Do You Love Literature?

I also do all of my reading in bed before I go to sleep, so the amount of reading varies according to how much of a grip insomia has on me. It limits me to books that won't be too exciting, but it's my only chance to read, at least now while demands of work and family take up the days.

an occasional member of the throng ringing in. i read whenever i can - sometimes a few minutes here and there, every now and then a reading binge which lasts longer than is appropriate for alertness at work.

Hi Beth! When I'm reading during the day it is usually a newspaper or a magazine.

Letty, what an interesting commentary and I think, very true. I like short stories. I enjoyed the one that some of the a2k'ers are reading out of the New Yorker, a new one from Louise Erdrich. I did make a fabulous review of it myself which was lost... and so I haven't posted there, but I'd recommend it to you!

Larry, Dream, just before sleeping is a good time to read for me, too, but sometimes it is hard to stay awake! I always have a variety of books to read and have the delight of choosing which one to enjoy... maybe that is the reason I so rarely read novels, as I agree that to read them straight through, even if not in one sitting, is best.

So, the books on my bed-table just now are:
The Gardener's Eye, by Allen Lacy, essays on gardening,
The Aztecs of Mexico, by G.C. Vaillant, a straightforward history,
The King's Henchmen by E.S.V. Millay, her only published play,
Twilight for the Gods, by Ernest K. Gann, a short novel, which I've read before but want to re-read.

Piffka, lost? Oh no. Would LOVE to see your fabulous review, if you can muster the patience to recreate it.

Yes, I was bummed, it happened when a2k lost service this week. I will go back and try to recreate it. The same thing happened with my reply to yours on Fury but that was my computer's fault.

Hello piffka, haven't seen you in ages! What's this about one mini-donut?

I must go take a look at the stacks of books under the bed - i pull one up every now and then, and read til i snooze out completely. i've been reading snippets of The Art of Hugging lately, and various of Dr. Coren's wonderful books about dogs. I can't read anything too exciting at bedtime. Not even the Ikea catalogue.

I guess I'm more of a 'literature' lover when i'm not sleepy.

Ah, I am a night reader too, and a dawn reader. Private time at my house. Just a few more pages....

It is true that because of this reading pattern, I fail to fully absorb m'books. I remember instead baths of insight, or joy at some sentences. I produce crumpled books as an effect of my reading ways, and so buy used in the first place, often, if not always.

I too love short stories, and have probably mentioned Trevor too many times on reading threads. So I won't. I do read the NYer, and am glad to see a discussion on nyer short stories. I believe their new editor is reputed to be open to some play in that regard.

Among recent fiction reads are Love in the Time of Cholera, as you all know by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, and Dancer Upstairs by Nicholas Shakespeare; both of those placed in latin america. Before that, A Big Storm Knocked It Over, by Laurie Colwin, an american writer who focused on the accumulating minutiae of relationships.

In nonfiction I am reading Chatwin, another Bryson (irritated with him at the moment), and yet another book on building one's own house by a muser about the issues involved, re ecology, etc. Have devoured four books in past few months about people who went to italy, were in italy, or stayed in italy, all writing about it. Well, I gave up on one of them, La Mattanza, about the ritual harvest of tuna in Sicily, even though it was well written.

I prefer novels to short stories but I can see why those with a different attention span would feel the opposite way. The problem with short stories is that they have to be perfect to succeed--no real flaws are permissible. Most writers can't deliver these goods. There are a few around who can, and I like them--Mary Gaitskell, in my generation, is the best story writer in America. But in general I'd rather read a novel. It's easier for me to lose myself in a novel, whereas with a short story I am "outside" the story, judging it every step of the way.

Ah, my attention span is fine. Once in a while I hibernate from the world and read at least one book, perhaps two, over a weekend, when I should be getting tasks done. A dual or even triple career effectively truncates my time, though, and those fiction reading spurts are fewer than I want. I agree on appreciating good novels; I can inhabit the space in them, inhabit the characters. savor, and reread certain passages...or not, because I am after all the character at the moment, and wouldn't be rereading. But I do circle back and reread sometimes.

Mary Gaitskell, I'll look her up.

Larry, I know what you mean about being outside the story. I said somewhere recently that I can't give a coherent answer as to whether I liked a novel too soon after I've finished it, since I've too thoroughly entered into the worldview of the author. After a while, I'm able to step back and be more objective. Few short stories are that all-encompassing. Some are, though, and I love those.

Osso, would love to see you on the NYer thread.

I agree it's not a matter of attention spans so much as time spans -- how much time one has available to read. It's a question of priorities unless you are very lucky, and while I've called in sick to finish a book , full-time motherhood is just too time-consuming. Or perhaps more to the point, I have lots of little brief moments (perfect for rattling off a response on A2K, for example), but hardly any good long chunks of time. Unless I want to let the sozlet slowly rip my photo album to shreds...

