Boxall's 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die discussion
Members
>
Hardest Book to Read?
I found One Hundred Years easy to read and enthralling.
Heart of Darkness was dense and so it was slow reading, even though it was a thin book. I don't know if the other Conrad books will be similar. I believe Joselito had a review on what sounded like a very difficult book by William Gaddis.
Tristram Shandy. So very very dense. I could see that it was going to be a good story, with funny political commentary, but my god, it hurt my brain!Like someone said upthread, perhaps when I'm a recluse living on a moutain...
Drew wrote: "Foucault's Pendulum was actually really easy for me, almost a page turner. I think that those who worry about not getting references in it are missing the whole point of the book."I was the same, I loved Foucault's Pendulum almost to the extent that I was starting to believe their lies :P
I love Finnegans Wake but I doubt that I'll ever actually finish it. It's like swimming in some enormous river: from time to time I love to dive in & have a good time but when I come out-there it still is, flowing on forever!I'm at the beginning of Infinite Jest & I feel a huge pressure to read it since I selected it as a challenge book for myself but I may fail at this one. :(
Sooooo difficult and long.
Ellie wrote: "I love Finnegans Wake but I doubt that I'll ever actually finish it. It's like swimming in some enormous river: from time to time I love to dive in & have a good time but when I come o..."When I have to read a book that I really don't want to, I commit to reading 30 pages a day. At that rate, you can usually finish up in 4-6 weeks. If I end up really not liking it, I make it my first book of the day. I have to read those 30 pages before I can read anything else.
Ellie wrote: "I'm at the beginning of Infinite Jest & I feel a huge pressure to read it since I selected it as a challenge book for myself but I may fail at this one. :(Sooooo difficult and long. "
Ellie - Infinite Jest gets easier as you get into it a bit more. It becomes easier to keep the characters sorted and the three major plotlines in your head. There will be some payoffs. :)
And IJ isn't as long as War & Peace or Les Miserables. (Which isn't saying much!)
I have a very stupid question; why force yourself to read a book that you have to really struggle to get through because you dislike it or find it really boring? I've read a number of books on the list that make me wonder why they are there.
I don't think you should force yourself to finish a book if you really dislike it. Reading should be a way to spend your time in an enjoyable way. Sometimes it's rewarding to finish a book that you've particularly struggled with though, so you have to decide for yourself.I've read only a few list books, but the hardest ones for me so far were Lord of the Rings and the Vicar of Wakefield. I read LotR ten years ago when I was an exchange student in New Zealand. It was the most difficult book I had ever read in English at the time and I should probably reread it at some point because I think I missed some stuff. The Vicar of Wakefield was also quite difficult to read in English, if I ever find a copy in my native language I'll read it again.
One of the most challenging novels I'm now reading is the first novel (in a series) by Proust ---
"SWANN'S WAY"
I confess to being a Francophile (having twice visited Paris). So I've been keen to read "À la Recherche du Temps Perdu" since the late 1990s.
My problem, being the voracious reader I am, is making myself sit down for a sustained period of time and concentrating wholly on the novel. It can be a bit daunting when you have to sprint through paragraphs that are a page or more in length. Sometimes I liken the experience to that of a long-distance swimmer in the Ironman competition.
Nevertheless, I am determined to read the series.
KOMET wrote: "One of the most challenging novels I'm now reading is the first novel (in a series) by Proust ---"SWANN'S WAY"
I confess to being a Francophile (having twice..."
Proust is one of the most beautiful prose writer I have encountered. But at time that prose can be difficult to get through.
Cindy wrote: "Ellie wrote: "I'm at the beginning of Infinite Jest & I feel a huge pressure to read it since I selected it as a challenge book for myself but I may fail at this one. :(Sooooo difficult and long. ..."
The length is only a problem because of the difficulty, I think. And I actually love what I read but I feel exhausted (I think from the somewhat manic energy of the writing) after only a couple of pages. So I'm caught-I do like the book but I feel overwhelmed by it. And also, I think, afraid that my brain isn't smart enough for it-something I rarely admit, even to myself!
