Ted’s review of War and Peace > Likes and Comments
95 likes · Like
I gulped down this mammoth novel when I was 15. One of the great reading experiences in my life ...
Well you beat me by a bit, Philippe. I hope I'll be able to consume it over the next month or two.
I've had the book since I bought it in the summer between my junior and senior years of high school at a college bookstore. That would be 1961, 52 years ago.
Enjoy, Ted! It's never too late to tackle the great classics. I have plenty of big novels waiting for me too ...
Go for it, Ted. Looking forward to your review.
How's War and Peace coming along, Ted?
Well I am plugging along, but reading multiple books as I do it will take time. I am enjoying the novel more than I anticipated, and have found many sections that are about as fine as anything I can remember reading. I'm very glad to be reading it.
It also helps me immensely that the group read introduction included a link to a list of characters, in order of introduction, and a second list of these characters in five family groups. I printed it out and have made a few small notes on it. It does help me keep my bearings.
Do share a photo/scan of the character listings, Ted. Would benefit the rest of us too!
Riku wrote: "Do share a photo/scan of the character listings, Ted. Would benefit the rest of us too!"
I think I need to track down the web site where I got it.
Here's what you want Riku: http://galileo.stmarys-ca.edu/integra...
Also, if you're interested in translation info, see the start of the Classics and the Western Canon read of the book, where I got the above link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Ted wrote: "Here's what you want Riku: http://galileo.stmarys-ca.edu/integra...
Also, if you're interested in translation info, see the start of the Classics and the Western Canon rea..."
I have been tinkering with the P&V version, but I think I should switch to Garnett too. Thanks for sharing!
I know that Garnett is ridiculed in some circles. I think the Wiki article on her mentions that she supposedly just threw out sentences or parahraphs which she found difficult. I think Nabakov had a lot to do with lowering her reputation.
But much of the Russian lit that I've read was purchased decades ago, when Garnett was almost the only game in town. I've found profoundly wonderful passages in her version of W&P which, were I to find out that they are "poorly" translated, I wouldn't care one bit.
Ted wrote: "I know that Garnett is ridiculed in some circles. I think the Wiki article on her mentions that she supposedly just threw out sentences or parahraphs which she found difficult. I think Nabakov had ..."
Yes, I went through your comments on it... W&P is in any case a book I wouldn't reading twice :)
I'm afraid I've been dilatory in keeping at reading it, but I will finish it this year, sooner rather than later I hope.
So far I'm kind of blown away by how good I find it. I actually can see myself reading it a second time in a few years.
Ted wrote: "I'm afraid I've been dilatory in keeping at reading it, but I will finish it this year, sooner rather than later I hope.
So far I'm kind of blown away by how good I find it. I actually can see mys..."
I intend to finish it soon too. Will compare notes with you :) I am trying to read it as historically as possible.
You mean by paying attention to the "historical" detail? I find that detail to be very interesting. Many of the battles and campaigns (Eylau, etc.) that have been mentioned I'm familiar with (a little) due to the large number of board wargames I've collected over the years.
I was also extremely interested in the character Speransky who appears in 1809 as part of Alexander's reform government. As I suspected, this is a historical person who Wiki says was one of the most powerful men in Russia at this time.
So I have no doubt that W&P can be read as at least a fairly historically accurate portrayal of these times.
Ted wrote: "You mean by paying attention to the "historical" detail? I find that detail to be very interesting. Many of the battles and campaigns (Eylau, etc.) that have been mentioned I'm familiar with (a lit..."
Well, I am not sure if you have seen my review on Tolstoy's historicity: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
In any case, we also need to keep in mind that some of the characters are real-life, but have their names changed - only the events identify them as historical characters. Lieven talks of quite a few of them...
A wonderfully enthusiastic review, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading your feelings as you went along too. It sounds like a real milestone in your book life.
Caroline wrote: "A wonderfully enthusiastic review, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading your feelings as you went along too. It sounds like a real milestone in your book life."
It was Caroline. It came late, but better late tthan never! 8)
Is the review to be continued? Or just the reading? The review is very like-worthy already.
Ian wrote: "Is the review to be continued? Or the reading? The review is very like-worthy already."
You rated War & Peace 4 stars. Go stand in a corner please.
Haha. I don't know whether that was an oversight! It might have been my way of saying I'm a Dostoy kinda guy, more than a Tolstoy kinda guy!
Ian wrote: "Is the review to be continued? Or the reading? The review is very like-worthy already."
