Nothing But Reading Challenges discussion
Let's Talk About: Your Books
>
What are you reading AND what do you think?
message 51:
by
Amanda
(new)
Jan 15, 2011 07:07AM


reply
|
flag





I'm currently reading


What did you rate Angel Burn, Lacey? And that does sound different, usually the angels books that I read has two types of angels- the fallen (a.k.a. the bad type or seeking redemption) or the ones who still have an in with God (a.k.a. the good guys).

im reading the Narnia series ..... 2nd Book


Try this. If you read it online it's free, it costs to download it to an ereader or phone, though. It's the original on one side and a modern "translation" on the right. http://nfs.sparknotes.com/macbeth/

You're welcome. There's also a "Shakespeare Made Easy" series that is published in book form. Also, as much as people may not want to read it even once, the first time you read a play, it will usually have to be read at least twice.




Try this. If you read it online it's free, it..."
That's a great link, Shay. I too never really enjoyed Shakespeare because I couldn't understand what people were saying. Wish I'd known about this when I took AP Lit. :) I'd plan on reading more Shakespeare and this link will come in right handy then.
@Mckris10: We did that in high school as well. Even spoken out loud, I can't understand it. A couple of days ago I started watching Zefferelli's Romeo and Juliet (I'd enjoyed it the first time I'd scene it in high school English), and the acting along with the speaking helped my comprehension a bit. Some parts, though, I was still lost.

Exactly, Shakespeare should be read aloud especially the first time you read a play. The thing to remember is that Shakespeare never intended we read the plays. They were made to be seen on stage. I don't think he meant the plays to be read by anyone other than actors or people connected with performing a play. Also, the basic structure of a play is something you have to get used to. Unless it's spoken out loud, you don't get into the character's head and know their thoughts, feelings, motivations. So, part of reading a play is figuring all of that out. Think of yourself as an actor and how you would perform it on stage when you're reading it.




We're reading it in aloud in class (I've been assigned the roll of Lennox, btw), but like Niquae said it doesn't make it anymore understandable.

I don't find Macbeth to be one of the more accessible Shakespeare plays, but at least it's not Lear! I think the comedies tend to be the most accessible/easily understood for people who have a hard time with Shakespeare - As You Like It, Twelfth Night, Midsummer Night's Dream, etc. I think humour is easier to get across, regardless of the elizabethan language, than anguish or irony or social commentary - those don't tend to be as easily picked up on as a dirty joke, sadly enough.

The narrator is Jesse Bernstein. He's pretty good with voices and decent with voice-acting, but sometimes the type of voices he chooses to use is silly, exaggerated, and stereotypical. He's not a boring narrator although I will admit to falling asleep while listening to this in bed. I think that kids would enjoy his narrating more.
After I'd read The Lightning Thief, I'd read a few reviews on Goodreads. Some of the negative reviews complained about the similarities between this series and Harry Potter. I have to admit that I'd completely overlooked those similarities. As I listen to Sea of Monsters, I can now easily identify the similarities, which does dismay me. I can not enjoy the series as much as I did when I first started now because I'm mentally, automatically comparing the two series.
Lesson: Do not read reviews after reading a book I'd enjoyed.

I started reading



I don't have anything against first person as a rule, but many authors do have problems with it. (The most frustrating manifestation of it for me is unrestrained, repetitive navel-gazing.)

Gah. When I get the navel-gazing books, they're automatically thrown against the wall then tossed into the sell/swap pile. Bleh.
What I can't understand is why so many UF authors use first person. Was there a vote at a secret club meeting or something? These authors can (usually) write well but by limiting themselves to a single narrator and making them as annoying as possible, it reflects poorly on them. Then again, maybe it's the genre itself that upsets me and the first-person is just a catalyst.







We are given our first "couple" in the first "chapter" of the book, and then something happens. We are told nothing else. I got sooo frustrated by this because I couldn't figure out who these characters were, what happened to them, what was going on, and why we were introduced to totally new characters from the second "chapter" on. I kept flipping through the book to find out what happened to the first "couple" and whether they'd get back together. I think I have a vague idea now, but I'm still not certain.
By page 60-70, the ONLY part I truly enjoyed was the first 3 pages when we first meet Rhapsody. My first impression of her was, with dismay, "Oh no. Not another Mary Sue-ish character." That tavern keeper and his wife adores her. Then, she became really funny. I nearly snorted aloud on the train. But when we meet the baker... Ugh. I used to like Mary Sue-ish characters, but for some reason, these days I have less patience with them.



I am impatient to meet up with Ashe.

I'm torn. I desperately want to start Blackveil by Kristen Britain. It arrived in the mail today. I've been waiting a few years to read it. But I also want to meet Ashe and find out what goes on in Rhapsody next. So while I wait for a impulse decision, I waste time online. lol.




I never finished it either. A lot of people liked it, I wasn't in that group.

I'm just finding it so... teenagerish. Not that teenagerish is always a bad thing for a book to be, but this one is just so incredibly cliched and I have no interest in any of the characters - they seem like teenage cliches, not real people.


That's exactly the way I felt about Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson and the Olympians series. I liked the idea and the humor, and even somewhat of the way he set it up, but I didn't think that the series was GREAT. It had promise to be better but was kind of dumbed down, I thought. I could totally see why young adult readers might really enjoy it though.

That's exactly the way I felt about Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson and the Olympians series. I liked the idea and the h..."
I don't think the series is great either. I can't get what all the hoopla is about. I couldn't even finish the first book. But I guess to each his own...

What intrigued me was the fact that it was a m/m paranormal romance - my first. The main protagonist is apparently straight and ends up with a gay mate. While I didn't think that the author handled that part of the storyline very well, the characters are fun. If I had to describe this book with one word, fun is the first word that would pop into my hand. So far, I think it is a 3-star. I am more than halfway done.






I have yet to hear something bad about this book. I have really high expectations.


Hey, I loved this book, I was lucky enough to get an ARC of it and fell in love with it instantly. So it's been awhile since I've read it but I still remember the major details of it. If you guys like this one I think you'd like

Books mentioned in this topic
Kira-Kira (other topics)Siracusa (other topics)
Emma (other topics)
Vicious (other topics)
My Man Jeeves (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Delia Ephron (other topics)Caroline Kepnes (other topics)
Sarah Waters (other topics)
Kate Kerrigan (other topics)
Haruki Murakami (other topics)
More...