Confess your literary ignorance

[Nine Bob Note]

I've tried on a couple of occasions to read Lord of the Rings but hated it and had to give up.

Try the Hobbit. It's about twelve pages per film

 

[Orang Utan]

I don't have the imagination for science fiction

This statement makes no sense.

 

[Orang Utan]

Worst book I've ever read, and I've read manuals on microprocessor design

Give over. It's amazing.

 

[Pickman's model]

Worst book I've ever read, and I've read manuals on microprocessor design

i've read worse than that

 

[Spymaster]

tell you what try a bit of space opera and ee "doc" smith's lenssman series. give triplanetary a go.

Just had a look. I really don't think it's for me.

 

[Pickman's model]

Just had a look. I really don't think it's for me.

fair enough.

 

[laptop]

That seems more like wisdom than ignorance, tbh.

Gnorance, I was about to say.

 

[Spymaster]

This statement makes no sense.

Of course it does.

 

[DotCommunist]

It's hard to confess ignorance because that would be unknown unknowns. Tolkien is a known unknown.

DotCommunist did recently tell me to compare something with several sci fi writers I'd never even heard of. Unfortunately I can't remember who they were. But I hereby confess my ignorance. (It was during a conversation about the difference between science fiction and science fantasy).

asimov, egan, c clarke and KS Robinson vs I can't remember who I put here but brin and space opera in general

 

[Orang Utan]

Of course it does.

can you expand on it then please?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

asimov, egan, c clarke and KS Robinson vs I can't remember who I put here but brin and space opera in general

Only one of those I've read is Egan. Great ideas. But I struggle with the writing. The coming together of great sci-fi ideas and a great writer seems to be a rare occurrence.

Olaf Stapledon is similar for me.

 

[danny la rouge]

i've read worse than that

Me too: The Life of Pi.

 

[Orang Utan]

None of us have read these:
A Brief History of Books That Do Not Exist

 

[Cheesypoof]

I've never read any big fat Russian novel. Too hard to keep track when there are three times as many names as characters, I've heard.

I hated The Master and Margarita, what a confusing book. Didn't do it for me at all. If i am gonna commit myself to reading 900 pages (okay well 350 for that particular one), i want to be able to follow it.

 

[DotCommunist]

Only one of those I've read is Egan. Great ideas. But I struggle with the writing. The coming together of great sci-fi ideas and a great writer seems to be a rare occurrence.

Olaf Stapledon is similar for me.

I don't make the categories up but I can see some use in the descriptor 'hard SF' which is basically very science minded extrapolations as opposed to grand space operas about uplifted apes and spiders a la Brin or Tchaikovsky (no not that one).

bit like music mags sub genre naming all the time. Five minutes ago it was steampunk this, urban fantasy that. The new weird. Its a tricky line to draw between hard sf and science fantasy but I'd say faster than light automatically makes it fantasy, time travel also.

 

[Cheesypoof]

I only have one more tip from my literary ignorance:
I have this on the shelf but not tried it yet - from the 30s USA - Bukowski rates it very very highly as an early US classic written with the modern tightness and seeming simplicity, or something....I havent read it so dont know... I like Bukowskis attitude to writing and language so it appeals to me ... hard times in depression era LA....

It's much better than Bukowski, John Fante is the man who inspired him to write.

 

[danny la rouge]

can you expand on it then please?

It's quite easy to understand. He believes he has the wrong level of imagination for sci fi: that the amount of imagination he has is sub optimal in order to get the best of the genre. Either he thinks a lot of imagination is required in order to read sci fi, and he doesn't possess a lot, or he thinks only a little is required, but he has a lot.

Or perhaps not quantity, perhaps quality; he has the wrong quality of imagination. A different quality of imagination is required in order to get the most from sci fi.

 

[Orang Utan]

It's quite easy to understand. He believes he has the wrong level of imagination for sci fi: that the amount of imagination he has is sub optimal in order to get the best for the genre. Either he thinks a lot of imagination is required in order to read sci fi, and he doesn't possess a lot, or he thinks only a little is required, but he has a lot.

Or perhaps not quantity, perhaps quality; he has the wrong quality of imagination. A different quality of imagination is required in order to get the most from sci fi.

that's not easy to understand!

 

[danny la rouge]

that's not easy to understand!

Yes it is. I can understand it.