And although I generally don't push myself any more to finish books I'm not enjoying, this doesn't exactly fall into that category since I am enjoying it. It's more that my brain can't quite keep up with it. And I have had the experience of pushing myself to read a book that literally (in a positive way) changed my entire experience of reading after reading it & taught me how to read in a new way that opened up many more kinds of books to me than I had been able to access before. The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman was a book like that-it was only after finally (it took me 10 years!) reading it that I could read-and enjoy-many 20th century works. I was pretty much stuck in the 19th century until then (not but that I had a great time there!).
And I feel this could be the same kind of experience. Or I could, of course, be wrong.
It's funny because although I found, say, Swann's Way slow reading I didn't find it difficult. I think because Proust write in a way that meshes with how I think.
Whereas Wallace thinks in a different way than I do & that's challenging, uncomfortable but also exciting.
So, some thoughts, I guess, on why I'm pushing myself to read this.
Ellie, I felt much the same way reading Infinite Jest, in that it exhausted me to read it. I loved to hate it while I was reading it, and found myself hating to love it in other parts. I agree with Cindy that it does get easier as you read - which I think had more to do with me getting into a Wallace groove, personally. Like I seemed to finally get the way his brain worked - sort of a scary concept at times. I bitched about it while I was reading it (and I still do even now sometimes...), but I was a happy fool when I finished it. I hope you continue to enjoy it!
Amanda wrote: "I disagree that the author's job is to have an entertaining style, especially since what entertains us changes over the years. In the past, it was the reader's job to engage the novel, not the othe..."Thank you Amanda, and to extend the mantra to the world beyond lit. - it is our job to engage the world, not the world's job to entertain us.
Very interesting thread: remember that not all books are meant to be "understood" at first reading. Some great books take years to absorb, time for immersion. Revel in the literature and enjoy the process!
I agree-this is why I continue to struggle. I really feel this book is worth making every effort. So I will. Maybe, El, I'm afraid of really getting into Wallace's mind.And I suspect this is a book that I won't complete "get" in a first reading so I may have to surrender whatever fantasy I have about that.
I think, Amanda & Hubert, that it is the author's job to bring their very best to the work, whatever that means in terms of that particular work & writer & that it is then the reader's job to not simply consume the work but to actively engage with it, something like Jacob's angel.
That being said, if the author has not done their work, it is not the reader's job, I don't think, to do both. I mean s/he can, but then the author truly is dead & only the reader exists. Which I don't believe. The most fruitful reading is when both parties bring talent, creativity, knowledge, skill, & the willingness to work hard to the table.
You also have to think about lengthy books differently. Often in an "average" length book, it takes about 30-50 pages for an author to get going- setting, character development, etc. So, in a 1000 page books, it's not unreasonable to think that you may have to force yourself through the first 100-200 pages to get to that point.
Ellie wrote: "I love Finnegans Wake but I doubt that I'll ever actually finish it. It's like swimming in some enormous river: from time to time I love to dive in & have a good time but when I come o..."Wow! I'm impressed! Good for you, Ellie. I often feel like I'm the only one on the planet who's actually read this. But I'll take Ulysses over Finnegans Wake any day.
Mikela wrote: "I have a very stupid question; why force yourself to read a book that you have to really struggle to get through because you dislike it or find it really boring? I've read a number of books on the ..."A lot of times, I'll read a book like Moby Dick just to see what all of the fuss is about. Also, I have always had this desire to catch every reference. It started when I was a kid reading Poe and found that he referred a lot to Greek mythology, so I started reading that. You can see how that quickly spirals. My final reason also goes back to my childhood. My English teacher recommended Rebecca and I really struggled with it. Every day I'd go to class and say, "Miss Mertz, I just don't like it!" She'd tell me to keep at it. Finally, after two weeks, I got to the halfway point and finished it that weekend. So, a part of me always thinks that even if a book doesn't start out well, I'm holding out hope that I'll actually love it in the end. (Hardly ever happens, but I keep hoping!)
Ellie wrote: "It's true. I remember it took me 100 pages to click into The Name of the Rose & then I adored it."I once read an interview by Eco where he said that he purposely started the book slowly because he wanted to weed out the unworthies! I know it's really snobbish, but I thought that was wonderful. :)
Well, I'd like it a lot less if I hadn't passed the test, lol!