I meant the review (tho the reading too, as I indicated). But I'm not working on the continuation at present, and I'm not good at getting things done.
it must be the greatest historical novel ever written.
That says quite a lot. Delightful review, Ted.
What a great history of a reading experience, Ted. Owning this book for all those years, finally taking it down from its shelf and opening it up, spending months and months in the company of the characters, experiencing the weather, visiting the different locations, analysing the battles, then finding the perfect image for the entire experience: a prism at the heart of which glows this wonderful historical novel.
I taught W&P once in a course on "Love and War"--with a play and some poetry--a whole semester course. But it's not really a war novel like All Quiet or Slaughterhouse 5. It's as you say, about an whole society, fifty years prior to the writing. Only one novel to my knowledge tops it for sure, and here's my review (PL forgive):
At least Anna Karenina is mainly in Russian, while War and Peace, which I read in Russian class (100 pp), is half in French--all society spoke it, from Pyotr up. At the time I didn't know French and was told, Russian, French, same difference. (I did get my highest Freshman grade in that course, so I guess he was right.) I argue that Karenina is among the very great, Shakespearean works of literature, because as you read Levin's discussions, say, on land reform, the reader is not positive which side to take. I call this kind of objectivity and observation of human verbal behavior: Shakespearean. Contrast, for example, DH Lawrence, and almost any modern writer, whose side is obvious in every discussion
"For not only has Tolstoy given us this profound story of humanity, not only has he given it a historical setting in the two tumultuous decades following the French Revolution, ....... the very meaning of history."
Ted, I have shamelessly copied the above last paragraph in my notebook. A perfect summation of a book that never gives a dreary moment in its timeless narration. It might just change my somewhat feeble perspective in comprehending this Tolstoy.
Thank you for this heartfelt and candid appraisal and I shall be looking forward to your lengthen prose. (view spoiler)
This is definitely one of my favorites and I was eager to read your review on it. Glad to see you loved it as much as I did. Looking forward to the continuation of your review!
To be continued? What more do you want to say?!
But much of the Russian lit that I've read was purchased decades ago, when Garnett was almost the only game in town. I've found profoundly wonderful passages in her version of W&P which, were I to find out that they are "poorly" translated, I wouldn't care one bit
this made me smile - In a Nabokov novel, I think Pnin the main character is obsessed by the memory of a translation of Hamlet into Russian that he had read as a boy/student/young person whose description of Ophelia floating down a river with flowers in her hair stuck in his memory, although all the other translations he read were better it was the lines from the poor one that he carried with him :)
Garima wrote: "it must be the greatest historical novel ever written.
That says quite a lot. Delightful review, Ted."
Of course it only a personal opinion; but put forcefully!. ;)
Fionnuala wrote: "What a great history of a reading experience, Ted. Owning this book for all those years, finally taking it down from its shelf and opening it up, spending months and months in the company of the ch..."
I hope my memory of it doesn't fade, Fionnuala. I want to think of 2014 as the year that I read this masterpiece.
Alan wrote: "I taught W&P once in a course on "Love and War"--with a play and some poetry--a whole semester course. But it's not really a war novel like All Quiet or Slaughterhouse 5. It's as you say, about a..."
Alan, thanks for your comments. I will say that Anna K was maybe my favorite novel before I read this one, so I wouldn't want to disagree violently, that's for sure.
I love that definition of "Shakespearean". Mayhaps I can remember it!
Praj wrote: ""For not only has Tolstoy given us this profound story of humanity, not only has he given it a historical setting in the two tumultuous decades following the French Revolution, ....... the very mea..."
Praj, I'm embarrassed by such a compliment, but also very grateful - thanks pal!
I felt the same way upon finishing this a few years ago. It's like Tolstoy put all of humanity between these pages, and all human emotions. I will surely read it again. Excellent review.
Renato wrote: "Looking forward to the continuation of your review!"
Jan-Maat wrote: "To be continued? What more do you want to say?!"
I'd better put anything I want to add in a drawer of spoilers.
Jan, you seem to be quoting something I have written? but I don't know where you saw it.
Anyway, yes this old Random House book I have was translated by Constance Garnett. Since joining GR a few years ago I've learned (here and there) of the low opinion that some (especially Nabokov) have of her work. Though that might say about about Nabokov than it does about Garnett, I don't know.
