What are you reading? Showing 651-700 of 1,941

[[deleted user]]

Half-Price Books! Woot! *has a local one too* :D

[Hannah]

Aubrey wrote: "Half-Price Books! Woot! *has a local one too* :D"

It was wonderful! I'll have to make a list of the books I got...and there were so many others. One of the ones I really wanted was $15 (Florence Kingsley's "Paul...") and was in great condition except for a totally split binding. (It looked like someone had knocked it off the shelf and put it back without paying for the damage.) When I went to the desk to ask about it, they said it was unsalable and marked it for $1 clearance just because I said I would take it...otherwise it would have gone in the trash. So I got it for $.85 with my discount! I think I can stabilize it with tape.

They have six shelves of old "nostalgia fiction" at that store, and I went slightly crazy for over an hour. I also got ten cds for $1 each, which I've really been enjoying. (Good medicine...we'd had a flat tire, followed by a blowout on the highway, the day before and spent six hours on that, which was followed by a long headache...life is never simple in our household and never quiet for long.)

[Elisabeth]

Aubrey wrote: Wow, Elisabeth is out to make us all feel guilty. o.O ;)"

No, not really! :) I actually feel like I haven't been reading much...I've always been a fast reader, but it took me a while to finish All This, and Heaven Too because I was almost asleep on my feet after staying up too late one night to watch a basketball game. Playoff time, you know. :)

Ooo, Hannah, you found some B.M. Bower books? Which ones? I'm going to investigate some of the used-book stores in my neighborhood one of these days, on the off-chance they've got one I haven't read. I want to read The Swallowfork Bulls, but it seems to be a bit rare—there's only a couple copies for sale online and they're somewhat expensive.

[Faith]

Miriam, yes, I have, but I've mostly read his historical fiction. I read Stephen Lawhead's Robin Hood series and the Pendragon Cycle. I think I read another one or two, but I can't think of them right now.

[Hannah]

Elisabeth wrote: "Aubrey wrote: Wow, Elisabeth is out to make us all feel guilty. o.O ;)"

No, not really! :) I actually feel like I haven't been reading much...I've always been a fast reader, but it took me a whi..."

I got "Lonesome Land". I got several other Western stories by other authors, so I'll have to let others know how they turn out. It's the first copy of one of her books I've ever seen in a bookstore, so I was very pleased to find it. I hope you're able to find "The Swallowfork Bulls"!

[Hannah]

I'm copying this list of what I got from the other group I'm in. I'd love to read all of these this year, so keep me accountable, y'all! :)

I got to go to Half Price Books while in TX last week. I made a haul of old hardcovers and enjoyed using a 15% off coupon...
"Lonesome Land" by B. M. Bower
"His Version of It" by Paul Leicester Ford (already read it...four stars...)
"The Second Generation" by David Graham Phillips
"The Law-Breakers" by Ridgwell Cullum
"The Girl of La Glorieta" by Clara Driscoll
"The Gun-Brand" by James B. Hendryx
"The City of Comrades" by Basil King
"The Pride of Jennico" by Agnes and Egerton Castle
"The Master of the Vineyard" by Myrtle Reed
"Children of the Abbey" by Regina Maria Roche (already had a bad copy of that one...this one's pretty and in great condition)
"The Grafters" by Francis Lynde
"The Gorilla Hunters" by R. M. Ballantyne (pretty shabby, but it's been so long since I found one of his that I got it anyway)
"The High Hand" by Jacques Futrelle
"Jennie Baxter--Journalist" by Robert Barr
"Mr. Opp" by Alice Hegan Rice
"Love-at-Arms" by Rafael Sabatini (so fun to find a Sabatini book I didn't already have!)
"The Trailers" by Ruth Little Mason
"The Danger Line" by Lawrence L. Lynch
"A Texas Blue Bonnet" by Caroline E. Jacobs
"Blue Bonnet in Boston" by Caroline E. Jacobs and Lela Horn Richards (beautiful dust jacket on this one)
"Bob Hampton of Placer" by Randall Parrish
"Three People" by Pansy (Mrs. G. R. Alden) (another nice dust jacket)
"The Hornet's Nest" by E.P. Roe
"Paul: a Herald of the Cross" by Florence M. Kingsley (this one was a very nice copy that had gotten messed up, so they marked it down to $1 for me)
"Me and Nobbles" by Amy le Feuvre (only the second book of hers I've ever been able to find)
"The Enchanted April" by Elizabeth von Arnim (very plain copy, but someone had hand-painted the cover...so cute!)
"The Admiral's Ward" by Mrs. Alexander (I have one of her books, but even Amazon has really high prices on them, so $5 was quite a deal)
"The Lost Prince" by Frances Hodgson Burnett
So, 28 new books to read!