The hardest book for me was American Psycho. I detested that book from the first to last word and all those in between. I understand I'm in the minority on this but I felt dirty while reading it. A horrible book in my opinionl
Tej wrote: "Mikela wrote: "I have a very stupid question; why force yourself to read a book that you have to really struggle to get through because you dislike it or find it really boring? I've read a number o..."http://www.powermobydick.com/
Another group I belong to is reading Moby Dick and someone posted that as a reference. It's an online, annotated Moby Dick. I wasn't able to do the discussion- too much going on, but it seemed like a great reference.
just took a brief look at the annotation. It appears that it will be a tremendous asset when I get to Moby Dick. Thanks for posting it.
Ellie wrote: "Whereas Wallace thinks in a different way than I do & that's challenging, uncomfortable but also exciting."So well said! I hadn't thought about it this way, but I completely agree.
And like you and El, reading IJ exhausted me as well. I couldn't read more than 50 pages a day. And even then, I was really pushing it.
Even though I didn't enjoy IJ in the same way I enjoy a new SF release, I think I can say that I enjoyed it. I enjoyed the whole experience and putting the pieces together, the intense conversations with fellow IJ readers, and I especially enjoyed the accomplishment.
That's what I'm hoping for Cindy. There are different kinds of enjoyment. Like in running-short sprints & marathons. Each brings its own rewards & pleasures.For example, I found another book on my challenge, Blindness by Henry Green, very difficult but suddenly, in the final third of the book, I understood how to read it-he taught me & I finally learned, & then I enjoyed it tremendously.
Back in the heady days of grad school, I used to love reading really difficult novels - Gravity's Rainbow, Ulysses, The Sound and the Fury - but now that I've left the ivory tower, I find my reading tastes to be much simpler.... In all honesty, I have to say that it's often great author's "easier" works that haunt my imagination and stay with me. Joyce's first published work,Dubliners, a collection of short stories about the lives and ways of people in Dublin, is probably my favourite work by him.Ex Lit Prof
www.the-reading-list.com
Leslie, have you seen John Huston's movie version of The Dead? He did a wonderful job, I thought.
I've been thinking about this topic for a while and couldn't come up with a book that has been particularly difficult...This morning I suddenly remembered how hard it was to get through Rushdie's "Satanic Verses". The ridiculousness of the so-called plot and characters made sticking with that one very hard indeed. Of course, I also knew I was missing many of the author's points and references due to my ignorance of his culture and religion.
I've been reluctant to try another Rushdie novel since that experience though I have at least one more title waiting on my TBR shelf.
Ellie wrote: "That's what I'm hoping for Cindy. There are different kinds of enjoyment. Like in running-short sprints & marathons. Each brings its own rewards & pleasures.For example, I found another book on my..."
What an excellent revelation! I wish I could say that reading Rushdie had done the same for me with his books!
Watt by Beckett was hard to read because it was so disjointed and nonsensical. It was a rough draft, experiment the author never intended be published and was published after his death. It is on the 2006 list only.
Chel wrote: "Watt by Beckett was hard to read because it was so disjointed and nonsensical. It was a rough draft, experiment the author never intended be published and was published after his death. It is on ..."Oh dear, Chel, I may have to just skip that one! Thanks for the info.
by Mark Helprin.Reading this book was a HORRIBLE, excruciating experience. I was so relieved to finish it.
Funny, both my husband and I liked that book, and found it a fairly easy read.
KOMET wrote: " by Mark Helprin.Reading this book was a HORRIBLE, excruciating experience. I was so relieved to finish it."
I also enjoyed SotGR a lot.
Sonia wrote: "Zee wrote: "I think I'll leave that one till last then lol!Seriously... so far for me it's The Unbearable Lightness of Being. It was unbearably boring... I had to force myself because..."
Oops, coming back to this thread 9 months later :) It was for creative writing class at Uni. I hated it. I don't think I will ever like Kundera's work. I simply do not understand it.
Having said that, I also disliked Dubliners by James Joyce. It was really dry. Sorry people. I just hope his Ulysses is a lot different even if it isn't a lot better.