The fact remains that without Garnett's translations of the Russians way back when, and regardless of what one wants to say about her efforts, they were the only game in town. A generation or two or three of English-speaking readers simply would not have had the opportunity of reading these great novels without Garnett. (That's what I gather, anyway.)
I think one must accept the fact, when reading a translation, that of course what you're reading is a joint creation of the author and the translator, a creation that the translator has the last word in, unfortunately. But I'm happy to read these joint creations, as opposed to sitting on the sidelines and simply wondering what these classic novels are all about. C'est la vie!
(view spoiler)
Diane wrote: "I felt the same way upon finishing this a few years ago. It's like Tolstoy put all of humanity between these pages, and all human emotions. I will surely read it again. Excellent review."
Thanks Diane. Here's hoping you do fit it in again.
Ted wrote: "I think one must accept the fact, when reading a translation, that of course what you're reading is a joint creation of the author and the translator, a creation that the translator has the last word in, unfortunately. But I'm happy to read these joint creations, as opposed to sitting on the sidelines and simply wondering what these classic novels are all about."
oh definitely, and when it comes down to it a translation can never be what the author wrote. Every translation will resonance with its own generation.
I read the Maude's version of W+P and thought it fine, but I've never read it in the original. When I have read something in translation and original then I tend to be more sympathetic to the translator - really a thankless task!
I've got Nabokov's book on Gogol and he roundly criticises Garnett in that for, for example, making a mess of species of trees, so calling something a birch when it should have been a Scots-pine and so on. And you have to ask yourself whether that kind of thing really hampers your enjoyment or understanding of the text...Probably not most of the time.
Jan-Maat wrote: "Ted wrote: "I think one must accept the fact, when reading a translation, that of course what you're reading is a joint creation of the author and the translator, a creation that the translator has..."
... maybe if you were a botanist.
Can you actually read Russian Jan? I'm very impressed, if so.
I've had War and Peace sitting on my shelf, unread, since I was about 18, which means that it's been there for about 39 years. I'll try to make sure I read it before it's been there for 50 years!
I read it when I was about 20 and remember it vividly, reinforced no doubt by film. It is on my re-read list and indeed on my kindle. It's wonderful to know you have discovered it.
Kim, no need to delay. And it needn't be read fast.
See message 1 at https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/... for a useful list of characters in order of introduction, and the main families of characters. I found this extremely useful, kept it in the book and it's covered with notes and pages numbers now.
Lyn, thanks for the sentiment expressed!
Your first sentence perfectly sums up how I feel every time I rate one of THOSE classics.....like, duh! Really? Sometimes I wish those stars were balloons and I could just pop them and make them go away.
Your review speaks to the reading experience, yes, but also to the wonder that keeps bubbling up in you, Ted. It's like you're just starting. To be continued indeed.
Tony wrote: "Your review speaks to the reading experience, yes, but also to the wonder that keeps bubbling up in you, Ted. It's like you're just starting. To be continued indeed."
That's what happens when one has had a career as software engineer. But I was always very well read for that crowd! 8/
Well, I just got the Gutenberg public domain translation by the Maudes:
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2600
Now to find this translation.
As the door of my own 70th year is just now opening, I'll say that you beat me to it. I've been thinking an absolute chunkster should be on my plate in 2015 - this may be it.
Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "As the door of my own 70th year is just now opening, I'll say that you beat me to it. I've been thinking an absolute chunkster should be on my plate in 2015 - this may be it."
It would be a good choice, Elizabeth. I'm thinking of Middlemarch (never read), but I would like to read Studs Lonigan again.
Ted wrote: "Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "As the door of my own 70th year is just now opening, I'll say that you beat me to it. I've been thinking an absolute chunkster should be on my plate in 2015 - this may be..."
Ted, if you haven't read Middlemarch, you haven't lived. Really. Arguably along with every Austen, the best English novel. NOT her Silas Marner, lodged in the curriculum in the 1890s bec Harvard decided they shouldn't require only Latin, but some contemporary lit--Silas! A century later, it was still in the US curriculum, but no-one knew why. Probably bec there was no sex.
Alan wrote: "Ted wrote: "Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "As the door of my own 70th year is just now opening, I'll say that you beat me to it. I've been thinking an absolute chunkster should be on my plate in 2015 -..."
I've been urged to read Middlemarch by others too, Alan. I likely will, since I have the book now, so may as well read it. I know it's supposed to be quite an outstanding read.