I think there is definitely a different mindset to reading a novel. For one thing, you have to give up the idea that you are doing anything other than recreational reading (unless you are a student). With a gardening book I am doing "research." With history I am expanding my mind. Poetry doesn't immerse me for hours but a novel requires a lot of concentration and is a form of mind-candy, no matter how literary.

I adored Love in the Time of Cholera when I read it, wonder if I'd still like it???


Beth - One mini-doughnut... a little beignet? Yes, 'tis true.

A good novel? MIND-CANDY???!!!


Thud........

Picks self up, dusts self off, goggle-eyes settle back into sockets, mouth closes reluctantly - mind NOURISHMENT, EXPANDER, FURNISHER, CHANGER, ORGASM, TEACHER, SENSITISER, BREADTHENER, DEPTHENER, WISDOMERER - on and on I could go- but candy?

I am not entranced by fiction. If it resonates with me, great, but much of it is off-putting. I realize this is not a popular attitude...

There are many novels that are worth reading, but in-between I personally have read so many bad time-wasters that I won't devote much more time to them. I have received plenty of "nourishment," etc. from living my life and reading about other REAL lives... memoirs, etc., much more so than by reading about the made-up lives, the made-up sequences dreamt up by novelists.

I do enjoy novels, but I think, yes, most are mind-candy, entertainment, a way to escape reality. It would be a sad day, indeed, if my main source of mind nourishment, mind expansion, mind changing, teaching, sensitizing, broadening, deepening and wisdom-making, such as I have, came from fiction.

I also think most writers only have one great edifying novel in them, if that. Then they hack out a lot of others. I don't like formulas, I don't like to have a novel preach to me and I am mightily sick of the various "plights" that novelists use to get their characters in and out of trouble. I cannot stand reading crime novels, spy novels, nor several other genres. I wish that every time somebody decided to write a novel, that first he or she stopped and thought, is it truly a good idea? Will it give readers what they need? Is it worth the time it takes to read it? Instead, I think most write today so that they can be published, so that Hollywood will "pick them up," and then they'll get rich. Do NOT get me started on how bad most films are!

One of my ideals is MFK Fisher, a well-known and respected writer of the mid-twentieth century. She never ever wrote fiction, she didn't need to. She'd gleaned enough from her life to make fascinating real-life characters and events live on in her books.

Some interesting points of view, at literally different ends of the spectrum in some cases.

Letty, The he in the poem is no particular person though most poets are a llittle ego centric so draw from that what you will.

The poem was a pastiche of a much superior poem by another cyber poet, it may have come across as a little cynical, it was meant to be humorous. By the same token the she in the story is no one in particular.

When reading I go on binges when I have time I read almost non stop, most of the time I do not have the time or energy to read so at the moment have several books en train : Umberto Eco's The Pendulum, Thomas Wolfe- Of time and the river, Nick Hornby's How to be good, Tom Robbins - Even cowgirls get the blues and Jung Chang's -Wild Swans.

Quite a broad range.

Piffka, my husband feels as you do, so I've had this discussion many times (because I feel as dlowan does...) There is undoubtedly a lot of bad fiction out there, but so much wonderful fiction, too.

I usually say something like, there are varying degrees of truth. Just because something "really happened" doesn't necessarily make it more fundamentally true or real than what occurs in a novel. Any piece of writing edits, shapes, interprets truth. I love finding fiction that is true.

Also, have you read "A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius" by Dave Eggers? It's somewhere in the middle -- literary non-fiction -- and interested in what you'd think of it. (Hubby liked it.)

That said, there is undoubtedly mind-candy fiction out there... Kinky Friedman comes to mind. Not reading him for truth, just the one-liners and attitude.

I love both fiction and non-fiction. If one takes an Absurdist view, 'tis all mind-candy - distractions on our voyage t'wards death - but I would bet my sweet bippy that it is a toss-up as to which genre most sweetens and deepens our journey.

To me, either/or is a distraction - this/and is where I rest my head and heart.

Can I did myself out of this hole? ... though I am gratified to be aligned with your husband, Sozobe, who seems to be brilliant (smart enough to have married you!). I also think there is a lot of good fiction, wonderful stuff, but the chaff gets in my way, and I don't feel I've got time for much of it.

For example, I adored Jane Smiley's book, The Greenlanders. Of course, as it turns out, it is based on a bit of real history, but nevermind. Her books Moo and A Thousand Acres were just annoying to me. I would truly hesitate before ever picking up another of her books, though I might re-read The Greenlanders.

I liked Doris Lessing's Shikasta books very much, and will re-read them, but I hated a lot of her other works, the worst being Briefing for a Descent into Hell. Would be very chary of going back to her. She has, however, written some amazing short stories.

When I'm reading fiction I'd rather it showed me the best of life, gave me a reason for being that makes sense. When I want to read of gritty awful things, the worst of the human condition... all I have to do is read the newspaper.