Mikela wrote: "The hardest book for me was American Psycho. I detested that book from the first to last word and all those in between. I understand I'm in the minority on this but I felt dirty whil..."Oh dear, I know what you mean. It shocked me like no other book ever has. But I learned a lot about different literary concepts and was surprised that I was able to finish it. I won't be hurrying back to it any time soon, but it is a very important and notable book purely for the WAY it is written. With 'American Psycho' I learned that I could respect the author's literary talent even if my brain revolt against the subject matter. Truly a singular book!
Judith wrote: "I've been thinking about this topic for a while and couldn't come up with a book that has been particularly difficult...This morning I suddenly remembered how hard it was to get through Rushdie's..."
I fear Satanic Verses. No real reason, but I fear it.
Ellie wrote: "It's true. I remember it took me 100 pages to click into The Name of the Rose & then I adored it."I'll make a mental note of that Ellie. It's one I'm looking forward to getting into in the new year. I have yet to read Eco. I hope he doesn't turn into another James Joyce!
Zee, I totally agree about Kundera, although I've only read T.U.L.O.B, so I'm not sure I'm qualified to judge.Ulysses is definitely a lot different from Dubliners, but the main difference is that Dubliners is written in relatively standard style (that is, comprehensible) whereas Ulysses is poetic/allusive/gibberish, depending on whom you ask. So it's a lot harder to get into, and a lot easier to get lost in. If that makes sense.
If you haven't read anything by Rushdie, I'm not sure The Satanic Verses is a particularly good starting point. It's definitely over 500 pages, probably over 600 pages I think, and it has all of the magical realism stuff he's known for, but its narrative is also really disjointed and it has an enormous cast of characters. Midnight's Children, which people will say is his best book, is similar in size and scope and frustration-potential. I'd try something a little more modest...maybe Shame or The Moor's Last Sigh (my favorite book of his) or even The Enchantress of Florence. The first one I tried to read of his was Midnight's Children, and I gave up 150 pages in when I realized the main character hadn't even been born yet. I came back after reading 4 or 5 other Rushdie books and liked it much better.
I think Eco is more readable than Rushdie or Joyce or, for that matter, Kundera. I've only read Foucault's Pendulum, but I really liked it and it was easy to read.
I couldn't read The Name of the Rose. There was a lot of untranslated Latin and Italian, for one thing. But mostly I found I just plain didn't care about 14th Century Italy and the political conflict.
That's exactly what I'm worried about with The Name of the Rose. Foucault's Pendulum is cool because it's about conspiracy theorists and most of the references are jokes, and if you don't recognize them (which for a lot of them I didn't exactly, or only half got them) you don't lose much. The Name of the Rose is supposed to be such an engaging mystery, but....it's about monks! Come on!
I see many others in this thread that I truly enjoyed: The Princesse de Clèves, for instance; can't imagine not liking anything by Dickens; quite liked Dubliners. Some others that are mentioned, I just might not get around to though.
CD wrote: "Les Miserables is worse in French, but it's a great story if rambling. And has been said so many times, 'just how much description of the Parisian Sewer do we need?'Two others I found especially ..."
Oh, now I LOVED The Bell Jar, found it very easy to read! Maybe because at the time I read it, both my oldest son & my youngest daughter were mid range teens with all that sort of angst, & I read quite a few of my daughter's books after she did that dealt with teen depression, suicidal thoughts, etc.
Boxall's 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die
Books mentioned in this topic
War and Peace (other topics)The Name of the Rose (other topics)
Notes from Underground, White Nights, The Dream of a Ridiculous Man, and Selections from The House of the Dead (other topics)
The Case of Comrade Tulayev (other topics)
Dubliners (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Mark Helprin (other topics)Mark Helprin (other topics)
Samuel Beckett (other topics)
Foucault's Pendulum was actually really easy for me, almost a page turner. I think that those who worry about not getting references in it are missing the whole point of the book.
For me, the most difficult thing I've read in a long time is The Sound and the Fury. I read As I Lay Dying a few months ago, and really liked it, probably because it was short and polished. TSATF, on the other hand, has a lot of stuff crammed into it, and quite often it can seem like harping on a single theme. Add that to the difficulty imposed by the different narrative styles and jumbled timeline, and the experience is hardly worth it. I'm almost all the way through Quentin's section, and I'm really hoping that the other two will be cooler.