I have a vague recollection that we had to read Silas Marner in high school. If we did, I remember almost nothing about the story. You're probably right about why it hung around for so long. 8)
back to top
message 1:
by
Philippe
(new)
Aug 18, 2013 03:57AM
I gulped down this mammoth novel when I was 15. One of the great reading experiences in my life ...
reply
|
flag
Well you beat me by a bit, Philippe. I hope I'll be able to consume it over the next month or two.I've had the book since I bought it in the summer between my junior and senior years of high school at a college bookstore. That would be 1961, 52 years ago.
Enjoy, Ted! It's never too late to tackle the great classics. I have plenty of big novels waiting for me too ...
Go for it, Ted. Looking forward to your review.
How's War and Peace coming along, Ted?
Well I am plugging along, but reading multiple books as I do it will take time. I am enjoying the novel more than I anticipated, and have found many sections that are about as fine as anything I can remember reading. I'm very glad to be reading it.It also helps me immensely that the group read introduction included a link to a list of characters, in order of introduction, and a second list of these characters in five family groups. I printed it out and have made a few small notes on it. It does help me keep my bearings.
Do share a photo/scan of the character listings, Ted. Would benefit the rest of us too!
Riku wrote: "Do share a photo/scan of the character listings, Ted. Would benefit the rest of us too!"I think I need to track down the web site where I got it.
Here's what you want Riku: http://galileo.stmarys-ca.edu/integra...Also, if you're interested in translation info, see the start of the Classics and the Western Canon read of the book, where I got the above link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Ted wrote: "Here's what you want Riku: http://galileo.stmarys-ca.edu/integra...Also, if you're interested in translation info, see the start of the Classics and the Western Canon rea..."
I have been tinkering with the P&V version, but I think I should switch to Garnett too. Thanks for sharing!
I know that Garnett is ridiculed in some circles. I think the Wiki article on her mentions that she supposedly just threw out sentences or parahraphs which she found difficult. I think Nabakov had a lot to do with lowering her reputation.But much of the Russian lit that I've read was purchased decades ago, when Garnett was almost the only game in town. I've found profoundly wonderful passages in her version of W&P which, were I to find out that they are "poorly" translated, I wouldn't care one bit.
Ted wrote: "I know that Garnett is ridiculed in some circles. I think the Wiki article on her mentions that she supposedly just threw out sentences or parahraphs which she found difficult. I think Nabakov had ..."Yes, I went through your comments on it... W&P is in any case a book I wouldn't reading twice :)
I'm afraid I've been dilatory in keeping at reading it, but I will finish it this year, sooner rather than later I hope.So far I'm kind of blown away by how good I find it. I actually can see myself reading it a second time in a few years.
Ted wrote: "I'm afraid I've been dilatory in keeping at reading it, but I will finish it this year, sooner rather than later I hope.So far I'm kind of blown away by how good I find it. I actually can see mys..."
I intend to finish it soon too. Will compare notes with you :) I am trying to read it as historically as possible.
You mean by paying attention to the "historical" detail? I find that detail to be very interesting. Many of the battles and campaigns (Eylau, etc.) that have been mentioned I'm familiar with (a little) due to the large number of board wargames I've collected over the years.I was also extremely interested in the character Speransky who appears in 1809 as part of Alexander's reform government. As I suspected, this is a historical person who Wiki says was one of the most powerful men in Russia at this time.
So I have no doubt that W&P can be read as at least a fairly historically accurate portrayal of these times.
Ted wrote: "You mean by paying attention to the "historical" detail? I find that detail to be very interesting. Many of the battles and campaigns (Eylau, etc.) that have been mentioned I'm familiar with (a lit..."Well, I am not sure if you have seen my review on Tolstoy's historicity: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
In any case, we also need to keep in mind that some of the characters are real-life, but have their names changed - only the events identify them as historical characters. Lieven talks of quite a few of them...
A wonderfully enthusiastic review, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading your feelings as you went along too. It sounds like a real milestone in your book life.
Caroline wrote: "A wonderfully enthusiastic review, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading your feelings as you went along too. It sounds like a real milestone in your book life."It was Caroline. It came late, but better late tthan never! 8)
Is the review to be continued? Or just the reading? The review is very like-worthy already.
Ian wrote: "Is the review to be continued? Or the reading? The review is very like-worthy already."You rated War & Peace 4 stars. Go stand in a corner please.
Haha. I don't know whether that was an oversight! It might have been my way of saying I'm a Dostoy kinda guy, more than a Tolstoy kinda guy!
