The Best Book you ever read?

[Ewan MacDonald]

So many to choose from, I tried looking around my room (which has at least 150 books in it, worryingly not even half of my collection) but a very short list.
Homer's Illiad and Odyssey, wonderful stories, magical language, true epic.
Joseph Heller's catch 22, possibly the best satire I have ever read, after two dozen reads I still find something new every time I read it.
Herodotus, the original Historian, at least his flagrant inaccuracies are admitted, more impressive than many modern writers, and the stories are fabulous.
Beowulf, the language is sensational, although some grasp of Old English is necessary to appreciate it.
Finally, The Lord of the Rings (I know its far too fasionable) My favorite story, a true moden epic which tells what is really, behind the wizards and orcs, a human tale, quite sensational.


[hr]In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing.
Oscar Wilde, The Importance of being Earnest (III)

[Campbell]

i always thought catch 22 was a bit pants

but deadkidsongs by toby litt is phenomenal

[zuza]

I think Philip Pullman's HDM trilogy has to be up there with the best. It has such a gripping plot and so many different subtle underlying ideas that you find more every time you read it. Moreover it is absolutely beautifully written.

I would have to disagree with "smith" who said that anyone who includes Harry Potter is a fool. I think J K Rowling's books are great. They simply appeal to some people's sense of humour more than others. Although perhaps not a literary accomplishment, no-one can dispute that she hasn't completed an amazing feat by "introducing" reading for pleasure to a large majority of school-age kids. There is also a lot more to be gleaned from her books than the basic plot for those open-minded enough to give them a chance.

[Kizzy]

On the subject of treating books nicely, I agree to a certain extent: I sign and date the corner, and don't like bending the pages, but have a certain fondness for making the book truly mine - adding in little ssheets of paper with thoughts on whatever's being said, or annotations (in pencil only, apart from in my own academic books, in which I write in pen). It's particularly nice when dealing with poetry, I find: means if you see something in the poem once, you never forget it! Also little sticky labels on the pages are acceptable, in my view.

Now...bookmarks: what do we think on those?


(apologies for minor thread diversion)

[Ewan MacDonald]

I never use Bookmarks because i keep losing the damn things. However, if it is a nice book, or someone elses I use scraps of paper to mark pages instead of folding them over.

Does anyone else treat different bools differently. For example my copy of the Iliad is kept in pristine condition, while the various trashy thrillers I read are scattered haphazerdly, have pages folded over, and eventually, after much use, lose their paperback covers. Am I just a book slob, or is anyone else as bad as this.

[hr]In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing.
Oscar Wilde, The Importance of being Earnest (III)

[blondie]

Everyone in the world should read 'The Book Of Disquiet' by Fernando Pessoa. I'm having a Portugese phase at the minute. Jose Saramago is amazing, especially 'Blindness'. Everyone should read that too...
Or Calvino, Calvino is good for everyone. But Camus has to be my favourite writer. Sigh.
Often wonder what is lost in the step of translation, though. Are you truly reading the same book that the author originally wrote? Saddens me to think that it's only someone else's interpretation.

[chittabeep]

...

[Kizzy]

[s]Ewan MacDonald wrote on 15:38, 5th Mar 2004:
Does anyone else treat different bools differently. For example my copy of the Iliad is kept in pristine condition, while the various trashy thrillers I read are scattered haphazerdly, have pages folded over, and eventually, after much use, lose their paperback covers.

I'm similar, actually, only I think I treat mine differently according:
1. To the content of the book - academic and more literary books get more anotations, but are better kept, wheras not one of my Maeve Binchy collection has the full cover intended for it.
2. My fondness of the book's contents - My Chaucer is in a nice condition, but the Milton's major works looks as if it's been used by some amateurs as a football. Which it probably should.


And bookmarks are silly - I wish I could afford more nice hardbacks with the lovely ribbony-bookmarky thing, which solves all problems. Also, I did develope a tendancy to eat paper bookmarks not so long ago, simply by chewing on the corner as I read, and suddenly theyu would be about half their requisite size!

