The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion
Miscellaneous - Archives
>
Some of My Favorite Short Story Collections & Authors
I love O, Pioneers, and I've read it several times, seen the film twice, and moderated it at another site. The film was made for TV, with Jessica Lange, and it's completely faithful to the book, a real gem. I agree on Ulysses. We were forced to read it when I was an English major in college, and it was absolutely gibberish. I just skimmed through most of it after giving up. I can't read stream-of-consciousness books, and this was the worst. I think Joyce didn't really care if anyone understood it, as long as he did.
I've enjoyed a few Austen films, but I haven't the patience to read her books.
Getting back to short stories, I've read some recently by Fitzgerald, and Wharton's ghost stories.
Rochelle wrote: "I think Joyce didn't really care if anyone understood [Ulysses], as long as he did. "That assumes that he did. Is that a safe assumption?
Mod
LOL! IMHO, I also happen to think it is absolute rubbish too! I say that as a man who has 'read' (of course, reading implies comprehension--so, I haven't really 'read' any of it!) between one-third and one-half of that collection of pages (hard to call it a 'book') probably 10-12 times in my life.
But why have you tried 10-12 times? It's no clearer after the first time. I gave away my copy 40 years ago. Yet this is considered on EVERY book list, one of the great books of the 20th Century.
Mod
Yet this is considered on EVERY book list, one of the great books of the 20th Century."
That was why, Rochelle! I kept hearing (I'm not quite sure from 'who,' come to think of it?) that this was one of the great 'books' of the 20th century. I swear that over the years that I probably bought 4-5 copies in support of my futile efforts. I have long since disposed of my last copy of Ulysses, and will never, ever procure another. I am probably classified as a 'slow-learner.' ;-)
The "who" is all the Great Book lists. You're an optimist, not a slow learner, and you also have a larger book budget than I. I see many books on the "Great" lists that I know I won't read, either because of difficulty or length. Reading should be fun, I feel. You want to stretch your mind, but not torture yourself. Actually, I left Western Canon (after one week) because I found too many of the books unappealing.
If you want to know about Ulysses, probably Laurel (ID Laurele)actually understood it. Laurel has the huge literary background that's needed to understand the references.
I hardly dare confess that I like Ulysses and most of Joyce. I like stream of consciousness writing in general - perhaps because I had a maternal grandmother who spoke in it!! But then, of course, I don't like Austen - there must be a connection:O.
Nothing wrong with liking and understanding Ulysses. But I think the majority of readers absolutely don't understand it, and books, after all, are written for readers, not just for the author's own pleasure. I've seen some Austen films, but I have no patience for the length of her books, and I own none. The last one I read was Northanger Abbey in college.
MadgeUK wrote: "I hardly dare confess that I like Ulysses and most of Joyce. I like stream of consciousness writing in general - perhaps because I had a maternal grandmother who spoke in it!! But then, of course,..."
Trolling for unsuspecting Austen fishes, are you?
I don't dislike stream of consciousness, per se. It's that Joyce made Ulysses so damn impenetrable. I liked Everyman's remark @53, because I'm not convinced Joyce understood Ulysses either.
Trolling for unsuspecting Austen fishes, are you?
I don't dislike stream of consciousness, per se. It's that Joyce made Ulysses so damn impenetrable. I liked Everyman's remark @53, because I'm not convinced Joyce understood Ulysses either.
Mod
You know, Kate, I almost have to wonder if Joyce didn't write Ulysses and especially Finnegan's Wake to 'poke a finger' in the eye of the critics. Maybe it really is all simply "gibberish" and "rubbish" and the critics haven't figured it out either. Either that, or Joyce was just bats**t crazy!
Christopher wrote: "Maybe it really is all simply "gibberish" and "rubbish" and the critics haven't figured it out either. Either that, or Joyce was just bats**t crazy! "
Both could be true ;>
Both could be true ;>
There are several Austen groups here, so we need not worry about her in this group. Whew!Why would an author write a book HE doesn't understand?
Needless to say, I had trouble with Woolf's To the Lighthouse also. They did it on PBS about 10 years ago, and I thought the book would enlighten me, but it didn't.
Madge now has a second title, "Explainer of Stream of Consciousness." We're counting on you.