[[deleted user]]

... o.O Keep you accountable indeed!

[M F]

Jonathan -
Was there really? I have no memory of that: I loved the series. But then I travel on buses every day, meaning bad language is literally always around me, so I don't notice it in books. It doesn't bother me.

[Katie]

I have never actually read any Stephen Lawhead, but I have Silver Hand on my bookshelf. That and the Silver Chalice by Thomas B. Costain, about whom I can remember nothing. I didn't now Lawhead did Robin Hood too!

[Faith]

Katie wrote: "I didn't now Lawhead did Robin Hood to"

Yes, he did. I liked that series better than his King Arthur series.

[Leah]

Hannah wrote: "I'm copying this list of what I got from the other group I'm in. I'd love to read all of these this year, so keep me accountable, y'all! :)"

The Lost Prince is a great book. I've read it two or three times. The original version (as opposed to the BJU version) has one rather sizable Buddhist kind of thing, but other than that...yeah, awesome story. The main character is great.

[Hannah]

Leah wrote: "Hannah wrote: "I'm copying this list of what I got from the other group I'm in. I'd love to read all of these this year, so keep me accountable, y'all! :)"

The Lost Prince is a great book. I've ..."

Thanks for the heads-up on the original book issues. I have a version of "The Secret Garden" from my childhood days, with white-out and handwriting, where the children are praying in the garden instead holding Eastern-style religious services! :)

[M F]

Faith wrote: "Katie wrote: "I didn't now Lawhead did Robin Hood to"

Yes, he did. I liked that series better than his King Arthur series."

I found the Arthur books rather longwinded, though my dad adores them and has read each of them multiple times (they are now quite battered). Mind you, I tried to read Hood with a fever and couldn't get past the first few chapters, as my brain was spinning, and as a result I've never finished it -- though I have both it and the sequel on my shelf. I should do that. My favourites were Empyrion and the Song of Albion trilogy ... apparent bad language and all. (I have literally no recollection of that, so may reread to find it, ehehe!) I adore Celtic myth, and the amount of detail in those was awesome.

[Leah]

Hannah wrote: "Thanks for the heads-up on the original book issues. I have a version of "The Secret Garden" from my childhood days, with white-out and handwriting, where the children are praying in the garden instead holding Eastern-style religious services! :)"

That's hilarious. Great idea though. I'll have to keep it in mind in case I'm a mother someday. ;)

[[deleted user]]

Ugh, that's exactly why I don't like The Secret Garden nearly as well as Burnett's other works... *refrains from ranting about the weaknesses of her favorite childhood author*

[Hannah]

Aubrey wrote: "Ugh, that's exactly why I don't like The Secret Garden nearly as well as Burnett's other works... *refrains from ranting about the weaknesses of her favorite childhood author*"

I've really enjoyed her books "T. Tembaron" and "The Shuttle". "The Shuttle" had vague references to Eastern-type philosophies, but nothing like the scene in "Secret Garden". They're well-written, fun stories with good endings. Has anyone else read those?