[Setsuna]

I dont read a lot, im a science student, I like plain english and a GOOD story.

im a big fan of Amy Tan - i love the Joy Luck Club, A Hundred Secret Senses, The Bonesetter's Daughter and The Kitchen God's wife is my favourite. They are all pretty similar concepts but great stories.

I also just finished 'Ghostwritten' by David Mitchell. Very very clever, a great read - a bit like 9 degrees of seperation of different people around the world.

I read Alice Sebold - The lovely bones too... a bit of a weepy, but not spectacular.

[KateBush]

[s]Kizzy wrote on 14:21, 5th Mar 2004:
On the subject of treating books nicely, I agree to a certain extent: I sign and date the corner, and don't like bending the pages, but have a certain fondness for making the book truly mine - adding in little ssheets of paper with thoughts on whatever's being said, or annotations (in pencil only, apart from in my own academic books, in which I write in pen). It's particularly nice when dealing with poetry, I find: means if you see something in the poem once, you never forget it! Also little sticky labels on the pages are acceptable, in my view.

I like to write my name, where and when the book was bought inside the cover. And I love writing my thoughts next to the text. I have to confess that I am one of those infernal people who scrawls in the margin--but only ever in pencil in library books. Pen in my own though. And I used to think it was terrible to break the spine of a book but now I think it's really cool--it shows you've read and used it.

.rassic Gibbon's Sunset Song (the entire trilogy, in fact)and did I forget to mention I adore Wuthering Heights? Jane Eyre too.





[hr]
a red rose is not selfish because it wants to be red rose. It would be selfish if it wanted all the other flowers in the garden to be both red, and roses. -Oscar Wilde

[quarterstaff]

i spot a lack of science fiction here...

so may i take a moment to recomend some to you all:

the Foundation Series, by Isaac Asimov
The Mote in God's Eye, by Larry Niven
Redemption Ark, by Alistair Reynolds
The Rama Series, by Arthur C. Clarke
The Galactic Milieu Series, by Julian May

and anything by:

Stephen Donaldson (though his fantasy series "the chronciles of Thomas Covenant is one of the best written pieces of literature i have come across),

Frederick Pohl
Poul Anderson
or
Robert Silverberg


and please note... that these are all good novels as well as good science fiction... they are not mere future flights of fancy. For example... star trek and star wars are NOT science fiction... they are future fantasy. The above however both stimulate the mind and show the possibilities of how sceince, technology and the nature of the universe could shape the human condition.

enjoy.

[loretta]

I feel a bit sorry for Anne Bronte. Everybody tends to forget about her contribution because 'Jane Eyre' and 'Wuthering Heights' are so immortal. However 'Tenant of Wildfell Hall' is a really good book, and actually very modern in the way it treats the subject of a single mum who escapes from a violent and alcoholic husband.

People who like books should read Jasper Fforde and his Thurday Next books; 'The Eyre Affair,' 'lost in a good book,' and 'The well of lost plots.' Intelligent books with a silly storyline.

[exnihilo]

[s]chittabeep wrote on 16:24, 5th Mar 2004:
Herodotus in Ancient Greek is about 100 times better than in English...the subltleties of the language give the anecdotes a great deal more depth--but I would tend to agree, Herodotus was "the man."

What errantly fatuous drivel. The question of how well a writer reads in the original language or in translation depends entirely on the worth of the translator, and to a lesser degree on the extent to which one is familiar with the original. All statements like that serve to do, for such is their intent, is inform people that you have a passing reading knowledge of Ancient Greek. How enormously enterprising of you, but hardly something you need to wave in people's faces. It impresses not one jot or tittle.

[Campbell]

[s]KateBush wrote on 17:46, 5th Mar 2004:
[s]Kizzy wrote on 14:21, 5th Mar 2004:[i]


.rassic Gibbon's Sunset Song (the entire trilogy, in fact)and did I forget to mention I adore Wuthering Heights? Jane Eyre too.





sorry but i couldn't read that and not say that sunset song is one of the most boring, overrated books ever commmited to paper. it did only take him about 3 weeks to write though, i suppose, so you could almost forgive him. almost.

