Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

What books are you currently reading?


Books

7,401 to 7,444 of 7,444 << first < prev | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | next > last >>

Lord Snow wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I understand the love for Pratchett, but don't share it. He relies on the same general brand of humor as Douglas Adams (whose novels I also didn't like) and, to some extent, Monte Python (whom I also don't think are all that funny).

Unlike the Monthy Python and Adams, though, Pratchett usually tells stories that actually have merit. It is astounding to me how many times I found myself actually on the edge of my seat reading a Discworld novel. He has real things to say and real stories, sometimes even about characters you can care about.

I know, I know, his stories happen in an intentionally silly world with intentionally silly rules, but... the lion king is about talking animals, yet that doesn't make the story in it any less engaging, right?

Now if you find the humor more annoying than fun I can see why reading the books wouldn't be as interesting for you. I just think that in many ways Pratchett is a step above Adams or MP. There is a method to his madness.

I can get behind this. As I grew out of my "random humor" phase, I liked the Hitchhiker's Guide less and less.

The Dirk Gently novels are interesting in a different way - on a rereading, you can see the "holistic" part far more clearly. Tiny, casually-mentioned events have potentially major ties to the story.

As for Discworld, it evolved - and grew far more serious as a setting - with every passing book.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
I know, I know, his stories happen in an intentionally silly world with intentionally silly rules, but... the lion king is about talking animals, yet that doesn't make the story in it any less engaging, right?

Well, The Lion King is basically Hamlet on the African savannah, though that doesn't invalidate your point. It's also why good genre fiction is no less *literary* than literary fiction, and I'll defend that idea against any person or professor who cares to disagree.


Just reread Small Gods. I'd forgotten some of the subtle things I'd liked about it.

Spoiler:
On the Disc, the gods aren't just fueled by belief - they're shaped by it. So if the people all believe you have a penguin as your sacred animal, you soon will.

In time, gods can die... while still being worshiped. The people believe in the Church and forget the god. SYMBOLISM!

The remnant god encountered in the desert is a little unsettling, as is the big moment of rekindled faith.

The Exchange

Readerbreeder wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:
I know, I know, his stories happen in an intentionally silly world with intentionally silly rules, but... the lion king is about talking animals, yet that doesn't make the story in it any less engaging, right?
Well, The Lion King is basically Hamlet on the African savannah, though that doesn't invalidate your point. It's also why good genre fiction is no less *literary* than literary fiction, and I'll defend that idea against any person or professor who cares to disagree.

Yeah, and The Wyrd Sisters is basically Macbeth on the Discworld ;)

I actually don't think fantasy (and SF, and horror) are as "literary" as literary fiction, I just happen to think this is not a bad thing. These differnet kinds of books are trying to do different kinds of things. A SFF book can be great even if the language is clear and you didn't learn much about life or yourself or whatever by the time you finished reading it. It could just be an interesting adventure with some funny moments, some action, and likable characters and that just does not make for a good book for many people.

Sure, you can find SFF books that have literary components and even some that could actually be really good literary books (I consider A Song of Ice and Fire to be such a work, for example), but this is not the main focus of those genres. Star Wars will never be Citizen Kane... but then, Citizen Kane will never be Star Wars either.

Accepting differences in focus is different than accepting an inherent superiority in one of the genres.


Lord Snow wrote:
Readerbreeder wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:
I know, I know, his stories happen in an intentionally silly world with intentionally silly rules, but... the lion king is about talking animals, yet that doesn't make the story in it any less engaging, right?
Well, The Lion King is basically Hamlet on the African savannah, though that doesn't invalidate your point. It's also why good genre fiction is no less *literary* than literary fiction, and I'll defend that idea against any person or professor who cares to disagree.

Yeah, and The Wyrd Sisters is basically Macbeth on the Discworld ;)

I actually don't think fantasy (and SF, and horror) are as "literary" as literary fiction, I just happen to think this is not a bad thing. These differnet kinds of books are trying to do different kinds of things. A SFF book can be great even if the language is clear and you didn't learn much about life or yourself or whatever by the time you finished reading it. It could just be an interesting adventure with some funny moments, some action, and likable characters and that just does not make for a good book for many people.

Sure, you can find SFF books that have literary components and even some that could actually be really good literary books (I consider A Song of Ice and Fire to be such a work, for example), but this is not the main focus of those genres. Star Wars will never be Citizen Kane... but then, Citizen Kane will never be Star Wars either.