[Leah]

Aubrey wrote: "Ugh, that's exactly why I don't like The Secret Garden nearly as well as Burnett's other works... *refrains from ranting about the weaknesses of her favorite childhood author*"

I've actually never been able to get into The Secret Garden. I get a few chapters in and get bored ever time. Whereas I've read The Little Princess more times than I can count.


Hannah wrote: "I've really enjoyed her books "T. Tembaron" and "The Shuttle". "The Shuttle" had vague references to Eastern-type philosophies, but nothing like the scene in "Secret Garden". They're well-written, fun stories with good endings. Has anyone else read those?"

No. Now I'm curious.

[[deleted user]]

I haven't heard of those titles of hers, actually. Little Lord Fauntleroy and The Racketty Packetty House were both darling, and The Little Princess was my top childhood favorite book. :)

[Hannah]

I loved "Little Lord Fauntleroy" and "The Little Princess" also. I got "The Shuttle" in 2004, and it was the first adult one of hers. I've also read "Robin" and another short one. So far the endings have been good, and I always get her things when I can afford to (when they aren't $30 and up!). I'd probably guarantee people would like T. Tembarom...he's a new York reporter who discovers he's just inherited an estate in England. His New York slang mystifies the upper-class people he has to fit in with, but he soon makes friends there, too. I don't remember anything objectionable, other than an occasional mild curse.

[[deleted user]]

*should make a point to look up Burnett's other works*

*is finally working through the manga and books she has that are coming due at the library*

[Leah]

I read "Little Lord Fauntleroy" this year. It was cute, but I never really got into the story.

[Katie]

I don't think I ever realized that all those books were by the same person! o.O I've read The Little Princess and the Secret Garden many, many times. I've read two other books that were /called/ the Secret Garden but had different plots as well. Talk about confusing! And I read Little Lord Fauntleroy at some point too, and then proceeded to get it confused by a poem of the same name. And I saw the movie.

[[deleted user]]

I saw an older adaptation of The Little Princess (by BBC, maybe?) that was good. The Warner Bros. adaptations of The Little Princess and The Secret Garden both are horrid, and not just because they mutilated the book.

[Hannah]

I enjoyed "Little Lord Fauntleroy" when I was 6, so my rereading it now has a lot to do with the impressions from that age. I don't know what I'd think if I read it for the first time now, since it is a very classic children's book. That was the trip when we went out to California to bury my grandmother, who'd just died of cancer (I wasn't old enough to be very sad; she and I hadn't really bonded...I liked her mother better...dear, spicy Nan, who blew out all her candles at once on her 95th birthday and didn't die until the year after my grandmother did). My mom and I were in the back seat of the car while we drove with my granddad in tow across the mountains from Colorado, where they'd lived to California...it was the bright spot in my trip, and the thing I remember best.
I've actually never seen the movie!

[Leah]

Aubrey wrote: "I saw an older adaptation of The Little Princess (by BBC, maybe?) that was good. The Warner Bros. adaptations of The Little Princess and The Secret Garden both are horrid, and not just because the..."

I just saw the BBC version relatively recently. After seeing the Warner Brothers & Shirley Temple versions. My brother thought I was a little crazy 'cause I was so glad I finally found a version where her father really does die. :P

[[deleted user]]

I know, right? I'll grant ya that Warner Bros. put some very interesting spins on the story, but they didn't quite pull it off.

[Jenni]

I've just read three John Constantine, Hellblazer books, with mixed impressions. I am frustrated that there aren't more stars I can choose from with these. I gave two of these books 4 stars and yet I wouldn't really recommend them... I just appreciated what had been attempted with the art and story even though they didn't stand alone and had some elements I didn't appreciate. If I had 10 stars to choose from I would've given them a six so that I could have other books at 10's. lol.

[Jenni]

I personally didn't have a problem with the aforementioned scene in the Secret Garden and think that if people do have trouble with it - don't black it out, just don't read the book. Seriously. Give an author some respect and do not censor. =P

[Hannah]

Jenni wrote: "I personally didn't have a problem with the aforementioned scene in the Secret Garden and think that if people do have trouble with it - don't black it out, just don't read the book. Seriously. Giv..."

