Fun Stuff > ENJOY
Reading this summer
loam:
--- Quote from: CamusCanDo ---I think what everyone is trying to say is that compared to a heavy handed piece of classic lierature like Ulysses, Gaiman's work is definitely a "light read". This does not mean that his works lack any sort of depth or tone. It's just a whole lot fucking easier to read because my fucking god, Ulysses.
--- End quote ---
I think you summed it up correctly.
--- Quote from: TheFuriousWombat ---This looked pretty cool. How is it?
--- End quote ---
I shall report back when I am finished. I'm not very far at the moment.
Tom:
--- Quote from: Linds on 11 Jun 2008, 06:37 ---Hitchhiker's Guide.
--- End quote ---
I for one am absolutely sick of this book, I spent the whole of Term 1 analysing it for Advanved English.
loam:
--- Quote from: n0t_r0bert_b0yle!! on 11 Jun 2008, 20:37 ---
--- Quote from: Linds on 11 Jun 2008, 06:37 ---Hitchhiker's Guide.
--- End quote ---
I for one am absolutely sick of this book, I spent the whole of Term 1 analysing it for Advanved English.
--- End quote ---
A. I would argue that Advanved English would have to be an awesome class, based on irony points alone.
B. Anyone who thinks that hitchhiker's guide needs to be analyzed, over or no, needs to be shot.
Lines:
Analyzing any book that you may have at one point liked kills it. People think I'm crazy for hating Catcher in the Rye, but part of it was because we analyzed the crap out of. (I wouldn't have liked it anyways, maybe just tolerated it, but I loathe that book now.) So I see why and I too agree with point B.
But as I haven't read it and it seems like a fun read, I'm going to read it. I won't blabber on about it though, for your sake. :-)
jimbunny:
I don't know. There's a kind of analysis that will lower enjoyment, but I think that's the kind of analysis that tries to detach the 'hidden content' from the 'surface content.' That's just a poor way of looking at literature, in my estimation. I mean, people analyze books every time they read one--we just don't call it 'analyzing'. Taking a closer look at the work, tossing it against other books, comparing styles and themes--I think these are perfectly legitimate things to do to a work of literature. If nothing else, they help you remember the things you read.
Anyway, I was planning on doing an independent (tutored) study this summer on contemporary American poetry. I decided to call it off on account of low funds, but I still ordered all the books from the list my prof and I compiled. So far, I've read Traveling Through the Dark by William Stafford, and I'm in the middle of The Freeing of the Dust by Denise Levertov. These are both really good, and lots more accessible than I think the casual reader assumes of modern poetry. There's a whole bunch of books left on the list, and I probably won't get through them all this summer... Don't have that list with me now; I'll put more up later, maybe.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version