Accepting differences in focus is different than accepting an inherent superiority in one of the genres.

Part of it is realizing that "literary fiction" is basically a genre. It has its own rules and tropes, just like any genre. And there are plenty of bad books written in the "literary fiction" genre, just like in any other.

And like any set of genres, there are cross over works. Things written with the conventions of both literary and science fiction, or literary and mystery fiction or whatever.


Kalindlara wrote:


As for Discworld, it evolved - and grew far more serious as a setting - with every passing book.

And that was the biggest weakness of the DW books. The setting got too serious, too defined, too much its own thing rather than a parody of fantasy tropes. That's how it was best and funniest, with some social commentary flavoring it. After a certain point, around Pyramids/Reaper Man/Small Gods the books steadily declined. Not that they were bad, at least not until the end, but they got less good. Too much soap box, not enough fun. Apart from the three already mentioned, Masquerade and The Color of Magic and The Light Fantastic are the best books.


Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:


As for Discworld, it evolved - and grew far more serious as a setting - with every passing book.
And that was the biggest weakness of the DW books. The setting got too serious, too defined, too much its own thing rather than a parody of fantasy tropes. That's how it was best and funniest, with some social commentary flavoring it. After a certain point, around Pyramids/Reaper Man/Small Gods the books steadily declined. Not that they were bad, at least not until the end, but they got less good. Too much soap box, not enough fun. Apart from the three already mentioned, Masquerade and The Color of Magic and The Light Fantastic are the best books.

From what I understand, that's more to do with your (general your) personal philosophical/political leaning than the stories themselves. I've never read anything by Pratchett, but I've been told by the people I tend to associate with that the books you don't like are the books I should start with.

At some point in the not too distant future I'm hoping to finally start digging into his books.


I've decided to shelf Aurelius for a while because having boring material printed in 6 pt font is not conducive to reading.

I've broken into the copy of In Defense of Sanity by G K Chesterton that my father loaned me just so he'll get off my back about it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
I actually don't think fantasy (and SF, and horror) are as "literary" as literary fiction, I just happen to think this is not a bad thing. These differnet kinds of books are trying to do different kinds of things. A SFF book can be great even if the language is clear and you didn't learn much about life or yourself or whatever by the time you finished reading it. It could just be an interesting adventure with some funny moments, some action, and likable characters and that just does not make for a good book for many people.

Agreed; the way I used "literary" earlier was in the sense that I've heard it used too often in my pursuit of a degree in English: anything that isn't "literary" is supposedly not worthy of reading and discussion. I think that looking at it as thejeff suggested (with literary fiction as its own genre, with its own tropes, rules and traditions) works well.

That being said, sometimes you just want to disappear into a rollicking good story, and who cares what anyone else thinks?

I'm currently reading The Wise Man's Fear, the second in Patrick Rothfuss' Kingkiller Chronicle; not very far into it, though. Anyone know if there's anything out there on the arrival of #3?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

All I've heard is there will be (is?) a book about that shy girl hiding in the Underschool.

The Exchange

Readerbreeder wrote:

Anyone know if there's anything out there on the arrival of #3?

It is slated to happen after the release of Winds of Winter and shortly before Half Life 3.

Wise Man's Fear spoilers!:
I didn't really like A Wise Man's Fear. There was a lot to enjoy, as it is a feel-good story (for the most part) with fluid writing, but too little happens in it for me to feel satisfied. It's not even the kind of nothing-happens that I have come to know from the Wheel of Time where everything is dense and a lot of stuff seems to be happening but actually nothing moves forward. Rather, an actual pile of nothing happens in the book. Honestly I can't see Rothfuss finishing the series in the third one, as Kvothe is not even at the half point of that List of Awesome Deeds he promises in the first book.

Also, I know this is a mildly silly criticism, but... come on, "The Doors of Stone"? I can build an algorithm that is fed generic fantasy words and spits out something better than that. A friend of mine calls the book "The noun of adjective".

The Exchange

SmiloDan wrote:
All I've heard is there will be (is?) a book about that shy girl hiding in the Underschool.