Ian wrote: "Is the review to be continued? Or the reading? The review is very like-worthy already."I meant the review (tho the reading too, as I indicated). But I'm not working on the continuation at present, and I'm not good at getting things done.
it must be the greatest historical novel ever written.That says quite a lot. Delightful review, Ted.
What a great history of a reading experience, Ted. Owning this book for all those years, finally taking it down from its shelf and opening it up, spending months and months in the company of the characters, experiencing the weather, visiting the different locations, analysing the battles, then finding the perfect image for the entire experience: a prism at the heart of which glows this wonderful historical novel.
I taught W&P once in a course on "Love and War"--with a play and some poetry--a whole semester course. But it's not really a war novel like All Quiet or Slaughterhouse 5. It's as you say, about an whole society, fifty years prior to the writing. Only one novel to my knowledge tops it for sure, and here's my review (PL forgive):At least Anna Karenina is mainly in Russian, while War and Peace, which I read in Russian class (100 pp), is half in French--all society spoke it, from Pyotr up. At the time I didn't know French and was told, Russian, French, same difference. (I did get my highest Freshman grade in that course, so I guess he was right.) I argue that Karenina is among the very great, Shakespearean works of literature, because as you read Levin's discussions, say, on land reform, the reader is not positive which side to take. I call this kind of objectivity and observation of human verbal behavior: Shakespearean. Contrast, for example, DH Lawrence, and almost any modern writer, whose side is obvious in every discussion
"For not only has Tolstoy given us this profound story of humanity, not only has he given it a historical setting in the two tumultuous decades following the French Revolution, ....... the very meaning of history."Ted, I have shamelessly copied the above last paragraph in my notebook. A perfect summation of a book that never gives a dreary moment in its timeless narration. It might just change my somewhat feeble perspective in comprehending this Tolstoy.
Thank you for this heartfelt and candid appraisal and I shall be looking forward to your lengthen prose. (view spoiler)
This is definitely one of my favorites and I was eager to read your review on it. Glad to see you loved it as much as I did. Looking forward to the continuation of your review!
To be continued? What more do you want to say?!But much of the Russian lit that I've read was purchased decades ago, when Garnett was almost the only game in town. I've found profoundly wonderful passages in her version of W&P which, were I to find out that they are "poorly" translated, I wouldn't care one bit
this made me smile - In a Nabokov novel, I think Pnin the main character is obsessed by the memory of a translation of Hamlet into Russian that he had read as a boy/student/young person whose description of Ophelia floating down a river with flowers in her hair stuck in his memory, although all the other translations he read were better it was the lines from the poor one that he carried with him :)
Garima wrote: "it must be the greatest historical novel ever written.That says quite a lot. Delightful review, Ted."
Of course it only a personal opinion; but put forcefully!. ;)
Fionnuala wrote: "What a great history of a reading experience, Ted. Owning this book for all those years, finally taking it down from its shelf and opening it up, spending months and months in the company of the ch..."I hope my memory of it doesn't fade, Fionnuala. I want to think of 2014 as the year that I read this masterpiece.
Alan wrote: "I taught W&P once in a course on "Love and War"--with a play and some poetry--a whole semester course. But it's not really a war novel like All Quiet or Slaughterhouse 5. It's as you say, about a..."Alan, thanks for your comments. I will say that Anna K was maybe my favorite novel before I read this one, so I wouldn't want to disagree violently, that's for sure.
I love that definition of "Shakespearean". Mayhaps I can remember it!
Praj wrote: ""For not only has Tolstoy given us this profound story of humanity, not only has he given it a historical setting in the two tumultuous decades following the French Revolution, ....... the very mea..."Praj, I'm embarrassed by such a compliment, but also very grateful - thanks pal!
I felt the same way upon finishing this a few years ago. It's like Tolstoy put all of humanity between these pages, and all human emotions. I will surely read it again. Excellent review.
Renato wrote: "Looking forward to the continuation of your review!"Jan-Maat wrote: "To be continued? What more do you want to say?!"
I'd better put anything I want to add in a drawer of spoilers.
Jan, you seem to be quoting something I have written? but I don't know where you saw it.
Anyway, yes this old Random House book I have was translated by Constance Garnett. Since joining GR a few years ago I've learned (here and there) of the low opinion that some (especially Nabokov) have of her work. Though that might say about about Nabokov than it does about Garnett, I don't know.