That's perfectly fine when someone's older. I don't censor books now! When I was seven, though, and was devouring books almost as fast as my mom could buy them, it was different. I would much rather have a book that I could read and love than have her say "no" to every book I wanted to buy.
So do you not agree with edited books of any sort? What about translations from other languages? What about condensed books?

[Katie]

LOL! That's a mighty big can of worms you've opened there, Jenni...

My dad censored a book or two for me. It confused me, because he left in all the d- and h- words, and I didn't know any others, so what on earth was he blacking out? Very, very glad he did. And when I get my own copy of the Hitchiker's series I'm going to censor it for my little brother. He wants to read the series, and he doesn't want to wait until he's seventeen, understandably, and there's not that much objectionable content, so I'm going to just white it out for him. So yeah, in this case I agree with Hannah. Who wants to wait to read good books?

[Jenni]

When I was little I had an abridged picture book of the Secret Harden that changed the story substantially as well as the Focus on the Family Radio Theatre version that changed that scene to a more Christian-oriented one.

I was very confused when I read the original. The author's intent had been entirely changed.

I think if you're too young for the worldview of a book you need to wait. I think it is disrespecting an author's beliefs to change a quasi-Eastern scene into a Christian scene. Think of it the other way round: wouldn't you be outraged if somebody did the opposite to your favorite Christian book?

I usually don't mind a bit of blacking out language if that's the only issue. Then again Narnia has its share of language which nobody blacked out for me and I didn't notice it was there until I was 14. But I would go ahead and black out the one f-word in Good Omens so that a 15yo could read it. The story didn't require it.

Condensed books as a rule for me are annoying. I feel like they often misrepresent the originals and do not promote reading them. It's like pretending to have read a classic. A child should read some actual classic children's literature, not classic adult lit brought to their level. Just wait. Patience. There is more than enough good JF and YA and a 12 yo is often ready to start in on more tame adult lit. You get more out of adult lit often when you have age and experience to read it with. And condensed books lose the authorial style.

Translations are necessary sadly. If I could read Japanese I'd read my manga in its original form. Manga is often one of the boldest examples of meaning lost in translation. But there are better translations and worse ones. You can tell if the dialogue doesn't match the pictures. Still jokes are lost outside the language it was intended for. We get this less with Romantic languages tho because we are much closer to them.

[Jenni]

It's also why I have a very huge problem with Lamplighter Publishing who claims to be finding the best of Victorian literature and republishing it since things were so much better back then.... But then I compared the online free Gutenburg Version with theirs. They took out and rewrote anything that didn't fit their worldview right down to making a feminist character less feminist. Apparently even the Victorian era wasn't all it was cracked up to be...

[Katie]

Oh, completely rewriting a book to change the author's intent is very, very different from simply changing one scene, or simply removing stuff. That sort of thing bugs me. People modernizing the language of the classics to make them more accessible bugs me too. Abridged books bug me. But whiting out a single scene doesn't bother me at all. You can't change the author's intent by changing one scene.

[Jenni]

I was referring to the 'whiteout and handwriting' version that Hannah had as well as other common experiences with that book.

Personally I'd rather discuss it with the child and talk about the issue. Or else wait it out. I'm pretty sure there was more of an Eastern attitude than just that scene. The little girl had been raised by Hindu nannies. She's got a lot of Eastern ideas. That was part of the story.

[Katie]

Still just one scene; not rewriting the entire book or altering the author's intent.

[Jenni]

Yeah.

I guess from there it depends how badly you want a child to be able to read a book. XD I personally don't have a lot of warm fuzzies for the Secret Garden. lol.