The book is already out and is interesting in context of the discussion of what is "literary" since it is very much a work in the genre of Stream of consciousness. In the story Laurie wakes up one days and decides that some things are not where they belong, so for near a hundred pages she walks around and thinks about that. Most certainly not your typical fantasy book. I'm not interested in this kind of thing so I didn't read it, and it is hard to judge if it is good in what it does or no because many reviewers judge the book on how it matched their expectations rather than its own merit.


Books I'm in the middle of on the verge of another Brooklyn vacation:

A Game of Thrones--will maybe read some more today and then go to Brooklyn and read La Principessa's copy

The Halfling and Other Stories--still put down; I bought this one used at a D&D store in Cambridge where they advertised it as from the library of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Sci-Fi Club. Binding's all wrecked and it's held together by a rubber band. I don't dare take it to Brooklyn.

Tess of the D'Urbervilles--Threw it away after it got soaked; hopefully La Principessa has a copy, otherwise, I guess a visit to the Brooklyn Public Library is in order.

Leaves of Grass--will accompany me on the bus.

I think I'll also bring More Soviet Science Ficiton edited by Isaac Asimov and, if after that, I need more reading material, I will throw myself on the mercy of La Principessa's bookshelves.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber

Reading right now: Conn Iggulden's War of the Roses - Stormbird. Hoping to finally understand the mangled mess that was this war.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I understand the love for Pratchett, but don't share it. He relies on the same general brand of humor as Douglas Adams (whose novels I also didn't like) and, to some extent, Monte Python (whom I also don't think are all that funny).

You are not alone.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SmiloDan wrote:

Ready Player One is sooooooooooo good!!!!!!!!

OMG YES IT IS!


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
All I've heard is there will be (is?) a book about that shy girl hiding in the Underschool.
The book is already out and is interesting in context of the discussion of what is "literary" since it is very much a work in the genre of Stream of consciousness. In the story Laurie wakes up one days and decides that some things are not where they belong, so for near a hundred pages she walks around and thinks about that. Most certainly not your typical fantasy book. I'm not interested in this kind of thing so I didn't read it, and it is hard to judge if it is good in what it does or no because many reviewers judge the book on how it matched their expectations rather than its own merit.

Personally, I thought the story was amazing, as did a friend of mine. But we both recognized that it is very much not for everyone, which the author even acknowledges in his forward. I think you will either love it or be completely apathetic towards it.

The Exchange

Caineach wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
All I've heard is there will be (is?) a book about that shy girl hiding in the Underschool.
The book is already out and is interesting in context of the discussion of what is "literary" since it is very much a work in the genre of Stream of consciousness. In the story Laurie wakes up one days and decides that some things are not where they belong, so for near a hundred pages she walks around and thinks about that. Most certainly not your typical fantasy book. I'm not interested in this kind of thing so I didn't read it, and it is hard to judge if it is good in what it does or no because many reviewers judge the book on how it matched their expectations rather than its own merit.
Personally, I thought the story was amazing, as did a friend of mine. But we both recognized that it is very much not for everyone, which the author even acknowledges in his forward. I think you will either love it or be completely apathetic towards it.

I once tried to pick up Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, and I put it down, aghast, after about half a page. I daresay this kind of writing is probably not for me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Finished Gallagher a couple of days ago. Started in on Stampp's Causes of the Civil War. I saw it described years ago as essentially a book that presents every possible argument and asks you to pick one, but it actually appears to be a survey of the historiography of the question up to 1991 with major primary sources included. So that's neat.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Treppa wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:

Ready Player One is sooooooooooo good!!!!!!!!

OMG YES IT IS!

I don't even play video games and still got most of the references!

:-D

The Exchange

SmiloDan wrote:
Treppa wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:

Ready Player One is sooooooooooo good!!!!!!!!

OMG YES IT IS!

I don't even play video games and still got most of the references!

:-D

Is that so? I've been hearing from everyone and their grandmothers that Ready Player One is the best thing that happened in the universe since dinosaurs, but since I never really played much 80's era video games I figured I am highly unlikely to get most of the references and thus would just be left scratching my head a lot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Samnell wrote:
Finished Gallagher a couple of days ago.

For a second I thought you meant this Gallagher. Please, finish him; he needs to be put down.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Readerbreeder wrote:
Samnell wrote:
Finished Gallagher a couple of days ago.
For a second I thought you meant this Gallagher. Please, finish him; he needs to be put down.