Rochelle wrote: "There are several Austen groups here, so we need not worry about her in this group. Whew!"
Well, you might have been saved from Austen if Chris had limited us to the Victorians. But personally I'd like to do Emma with a group like this and it fits the timeline, so you may be out of luck!! You and Madge can lob rotten tomatoes from the sidelines. ;P
Well, you might have been saved from Austen if Chris had limited us to the Victorians. But personally I'd like to do Emma with a group like this and it fits the timeline, so you may be out of luck!! You and Madge can lob rotten tomatoes from the sidelines. ;P
Mod
Well, you might have been saved from Austen if Chris had limited us to the Victorians. ..."
Personally, I would love a group read of Emma at some point! Beautifully written, and a puzzler, layers-upon-layers.
Kate wrote:You and Madge can lob rotten tomatoes from the sidelines. ;P
I never implied rotten tomatoes. :) Her books are among the greatest ever written. I just don't have the patience for long-winded books any more. I think the Austen book clubs here do an excellent, extraordinary, outstanding job, (except perhaps for the one named "the Jane Austin Club,") and we don't have to repeat their work. :)
But I also belong to multiple book clubs in case I don't like a selection on a given month :) 5 here and 2 at that bookstore's site. Heh-heh.
I just noticed: this thread is for Short Story Collections. Duh.
Christopher wrote: "Kate wrote: "MadgeUK wrote: "I hardly dare confess that I like Ulysses and most of Joyce. I like stream of consciousness writing in general - perhaps because I had a maternal grandmother who spoke ..."There's nothing wrong with stream of consciousness if people can understand it but the fact that so many people have great difficulty with Joyce does make one wonder about the merit of the work and it's such a good thing that in this group at least people can say what they think because you do sometimes come across people who will talk about having read Joyce as if it's some kind of badge of honour or something and don't you just hate literary snobism where everybody is aiming for status according to what they have read which is why this group is so refreshing when people like Everyman can admit to reading "brain candy"...whoever would've thought?And people can say that they love Austen and others are free to disagree so let's just leave it there for now and I hope it all made sense.
Jan wrote: "Christopher wrote: "Kate wrote: "MadgeUK wrote: "I hardly dare confess that I like Ulysses and most of Joyce. I like stream of consciousness writing in general - perhaps because I had a maternal gr..."
Brava! You can take a breath now.
Brava! You can take a breath now.
Christopher wrote: ""I agree on Ulysses. We were forced to read it when I was an English major in college, and it was absolutely gibberish."LOL! IMHO, I also happen to think it is absolute rubbish too! I say that ..."
I have never succeeded in tackling it, but I finally decided that I should at least understand what all the fuss is about, so when it went on a deeply discounted sale, I bought the Teaching Company lecture series on Ulysses. Just arrived today, 24 lectures just on Ulysses. So if I ever get time to tackle the course, I'll at least know what I am or am not missing.
Rochelle wrote: "I've seen some Austen films, but I have no patience for the length of her books, and I own none. The last one I read was Northanger Abbey in college...."
Egad. I don't think a single one of her books, except maybe Mansfield Park, is as long as Adam Bede, and Sense and Sensibility is one of the shortest full length novels you'll ever run across.
Kate wrote: "Well, you might have been saved from Austen if Chris had limited us to the Victorians. But personally I'd like to do Emma with a group like this and it fits the timeline, so you may be out of luck!! You and Madge can lob rotten tomatoes from the sidelines. ;P "Hear hear! I'm sure some Austen will be nominated for future reading here, and may even win. Sorry I can't supply the rotten tomatoes, but we've had an almost record cold summer here, and so far my tomato plants have given only about two dozen ripe tomatoes and hundreds of green ones that I have little hope will ever ripen on the vine now that September is here.
Jan wrote: "There's nothing wrong with stream of consciousness if people can understand ..."I am rolling on the floor helpless with laughter. Beautifully done.
Getting back to short stories, I don't have a collection yet, but I love Grace Paley's stories. Her characters speak in an urban "New Yorkese" that I can relate to, and she has a deep understanding of family relationships. I first discovered her through an NPR show called "Selected Shorts," readings of 2 short stories by actors each week. Don't know if it's still on, but it was a great way to discover new (to me) writers. I just order her Collected Stories (1994.)
