novel yet, whether another author has plagiarized the story yet or what; but there's some fresh ideas on how to do a vampire story in there. Or, at the least, new ideas in the eyes of someone who knows only mainstream vampire tales.
Overall, impressively enjoyable for someone such as myself, who does not read vampire novels for the terror or the godly values of their vampirism. ]]>
Doug added 4 books to this list. Add your votes »
add a comment
]]>
Doug
took the never-ending book quiz.
| questions answered: | 232 |
| correct: | 205 (88.4%) |
| skipped: | 13 |
| best streak: | 26 |
| questions added: | 3 |
by Harold Bloom
Ha! I don't know if you remember the details, but I was really bummed out over what my lit teacher said and it wasn't necessarily because of anything specific to what her and I spoke about that day, but primarily because of a fear I had that: all of the the literary analysis I'd ever done had been for nothing, if I had never even detected the faintest hint of these points of view that she portrayed to be so obvious. Luckily you gave me that cryptic line in an iphone AIM conversation about literary theory and I got confused/interested enough to find out which faction of theorists I lean strongest to. Of course the aesthetes were the first I gravitated to and I found this ballsy chap. Immediately I found the line about how a feminist or Marxist theorist might analyze Hamlet to find theories about feminism or Marxism, but probably tell nothing about Hamlet in the process. I absolutely wish I could summon this guy to my classroom like a Pokémon with nothing but headbutt learned--just watch him go to town. He's my newest friggin hero. My frustrations with myself all but went away thanks to one line from this guy's wikipedia page... Instant romance. I think I'll love reading him when the semester's over and I'm craving academia.
He has some facemelting theories on poetic voice that I'm excited to get into as well. ]]>
bookshelves: to-read
]]>
bookshelves: to-read
]]>
bookshelves: to-read
]]>