I used to really enjoy him and, while I hadn't watched him or heard anything about him in years, had fond memories. Then, you know, he turned out to be a racist and homophobe. Was not really asking for a Cleveland steamer in that particular happy place.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Samnell wrote:
Readerbreeder wrote:
Samnell wrote:
Finished Gallagher a couple of days ago.
For a second I thought you meant this Gallagher. Please, finish him; he needs to be put down.
I used to really enjoy him and, while I hadn't watched him or heard anything about him in years, had fond memories. Then, you know, he turned out to be a racist and homophobe. Was not really asking for a Cleveland steamer in that particular happy place.

I know what you mean; at one time Bill Cosby was my favorite comic.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Lord Snow wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
Treppa wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:

Ready Player One is sooooooooooo good!!!!!!!!

OMG YES IT IS!

I don't even play video games and still got most of the references!

:-D

Is that so? I've been hearing from everyone and their grandmothers that Ready Player One is the best thing that happened in the universe since dinosaurs, but since I never really played much 80's era video games I figured I am highly unlikely to get most of the references and thus would just be left scratching my head a lot.

The narrator explains things in character, so he'll tell you that Pac-Man is about a yellow ball with a big mouth that eats dots and ghosts. It will explain what a MMORG (sp?) is. Stuff like that. I had a Commodore 64 in the 80s, so the only games I really know are Bruce Lee and Snoopy Math.

The Exchange

SmiloDan wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
Treppa wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:

Ready Player One is sooooooooooo good!!!!!!!!

OMG YES IT IS!

I don't even play video games and still got most of the references!

:-D

Is that so? I've been hearing from everyone and their grandmothers that Ready Player One is the best thing that happened in the universe since dinosaurs, but since I never really played much 80's era video games I figured I am highly unlikely to get most of the references and thus would just be left scratching my head a lot.
The narrator explains things in character, so he'll tell you that Pac-Man is about a yellow ball with a big mouth that eats dots and ghosts. It will explain what a MMORG (sp?) is. Stuff like that. I had a Commodore 64 in the 80s, so the only games I really know are Bruce Lee and Snoopy Math.

If you need to explain a reference doesn't it kinda lose the point?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Well, he explains things that are critical to the plot, and then sprinkles Easter Eggs throughout. For zest.


Simon Legrande wrote:


From what I understand, that's more to do with your (general your) personal philosophical/political leaning than the stories themselves. I've never read anything by Pratchett, but I've been told by the people I tend to associate with that the books you don't like are the books I should start with.

I agree with most of his points, I just get annoyed when it's shoved in my face, and as the series wore on the books become less and less about fun and more and more about soapboxing. Unless the point was that the more you agree with him the less you like his books, which sounds odd.

Now I'm aware that the soapbox has always been there, but it became more and more pronounced and the general funniness of the stories declined after the aforementioned books. I stopped reading DW after Unseen Academicals because it was quite frankly a disappointment and not terribly good rather than just 'not as good as his earlier works but still a good read'.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:


From what I understand, that's more to do with your (general your) personal philosophical/political leaning than the stories themselves. I've never read anything by Pratchett, but I've been told by the people I tend to associate with that the books you don't like are the books I should start with.

I agree with most of his points, I just get annoyed when it's shoved in my face, and as the series wore on the books become less and less about fun and more and more about soapboxing. Unless the point was that the more you agree with him the less you like his books, which sounds odd.

Now I'm aware that the soapbox has always been there, but it became more and more pronounced and the general funniness of the stories declined after the aforementioned books. I stopped reading DW after Unseen Academicals because it was quite frankly a disappointment and not terribly good rather than just 'not as good as his earlier works but still a good read'.

If you'll be fair, though, you can'y really compare Unseen Academics to his earlier, pre-Alzheimer work. Any other person would have been applauded for managing a book at all given the circumstances.

Yes, the sense of pure fun dwindled in later book but never quite left, and the stories themselves became sharper, so I don't mind. Pretchett kept a unique voice and the ability to make me smile throughout the entirity of Discworld, and it was never as if I could confuse his style with that of someone else.


The Dragon Arcana by Pierre Pevel - the third book in his The Cardinal's Blades trilogy.

After that, I'll hopefully have gotten part three of Django Wexler's The Shadow Campaigns - The Price of Valour (with a 'u' in Valour since I ordered the British edition).

So plenty of magic and musketry in my future.