[Hannah]

Jenni, I am totally with you on Lamplighter stuff, after I obtained the original copy of "Melody: the story of a child" and discovered that her hair color was different, the type of rolls they ate were different, and all the instances of her dancing with joy were redacted!--I never bought another of their books after that.
Yes, all the language came out of books when I was young, until I was about 15. Since then I have not marked in books until this year, when I began reading the Bourne books after loving the movies. I have a really cheap copy, and every other paragraph has cursing. So it's going. I can't handle that much.
Actually, all the old Hindu nanny stuff is there in my copy. We talked through that stuff. It was the scene in the garden, where they were actually having an Eastern worship service, that we got rid of.
Another book that got redacted was Catherine Marshall's "Christy", another of my favorites. I was twelve, and we took out the whole scene of where Christy's lady mentor explains how she once had a child out of wedlock. WAY too much detail on one page.
It was back in 2002 that I got tired of having books that were "ok...but...that scene...those words..." and started shopping mostly for old books. We'd gotten a few before then, but that was when I really switched and discovered some amazing books that I could recommend to lots of friends of any age. There's a lot of clean stuff on the market, but when one reads "Tale of Two Cities" at 12 and "Les Mis" at 13, most of the Christian fiction seems pretty trite. I'm very picky about my books. It's got to hold my attention and not be utterly stupid.
When my books are published someday, I do really hope that no publisher ever tries to edit it. But for a parent to decide that a scene in a child's book is inappropriate for the child's age and maturity and to take it out, that's totally up to the parent and within their rights. The child knows the book was altered and can easily go out and get an original copy in later years. It's different from printing for an agenda, which is why Lamplighter and Reader's Digest Condensed books drive me nuts.
I also hate

[M F]

Jenni wrote: But I would go ahead and black out the one f-word in Good Omens so that a 15yo could read it. The story didn't require it.


The story might not have required it, but I would argue that the character definitely did. (Sorry, but mention Good Omens and you get an essay from me.) After all, throughout the novel we've seen Aziraphale carefully not swearing. He's an angel, for goodness' sake. And suddenly he swears. Which means ... big trouble. Something's going wrong. It's also supposed, I think, to highlight that angels aren't perfect and demons aren't beyond redemption. They're not so different after all. Therefore, it's pretty significant.

Also, I realise I'm coming from a very different viewpoint to all of you, because bad language has never bothered me, and nobody has ever tried to censor books. When I was 10 my mum said I couldn't read 'The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time' and I thought that was because of the swearing, but actually it was because she thought it would be too emotionally distressing for me. (I read it like a year later. It was fine.) But in my experience, by the age of fifteen at least, every kid has heard all the bad language there is under the sun -- at least if they go to school or ever take any form of public transport. I come into contact with it every single day when I leave the house because people just swear a lot. All the time. Maybe that's a British thing, though -- maybe we're more relaxed about it? I don't know. Anyway, I've never understood censoring books for language, especially if it's occasional. It's not like it's anything NEW to any of the readers. Maybe a six year old, but not a teenager. Even one who doesn't use poor language will have heard it.

I actually wrote a whole blog post once about censorship in books, because growing up I had a lot of friends whose parents tried to stop them reading books (including, like, the Lord of the Rings, which was written by a CATHOLIC) because apparently it was 'inappropriate' and it went against their religion. My parents were Christian too, let me read what I want, and I didn't turn out a psychopath or teenage mother or school dropout so ... you know, I'd say that was a reasonable success. I don't believe in censorship of any sort. A recommendation not to read a book until you're older -- now that's different.

[Jenni]

You've read Good Omens too. I ♥ you.

It really depends on the 15yo. I know some 15yos would not be phased by it. And some parents of 15yos would have my head if I handed them a book with an f-word in it. (Then again, Good Omens is just ever so slightly irreverent enough that those parents would probably not approve of it anyway. Oh well.)

And it is fair that it did work for the character. And it might be a British thing, to be more relaxed about swearing, IMO. But I'm not British so I don't know for sure.

I think I need to PM you so we can chat nicely about GO. Seriously you've no idea how happy it makes me to find someone else who's read it who I didn't recommend it to. XD

[Hannah]

Miriam, actually I have spent most of my life in the South, including many trips to Washington D.C. and many rides on the Metro (subway/bus system there). Until three years ago, I never heard the f- word. I heard plenty of h- and d- words but nothing worse until very lately.