 

[Cheesypoof]

I bbarely read at all any more. basically only when i have no phone or wifi signal.

That's a shame .

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's much better than Bukowski, John Fante is the man who inspired him to write.

I'm a big fan of Bukowski, but I think I agree that Fante's better on some levels - a deeper level of honesty. You get the feeling Bukowski doesn't want to give Chinaski too hard a time or too bad a thought. Fante has no such qualms - the bits about Bandini's wanking exploits both rang very true for me ( ) and spared the character little.

 

[Lurcio]

Love to get my chops into Middlemarch.
George Eliot - lovely fella (& a reputable used car salesman).

 

[Orang Utan]

Yes it is. I can understand it.

because you wrote it. i genuinely don't understand this imagination thing - you read so you can be entertained by someone else's imagination

 

[Cheesypoof]

I'm a big fan of Bukowski, but I think I agree that Fante's better on some levels - a deeper level of honesty. You get the feeling Bukowski doesn't want to give Chinaski too hard a time or too bad a thought. Fante has no such qualms - the bits about Bandini's wanking exploits both rang very true for me ( ) and spared the character little.

Yes, Ask the Dust is a beautiful gem of a book. Bandini's story 'The Little Dog Laughed' and putting on his suit in the morning is so bittersweet, my favourite kind of mood for a novel. And it's really sad and brilliant too, Camilla is the typical hotblooded fire and ice kind of woman he craves so badly. I would never describe Charles Bukowski as contrived, but John Fante is a much better writer. Bukowski's essay on the reason he became a writer is thanks to John Fante, is pretty amazing. I think he says that Fante, 'writes from the gut and the heart.' Which is true. The essay is here and well worth reading

Charles Bukowski Introduction to the John Fante Novel Ask the Dust

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yes, Ask the Dust is a beautiful gem of a book. Bandini's story 'The Little Dog Laughed' and putting on his suit in the morning is so bittersweet, my favourite kind of mood for a novel. And it's really sad and brilliant too, Camilla is the typical hotblooded fire and ice kind of woman he craves so badly. I would never describe Charles Bukowski as contrived, but John Fante is a much better writer. Bukowski's essay on the reason he became a writer is thanks to John Fante, is pretty amazing. I think he says that Fante, 'writes from the gut and the heart.' Which is true. The essay is here and well worth reading

Charles Bukowski Introduction to the John Fante Novel Ask the Dust

Will give that a read. Credit to Bukowski, though. If he hadn't banged on about how Fante is King all the time, I'd never have read Fante.

 

[danny la rouge]

because you wrote it. i genuinely don't understand this imagination thing - you read so you can be entertained by someone else's imagination

Sometimes you can't imagine what they're on about, though. Too much suspension of disbelief might be required, for example. For example, I was put off Philip Pulman by the terms for fictional technology that litter the first pages of his trilogy. It was a huge turn off for me (that and the fecking daemon changing shape all the time. Give it a rest). I thought, "I'm off to read something less annoying, and frankly less like CS Lewis".

If spymaster were to say that's what he means about not possessing the correct imagination, then I'm entirely with him.

 

[Cheesypoof]

Will give that a read. Credit to Bukowski, though. If he hadn't banged on about how Fante is King all the time, I'd never have read Fante.

I heard of Fante from a work colleague. Like ska invita, i had it on my shelf for years but was so glad when i finally read it. A richly rewarding book

 

[D'wards]

I've only read 18 off this list of 100 Best Novels (and I reckon I read most of those by the time I was 40 - I've been reading 'middlebrow' fiction for the last 15 years )
The 100 best novels written in English: the full list

13 - I've read very little pre-1950 novels - and the ones I have are probably on that list, apart from a load of Agatha Christie I suppose

 

[D'wards]

It's much better than Bukowski, John Fante is the man who inspired him to write.

I've read six Bukowski - three are superb, one is okay and two were fucking awful (Tales of Ordinary Madness is the worst book I've ever read)

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I've read six Bukowski - three are superb, one is okay and two were fucking awful (Tales of Ordinary Madness is the worst book I've ever read)

Yep. That and his last one, Pulp, is also really poor, sadly.

Ham on Rye
Factotum
Post Office

all brilliant.

Hollywood
Women

Worth reading after the three above. Not as good, but enjoyable.