More Soviet Science Fiction is fun thus far. Nice seeing the dialectical laws of the universe and Engels's "The Part Played by Labor in the Transition from Ape to Man" cited in stories about man's first contact with alien species.

Found another 50 cent copy of Tess and this one had a map of Wessex in the front, so that's nice.

Watched two more episodes of Game of Thrones and have decided that, as is to be expected, the show is a pale shadow of the book with all of the characters rendered flat, crass and unsubtle. I am actively disliking the show and impatiently waiting for characters to do it. Think I'm going to reverse myself and watch before I read. Hopefully, that will improve matters.

And, Black History and the Class Struggle, No. 14: Capitalist Rulers Wage War Against Blacks, Immigrants

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Kajehase wrote:

The Dragon Arcana by Pierre Pevel - the third book in his The Cardinal's Blades trilogy.

After that, I'll hopefully have gotten part three of Django Wexler's The Shadow Campaigns - The Price of Valour (with a 'u' in Valour since I ordered the British edition).

So plenty of magic and musketry in my future.

Wexler had blurbs on the Powder Mage trilogy. :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:


From what I understand, that's more to do with your (general your) personal philosophical/political leaning than the stories themselves. I've never read anything by Pratchett, but I've been told by the people I tend to associate with that the books you don't like are the books I should start with.

I agree with most of his points, I just get annoyed when it's shoved in my face, and as the series wore on the books become less and less about fun and more and more about soapboxing. Unless the point was that the more you agree with him the less you like his books, which sounds odd.

Now I'm aware that the soapbox has always been there, but it became more and more pronounced and the general funniness of the stories declined after the aforementioned books. I stopped reading DW after Unseen Academicals because it was quite frankly a disappointment and not terribly good rather than just 'not as good as his earlier works but still a good read'.

I hear you. I haven't read his stuff, but the ones you called out as liking the least are the ones that have been highly recommended.

I do agree with your point about soapboxes though. I don't mind when a point is poked in here or there, but it's tedious if the novel is overrun with it. I'm looking at you Atlas Shrugged.

The Exchange

Simon Legrande wrote:
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:


From what I understand, that's more to do with your (general your) personal philosophical/political leaning than the stories themselves. I've never read anything by Pratchett, but I've been told by the people I tend to associate with that the books you don't like are the books I should start with.

I agree with most of his points, I just get annoyed when it's shoved in my face, and as the series wore on the books become less and less about fun and more and more about soapboxing. Unless the point was that the more you agree with him the less you like his books, which sounds odd.

Now I'm aware that the soapbox has always been there, but it became more and more pronounced and the general funniness of the stories declined after the aforementioned books. I stopped reading DW after Unseen Academicals because it was quite frankly a disappointment and not terribly good rather than just 'not as good as his earlier works but still a good read'.

I hear you. I haven't read his stuff, but the ones you called out as liking the least are the ones that have been highly recommended.

I do agree with your point about soapboxes though. I don't mind when a point is poked in here or there, but it's tedious if the novel is overrun with it. I'm looking at you Atlas Shrugged.

I just picture Atlas shrugging as you point a finger at him.

But, are you serious? Ayn Rand was a very clearly outspoken political activist. Her books never pretend to be more than manifestos. You can't seriously complain about "soapboxing" when that is the declared intention of a book.


That's not fair.

They're also weird fetish fuel.


Just read the "Rincewind the Wizzard" collection - The Colour of Magic, The Light Fantastic, Sourcery, and Faust Eric.

...

Full disclosure: I may be reading extra books specifically to troll Lord Snow. <3


The Ayn Rand thing reminds me of Michael Crichton. Although, the word I heard used to describe Rising Sun was "polemic".

His writing style was more enjoyable, though. The only Ayn Rand book I could ever really get into was We the Living... probably not coincidentally, the one most based on her lived experience rather than her philosophy.

The parts of Atlas Shrugged that were actually about railroads were OK, I guess.


Kalindlara wrote:

That's not fair.

They're also weird fetish fuel.

Some sort of BDSM thing?

(Kind of makes sense. They've sold and sold and sold, after all, and there can't be all that many Objectivists knocking about...)

On another note, does anybody know if the de Camp and Carter Conan stories have been compiled anywhere?


Limeylongears wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:

That's not fair.

They're also weird fetish fuel.

Some sort of BDSM thing?