[Setsuna]

Sunset song - horrible flashbacks of Higher English - Ewan Tavendale the course tink brute - a dirty sinful book where sex is implied - TWICE...


I didnt really get why the book was controversial - i didnt even realise when they were talking about sex - it either shows how innocent i am or that you have to spell these things out for me. I didnt even finish the book because i used it to kill a spider (couldnt touch it afterwards)

I think the fact i got an A in my higher is the jammiest single event known to man.

*remembers, sorry, off topic* Has anyone ever had Dr Jackson in the modern languages dept.? When he found out I got an A for Higher German he commented that 'it shows just how bad the scottish education system is'.

D'oh!!

pity I cant fluke my way through uni

[Mackie]

Most definitely Harry Potter but also books like His Dark Materials, LOTR, The Regeneration Triology, Narnia Chronicles...I could go on for a wee while yet

[Amaunet]

Grassic Gibbons "A Scots Quair" is just one of these books that will give me nightmares for life. I just didnt like it one tiny bit.

I am a big fan of the Bronte sisters in general- so much that I did my adv. higher dissertation on them and ended up with something like 12 pages over the word limit- I think its the only time i've ever had to sit down and cut it down- oh how I cried.

I also love Austen, in fact i'm a big fan of the "classics": im working my way through the penguin classics list- its great fun.

Stephen Donaldson is a very good writer- in general, i will pick up a "classic" than a sci-fi novel, but he is a favourite.

One of my favourite kids series was Nancy Drew- yup, I do realise I am one of the few- but I did like her- and wanted a green mustang 'till about the age of 13 =) I am also a big fan of Swallows and Amazons- so good.

And to the poster who suggested that Harry Potter wasn't that good a book- not only is it very funny and full of intresting things- but the amount of research JK Rowling has done on little things- like character names, places or spells is incredible. As a classicist its really intrsting to read the books and go "oh" at the little things- for instance the term "hippogriff" is a mythical animal that appears in Miltons "Paradise Regained" and the poems of Saadi. No matter how much you may dislike JK Rowlings style of writing- she is very well read and has done a lot of preparation to the Harry Potter books.

[exnihilo]

Grr. Flatter yourself not - you're a classics student, not a classicist. Sir Kenneth Dover is a classicist.

[Plette]

[s]exnihilo wrote on 22:24, 5th Mar 2004:
Grr. Flatter yourself not - you're a classics student, not a classicist. Sir Kenneth Dover is a classicist.


What's up, exnihilo? You've so far insulted two people on this thread for no good reason. She didn't say "I'm the master of classical knowledge" - in the context, I think it just means "someone who is interested in and studies classics," similar to the way medical students are called medics.

Has anyone called you pretentious for having a Latin nickname? No. Even Sir Kenneth Dover was a beginner at some point, so don't get down on people just for having some affection for their subject. If she's proud to be a classics student and wants to call herself a classicist, more power to her.

[dear oh dear]

[s]exnihilo wrote on 22:24, 5th Mar 2004:
Knowing about hippogriffs hardly speaks of extraordinary research, so much as it does of simple general knowledge. Maybe Ms Rowling read books when she was younger? Unlike todays teenagers.


Oh stop moaning old man. Harry Potter books are the main reasons why so many kids and teenagres today do read books. They are good fun books, a book doesn't have to be a masterpiece to be "good" (look up the definition if it's confusing you so much).

The one really annoying thing about book discussions is that there are always a few who see it as a competition - who looks smarter and more well read etc etc
If I like a book I don't care what the reviewers or the critics say, and I care not one jot what those who read to make themselves look better think. Enjoyment of a book is completely subjective.

The Harry Potter books are good fun and good to read, those I have met who don't like it are all too stuffy anyway