It's still on, and I can listen to them streaming on my computer!! Yay!!Here are 2 by Paley
http://beta.wnyc.org/shows/shorts/201...
Everyman wrote: "Jan wrote: "There's nothing wrong with stream of consciousness if people can understand ..."I am rolling on the floor helpless with laughter. Beautifully done."
Well, thankyou Everyman but you really shouldn't encourage me because I'm likely to just keep going because this is what it's like in my head with all kinds of thoughts just tumbling about and talking about tumbling when you said you were rolling on the floor I couldn't help thinking well he's really fallen completely off his pedestal now but it's good to see you have a sense of humour because it helps if people keep laughing and another funny thing is that I only just realised yesterday that Kate's picture is a cat yawning while all this time I thought it was some kind of ugly elephant with a shrunken ear if you have a look you'll see what I mean at least your cat is clearly a cat Rochelle and I never knew before I joined Goodreads that there were so many literary cats I never thought to teach one how to read although I did show a picture book to an orangutan at a zoo once which she seemed to appreciate and people think Chris is slightly eccentric?
MadgeUK wrote: "I appreciate Austen's irony but prefer the more descriptive writing of, say, Bronte and Hardy. Austen herself said that 'the little bit (two inches wide) of ivory on which I work with so fine a br..."Austen's brush might be not as bold, but she could be snarky as hell. They're plenty of 'ouch' moments when she skewers some of the most offending characters.
My favorite Austen is P&P (yes, it's predictably sweet, but I love the romance and humor) and Persuasion. Mansfield Park is the one I'm struggled with. I thought that parts of it are turgid, complex plot or not, and overall too preachy. Emma makes the same point with a lot more subtlety.
I haven't read NA for ages and haven't read Udolpho (hint to Chris!). ; )
I can see you like stream of consciousness, Jan, by the sparse punctuation in your posts. LOL.Jan, neither is a literary cat. There's a limit to what looks good in a 26x33 pixel space. I worked hard on my avatar in Paint Shop Pro to make it legible in 26x33. I revised it about 5 times, but not everyone has that facility. Kate is using Simon's Cat, from a series of brilliant animated shorts by Simon Tofield.
Cat lovers, please note if you haven't seen all 7:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search...
Everyman--Not going to do the nested quotes in quotes in quotes here. I said that to Madge because she felt jokingly that she had to apologize for liking and understanding Joyce. I think probably she and Laurel are the only ones, and we haven't asked Laurel, but I will.
Everyman wrote: Egad. I don't think a single one of her books, except maybe Mansfield Park, is as long as Adam Bede, and Sense and Sensibility is one of the shortest full length novels you'll ever run across. I'm not reading Adam Bede, as I'm on Ruth Prawer Jhabvala's Heat and Dust right now, and about to begin Woolf's Orlando at another site. however, the short length of Austen's S&S would be a plus for me. But she's still not on my A list.
Mod
"...and people think Chris is slightly eccentric?"
Why, yes, I am--Thank you very much! ;-)
For anyone who's having trouble seeing avatars or anything on the net:I've run a little program called Virtual Magnifying Glass in my tray for many years.
http://magnifier.sourceforge.net/
It has a variety of magnifications for placing on areas on your monitor, and uses only 3 MB of RAM. You just place it with your cursor, then click it off.
Madge is using Picasso's "Woman with Cat," obviously inspired by Joyce's style.
Back to the topic, heh-heh:Any other opinions on Paley's short stories?
Hope you're feeling better Chris. And it's goodnight from me. 12:40am (Thursday)
Christopher wrote: ""...and people think Chris is slightly eccentric?"Why, yes, I am--Thank you very much! ;-) "
Isn't being on the Goodreads site in the first place a pretty good sign of eccentricity all on its own?
Everyman wrote: "Isn't being on the Goodreads site in the first place a pretty good sign of eccentricity all on its own?"