(Kind of makes sense. They've sold and sold and sold, after all, and there can't be all that many Objectivists knocking about...)

More, um... nonconsensual. Like, female protagonists being roughly taken (despite protests).

(I would put a trigger warning on that... but apparently people get triggered by trigger warnings. Irony!)

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Limeylongears wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:

That's not fair.

They're also weird fetish fuel.

1)Some sort of BDSM thing?

(Kind of makes sense. They've sold and sold and sold, after all, and there can't be all that many Objectivists knocking about...)

2)On another note, does anybody know if the de Camp and Carter Conan stories have been compiled anywhere?

Fifty Shades of Grey actually started out as fanfiction for The Fountainhead, you know.

2) I have a series of old, half torn books in my house my mom found in a box in the street. They are Conan Story compilation, and I think there's a lot of de Camp there. Not at home right now but I'll check them out later and report my findings.

Quote:
Full disclosure: I may be reading extra books specifically to troll Lord Snow. <3

Well I read like 150 pages since that thread started so take that! ;)


Lord Snow wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:


From what I understand, that's more to do with your (general your) personal philosophical/political leaning than the stories themselves. I've never read anything by Pratchett, but I've been told by the people I tend to associate with that the books you don't like are the books I should start with.

I agree with most of his points, I just get annoyed when it's shoved in my face, and as the series wore on the books become less and less about fun and more and more about soapboxing. Unless the point was that the more you agree with him the less you like his books, which sounds odd.

Now I'm aware that the soapbox has always been there, but it became more and more pronounced and the general funniness of the stories declined after the aforementioned books. I stopped reading DW after Unseen Academicals because it was quite frankly a disappointment and not terribly good rather than just 'not as good as his earlier works but still a good read'.

I hear you. I haven't read his stuff, but the ones you called out as liking the least are the ones that have been highly recommended.

I do agree with your point about soapboxes though. I don't mind when a point is poked in here or there, but it's tedious if the novel is overrun with it. I'm looking at you Atlas Shrugged.

I just picture Atlas shrugging as you point a finger at him.

But, are you serious? Ayn Rand was a very clearly outspoken political activist. Her books never pretend to be more than manifestos. You can't seriously complain about "soapboxing" when that is the declared intention of a book.

I was kidding. It's the only Rand novel I have or will read. I read before bed, it took me a week to get through the radio address at the end.

The Exchange

Quote:
I was kidding. It's the only Rand novel I have or will read. I read before bed, it took me a week to get through the radio address at the end.

I read Anthem in high school as a complement to 1984. That experience pretty much destroyed any illusions I might have that reading nonfiction thinly disguised with some thrown together story and setting could be interesting. Never looked back since.


Kalindlara wrote:
Limeylongears wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:

That's not fair.

They're also weird fetish fuel.

Some sort of BDSM thing?

(Kind of makes sense. They've sold and sold and sold, after all, and there can't be all that many Objectivists knocking about...)

More, um... nonconsensual. Like, female protagonists being roughly taken (despite protests).

(I would put a trigger warning on that... but apparently people get triggered by trigger warnings. Irony!)

I've only read The Fountainhead, but in the introduction Rand describes Roark as the ideal of Objectivist masculinity, and then halfway through the book he rapes the female lead. I'm not talking about different social mores in a different time, I'm talking about Dominique saying "I've been raped," later in the course of her narrative. I finished the book, but I could never quite get past that one.

Then, after I read about noted comic book artist and Objectivist Steve Ditko removing his endorsement from a biographical art book because the interviewer was "anti-Ditko" (I didn't even know there were pro- and anti-Ditko factions; I suppose that makes me anti-Ditko) I sort of decided that if you have to abandon your family while fleeing the Russian Revolution, you either come up with a social theory as nut-job bizarro as Objectivism, or die or grief and survivor's guilt.

Speaking of Rand, I think I'll reread Sewer, Gas & Electric by Matt Ruff, that's a fun one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah. When I finally read Atlas Shrugs after years of arguing with Objectivists and hearing about its wonderful deep philosophy, I realized it really is just a reaction to her having to flee Communism. All the creeping socialism and People's Republics, it's all just her reacting to anything that reminds her of Communist Russia, even in the slightest way. The philosophy is just a justification for the overreaction.

7,401 to 7,444 of 7,444 << first < prev | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gamer Life / Books / What books are you currently reading? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Books

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.