The fact remains that without Garnett's translations of the Russians way back when, and regardless of what one wants to say about her efforts, they were the only game in town. A generation or two or three of English-speaking readers simply would not have had the opportunity of reading these great novels without Garnett. (That's what I gather, anyway.)
I think one must accept the fact, when reading a translation, that of course what you're reading is a joint creation of the author and the translator, a creation that the translator has the last word in, unfortunately. But I'm happy to read these joint creations, as opposed to sitting on the sidelines and simply wondering what these classic novels are all about. C'est la vie!
(view spoiler)
Diane wrote: "I felt the same way upon finishing this a few years ago. It's like Tolstoy put all of humanity between these pages, and all human emotions. I will surely read it again. Excellent review."Thanks Diane. Here's hoping you do fit it in again.
Ted wrote: "I think one must accept the fact, when reading a translation, that of course what you're reading is a joint creation of the author and the translator, a creation that the translator has the last word in, unfortunately. But I'm happy to read these joint creations, as opposed to sitting on the sidelines and simply wondering what these classic novels are all about."oh definitely, and when it comes down to it a translation can never be what the author wrote. Every translation will resonance with its own generation.
I read the Maude's version of W+P and thought it fine, but I've never read it in the original. When I have read something in translation and original then I tend to be more sympathetic to the translator - really a thankless task!
I've got Nabokov's book on Gogol and he roundly criticises Garnett in that for, for example, making a mess of species of trees, so calling something a birch when it should have been a Scots-pine and so on. And you have to ask yourself whether that kind of thing really hampers your enjoyment or understanding of the text...Probably not most of the time.
Jan-Maat wrote: "Ted wrote: "I think one must accept the fact, when reading a translation, that of course what you're reading is a joint creation of the author and the translator, a creation that the translator has..."... maybe if you were a botanist.
Can you actually read Russian Jan? I'm very impressed, if so.
I've had War and Peace sitting on my shelf, unread, since I was about 18, which means that it's been there for about 39 years. I'll try to make sure I read it before it's been there for 50 years!
I read it when I was about 20 and remember it vividly, reinforced no doubt by film. It is on my re-read list and indeed on my kindle. It's wonderful to know you have discovered it.
Kim, no need to delay. And it needn't be read fast.See message 1 at https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/... for a useful list of characters in order of introduction, and the main families of characters. I found this extremely useful, kept it in the book and it's covered with notes and pages numbers now.
Lyn, thanks for the sentiment expressed!
Your first sentence perfectly sums up how I feel every time I rate one of THOSE classics.....like, duh! Really? Sometimes I wish those stars were balloons and I could just pop them and make them go away.
Your review speaks to the reading experience, yes, but also to the wonder that keeps bubbling up in you, Ted. It's like you're just starting. To be continued indeed.
Tony wrote: "Your review speaks to the reading experience, yes, but also to the wonder that keeps bubbling up in you, Ted. It's like you're just starting. To be continued indeed."That's what happens when one has had a career as software engineer. But I was always very well read for that crowd! 8/
Well, I just got the Gutenberg public domain translation by the Maudes:http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2600
Now to find this translation.
As the door of my own 70th year is just now opening, I'll say that you beat me to it. I've been thinking an absolute chunkster should be on my plate in 2015 - this may be it.
Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "As the door of my own 70th year is just now opening, I'll say that you beat me to it. I've been thinking an absolute chunkster should be on my plate in 2015 - this may be it."It would be a good choice, Elizabeth. I'm thinking of Middlemarch (never read), but I would like to read Studs Lonigan again.
Ted wrote: "Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "As the door of my own 70th year is just now opening, I'll say that you beat me to it. I've been thinking an absolute chunkster should be on my plate in 2015 - this may be..."Ted, if you haven't read Middlemarch, you haven't lived. Really. Arguably along with every Austen, the best English novel. NOT her Silas Marner, lodged in the curriculum in the 1890s bec Harvard decided they shouldn't require only Latin, but some contemporary lit--Silas! A century later, it was still in the US curriculum, but no-one knew why. Probably bec there was no sex.
Alan wrote: "Ted wrote: "Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "As the door of my own 70th year is just now opening, I'll say that you beat me to it. I've been thinking an absolute chunkster should be on my plate in 2015 -..."I've been urged to read Middlemarch by others too, Alan. I likely will, since I have the book now, so may as well read it. I know it's supposed to be quite an outstanding read.
I have a vague recollection that we had to read Silas Marner in high school. If we did, I remember almost nothing about the story. You're probably right about why it hung around for so long. 8)