Ummm, No. Lots of role playing and just for fun groups hang out on GR too. Being in weird groups on GR that read classics is a much better indicator. ;>
Ummm, No. Lots of role playing and just for fun groups hang out on GR too. Being in weird groups on GR that read classics is a much better indicator. ;>
I'm in the midst of Freedom right now so won't be able to join you guys in Adam Bede until I'm finished with it (hopefully in the next few days).*confesses that she is, unlike certain people here who only read the classics, susceptible to literary hype* ; )
Mod
*confesses that she is, unlike cert..."
Do come along when you can, Sandy! We look forward to you joining us. In the meantime, enjoy the Franzen novel.
Rochelle wrote: Everyman--Not going to do the nested quotes in quotes in quotes here. I said that to Madge because she felt jokingly that she had to apologize for liking and understanding Joyce. I think probably she and Laurel are the only ones, and we haven't asked Laurel, but I will.
I started Ulysses a couple of times, Rochelle, but that's all I can say about it.
Meaning: you couldn't go on. That makes me feel GOOD! LOL. You usually read challenging books that I won't touch.
I found my book of Wharton short stories and it's Edith Wharton Short Stories Thrift Edition by Dover Press, the reprint company. She wrote dozens, and I think we should look into some, before 1901 of course. The Greater Inclination covers her stories up to 1899, originally published in Scribner's Magazine.
The ghost stories are in:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23...
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36...
Mod
She wrote dozens, and I think we should look into some, before 19..."
Rochelle, I am of the opinion that all of Wharton's short stories are fair game for this group. She started writing inside of our loosely defined period of time. Some of her very best stories were written in the teens, 20s, and early-30s. Anyhow, now worries; at least from my perspective, I say she's in.
Christopher wrote: "Rochelle wrote: "I found my book of Wharton short stories and it's Edith Wharton Short Stories Thrift Edition by Dover Press, the reprint company.
She wrote dozens, and I think we should look int..."
This "time frame" is becoming interestingly fluid around here. So it sounds like we can start pushing it far enough to include the WWI writers and poets? Yes or no?
She wrote dozens, and I think we should look int..."
This "time frame" is becoming interestingly fluid around here. So it sounds like we can start pushing it far enough to include the WWI writers and poets? Yes or no?
Don't know. Is WWI covered by other groups? 1800-1918 is a long stretch of so many different literary movements. We don't have to cover what's covered in other groups.There is an Edith Wharton group here, but there's been no activity for a month, and I left.
Mod
Kate's example of the WWI poets and writers seems to fit. For example, Hardy wrote poetry until his death in 1928; and similarly for William Butler Yeats. Saki wrote until he was shot and killed during WWI (1916, I believe). I think most of our stuff will fall unambiguously inside the "1800-1910" period, but some will stray on either side. I am quite comfortable with lovingly embracing some of those outliers and bringing them into the fold, so to speak.
How say all of you?
There are also groups called "Between the Wars," and "Bright Young Things"('20's and 30's,) both of which I'm a member. Ask the other members if they want to overlap other groups.If you want to cover an author's total oeuvre, you'll end up in the '60's.
Mod
It sounds good to me Chris. I like the idea of being able to chase an idea or an interest without running up against an arbitrary cut off date. But then I was the one asking if we could push the boundaries here ;>
Maybe we should keep the group reads within the defined time frame, though. I assume you chose 1910 to make a cut between the Victorians and the modernists, which makes sense. So I'd propose keeping the main reading within those tighter parameters and allowing more flexibility with respect to poetry, short stories, additional parts of an author's oeuvre. Make sense?
Maybe we should keep the group reads within the defined time frame, though. I assume you chose 1910 to make a cut between the Victorians and the modernists, which makes sense. So I'd propose keeping the main reading within those tighter parameters and allowing more flexibility with respect to poetry, short stories, additional parts of an author's oeuvre. Make sense?
Good sense, Kate. Maybe we should think more of movements than exact years. I like cutting out the modernists, and if any of their poems came out between 1901 and 1910, tough noogies to them!
Mod
The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910
Books mentioned in this topic
Contos de Terror, de Mistério e de Morte (other topics)The Weird Orient (other topics)
ألزهايمر (other topics)
عودة الياسمين إلى أهله سالماً (other topics)
طوق الحمامة في الألفة والألاف (other topics)
More...
Now Madge, you don't happen to have a photo of above mentioned postcards that you could show, by any chance?