Whatcha reading?

[FrankChurch]

Faulkner is a demi-God, so go right ahead. Slog through the poetic golden rays of a man's complete command of language and manners. He was the south, the south that we cannot laugh off as hicksville central.

[David Loftus]

Loftus, if I discribed you as a classicist, would that be offensive, or would it make a direct hit?

I have no idea what you mean by that, and it's probably wrong anyway, so I'm not the least bit offended.

Mainly, I'm indifferent.

[David Loftus]

I might've mentioned that I truly enjoyed _Pnin_, but right now, I'm halfway into _Pale Fire_. I shudder at venturing a summary or any observation, because at this stage in the game, something might come up that'd throw my interpretation into a cocked hat. It's a genuinely odd book, and extremely enjoyable.

Need to get around to _Pnin_, which as I recall featured Nabokov's personal favorite character. Read _Lolita_ a number of times when I was younger, a couple of his really early ones (_Bend Sinister_ comes to mind) and _Pale Fire_ a year or two ago, but Nabokov is not someone I can read a lot of at at time.

[Hathor]

Must be something in the collective water. I'm re-reading "Les Miserables". And I stand by my belief that Victor Hugo was an optimist...

[markabaddon]

I just finished Physics for Super Heroes, which was good, but a little long winded. Fun to see how much force it would take for Superman to jump over a building, or how big Krypton might have been.

Just started Joe Haldeman's The Coming which deals with a message stating "we're coming" from a tenth of a light year away. I am only a few pages into it, but so far I like the scientific basis of the story and the political intrigue that is being woven in

[David Loftus]

I might've mentioned that I truly enjoyed _Pnin_, but right now, I'm halfway into _Pale Fire_. I shudder at venturing a summary or any observation, because at this stage in the game, something might come up that'd throw my interpretation into a cocked hat. It's a genuinely odd book, and extremely enjoyable.

If you haven't read Brian Boyd's magnificent two-volume bio of Nabokov -- which has GREAT literary discussions of each of his books -- do so posthaste.

Also, Nabokov's lectures on literature are fabulous. I'm sure I've said this before, but the one on Kafka's _The Metamorphosis_ vastly increased my respect for both writers.

[BrianSiano]

If you haven't read Brian Boyd's magnificent two-volume bio of Nabokov -- which has GREAT literary discussions of each of his books -- do so posthaste.

Also, Nabokov's lectures on literature are fabulous. I'm sure I've said this before, but the one on Kafka's _The Metamorphosis_ vastly increased my respect for both writers.

I'll hunt for the Boyd book, but I may take a break from Nabokov now: I went through Pnin, Lolita, the lectures you mentioned, and Pale Fire within a month and a half.

I know Laurie King's got a new mystery out, but maybe some China Mieville's in order.

[Steve Evil]

The Bradbury Chronicles by Sam Well. Ye Gods! He used to fool around with his cousin! Bradbury I mean, not Sam Well.

A senitmental account fo the incurable sentimentalist. God bless him.

Funny someone else mentioning Joe Haldeman. I'm finally getting around to reading "The Forever War" and was wondering what else he wrote. . .

[Hathor]

The Necronomicon. Damn technical manual I've been studying for about four months is discontinued due to the fact they're upgrading the systems to be run on computers instead of doing it the Spartan way but I have to COMPLETE the course or else it'll count against me. Now I can have a knowledge in obsolete information that's entirely useless to me-GAAAAHHH!!!
Yes, Father. Truly I am a MAN.

[David Loftus]

The Bradbury Chronicles by Sam Well. Ye Gods! He used to fool around with his cousin! Bradbury I mean, not Sam Well.

And she was older than he was -- lucky bastard.

There's a couple more surprises of an erotic nature coming later in the book, Steve.

Weller's book (note spelling, anyone who's looking for it) is not terribly well written, and nearly hagiographic in attitude, but it's a nice source of basic info on a lovely and complicated man.

[Tony Rabig]

Mark,

When you start looking at Joe Haldeman's backlist, don't miss his novel 1968. It's not sf, so chances are it won't be in the genre sections in the bookshops or libraries. It's also included complete in his recent collection WAR STORIES, which contains 1968, War Year, and several short stories.

-----

Haven't been reading enough lately. Markers in Joseph Epstein's Friendship: An Expose and in Silverberg's The Book of Skulls. Recently reread Don Robertson's Mystical Union, which is IMHO one of the best American novels published during the 70s.

And bests to all.

[FrankChurch]

Loftus, thanks for more hanks of that old fashioned Leninist elitism I am getting used to, by now.

Yea, buddy, you are smarter then the lowerlings who clean your toilets and cut your grass, you happy?

Once again, I am forced to go back into my Chomsky medicine bag. Specialized knowledge is not important in matters of politics, as long as one has basic knowledge and a common sense skepticism of the intentions of power interests.

You do give off that taint in your boorish thought paintings.

Kittens in a basket, this is what I keep getting back. No note, no milk bottle, the kittens mewing for the tit that has gone dead cold.

[David Loftus]

Loftus, thanks for more hanks of that old fashioned Leninist elitism I am getting used to, by now.

This is somehow worse than your political snobbery, which expends most of its energy on explaining what's wrong with everyone else?

Yea, buddy, you are smarter then the lowerlings who clean your toilets and cut your grass, you happy?

Nobody cleans my toilets but my wife and me, and I don't have any grass; I live in an apartment. I also don't own a car, and haven't for more than three years. I suppose you still buy plenty of the oil the president and his buddies procure for you, sir?

Once again, I am forced to go back into my Chomsky medicine bag. Specialized knowledge is not important in matters of politics, as long as one has basic knowledge and a common sense skepticism of the intentions of power interests.

And what, precisely, does this have to do with the books and authors we have been discussing on this thread this past week? Keep to your own political threads if you can't follow the discussion on this one and don't -- apparently -- wish to be enlightened.

You do give off that taint in your boorish thought paintings.

Kittens in a basket, this is what I keep getting back. No note, no milk bottle, the kittens mewing for the tit that has gone dead cold.

Poetic, but rubbish.

You haven't risen to any challenge I've offered you, and you haven't shown an ability to understand the comments I make on anything. I suggest you try to ignore anything I write here. It is obviously not for you.

[Anthony Ravenscroft]

For a whole dollar, down at the thrift shoppe, I just glommed onto Masters of Fantasy. Sufficient that it's edited by Carr (blessed be his name) & Greenberg, but it contains a Heinlein I've never before read, & HE is penultimate with "Jeffty."

Lovecraft; Merritt; Gold; Kornbluth; Smith; Sturgeon; Boucher; Kuttner; Moore; Bradbury; Russell; Heinlein; Brown; Blish; Vance; Wollheim; Farmer; Jackson; Bloch; Wellman; Davidson; Collier; Russ; Disch; Leiber; Zelazny; Lafferty; Roberts; Henderson; Ellison; Bishop.

Sort of a history of 20th-century U.S. dark fantasy -- pub dates 1924 to 1978. Looks like there's a dozen of these going cheap on Amazon (I got the Galahad 1981 hardcover), so consider it both highly recommended & a bargain.

[Moderator]

Just started rereading Piers Anthony's Omnivore.

Wow. I'd forgotten how good he was before descending into Xanth volumes 5 thru 259.