I do understand that English culture is very different in that respect. A lot of my English friends have a very peppery vocabulary.

I find it very interesting that authors, until very recently, found no need to resort to the dirtier words to express their characters' emotions. For an angelic character to say "d--" is going to be just as bad as anything else. I was hearing the other day (in a radio discussion of public profanity) that the f- word is actually a Middle English word and has been in use in armies and brothels ever since then. It was never acceptable in decent society until this century. I think this goes back to the decay of Western civilization.

I recently read my first John Steinbeck, "The Pearl", after my nephew read it in school. The story was incredibly memorable and stuck with me, but the language was a big issue, and I do not plan to read more of his books. I read books because I like the story, but I don't want to be continually distracted from the storytelling by words that always make me wince. When there are thousands of great books out there that are pure, unalloyed fun, why should I read those that are crude or unpleasant? That's the reason I don't read tragedies.

[Katie]

Oh, is that why that's in there. * lightbulb * Although any swear word would have made the point, I guess he went with the strongest one available to emphasize the point.

[Jenni]

And my stance officially on swear words is that I've pretty much heard it all at school; it's got to be really serious to shock me anymore. (Or frequent.)

Yeah - it had to be stronger than anything Crowley used to make the point. And Crowley has a wide variety of language IIRC.

[Leah]

Hannah wrote: "...we took out the whole scene of where Christy's lady mentor explains how she once had a child out of wedlock. WAY too much detail on one page."

Oh my gosh, I remember reading this when I was thirteen or fourteen and being like O.O. Don't even remember exactly what details it went into, but I still remember being shocked.

[Katie]

Of course, then there was the near-rape scene in Julie of the Wolves... o.O

[Leah]

Katie wrote: "Of course, then there was the near-rape scene in Julie of the Wolves... o.O"

There was?! I don't remember that...

And, off the topic of censorship and such, just finished To Darkness Fled. So far the series has been great.

[M F]

Corey wrote: "I'm not sure "they've been exposed to it before" is a particularly convincing argument. They may have heard it all before, but it doesn't automatically follow that they should keep hearing (or reading) it."

I was thinking about this earlier while revising for the Classics exam I have on Wednesday, reading through some of the set texts we have to learn. The language in there is FILTHY (like, I'm fairly relaxed about swearing and I would NEVER use words like that, particularly not so frequently), yet we're being asked to study this? Sheesh, we're 16/17: what sort of impression are they trying to give us?

(I guess this relates to the point of 'keeping hearing it' -- the school are literally asking us to memorise quotes that use the f-word and, notably, the c-word, which I personally think is completely unacceptable in any circumstances because it's just so derogatory, especially in the context it's used here.)

Horace is a filthy filthy man. As is Petronius. Ugh.

[Katie]

Homeschool for the win. *grin *

When I was twelve I was dead-set against the idea of editing Shakespeare. When I was 17 and understood more of it, I was suddenly in favour of.

[[deleted user]]

Yeah, if you asked my parents why they chose to homsechool, that kind of thing would be one of the first examples they'd give you. :P

[Jenni]

While I don't approve of forcing kids to memorize quotes with offensive language in them, I am rather impressed that they're having you memorize quotes at all...

[M F]

Katie wrote: "Homeschool for the win. *grin *

When I was twelve I was dead-set against the idea of editing Shakespeare. When I was 17 and understood more of it, I was suddenly in favour of."

But Shakespeare's innuendoes are hilarious! And given that most of them have to be explained, I'd leave them in and then just not explain them. No one would even know...

Jenni wrote: I am rather impressed that they're having you memorize quotes at all...

Alas, we aren't given the texts in the exams for Classics, but have to include textual evidence, so it's memorising for me. English they give us the books and poems. Classics it's just like, nah, you can totally remember 8 satires, 20 letters and a novella, can't you?