There's definitely something to be said for sticking with it. I admit, though, that as I get older and busier, I tend to do that less, or only give shorter books a chance? What can I say? I'm still a Philistine.
And there's certainly a difference in preferences. I was very, very into Kafka when I was in college. Read pretty much everything he ever wrote, plus a number of secondary things like letters and the like, and now I find I still like The Metamorphosis and The Trial is okay, plus the first part of Amerika (The Stoker), but a lot of the rest of it is just odd and not satisfying any more.
One book or I should say set of books that I keep picking up on occasion, particularly if I'm in a bad patch, is Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. I've been reading it since mid-college, so it's been, hmmm, about 25 years of this. I like it but it's so long and so dense (not to mention, not 100% accurate), so I can only take it in shifts.
I read it all in a sitting (over several days, but non-stop). Gibbon is irrationally prejudiced against primitive christians; he is sarcastic about what he considers the moral deficiencies of the upper classes of the empire, whether in the era of the Antonines (where he begins) or in his accounts of the Holy Roman Empire. That being said, his scholarship is solid, and there is a great deal to learn from it.
His tone, however, has always lead me to describe it as a pot-boiler, which offends many people--something i can't understand.
His tone is the most splendid aspect of the book.He is a must read for anybody with any pretensions to literary endevour.I spent a few weeks on it and loved it all.I still dip it from time to time.
That is arguable, although i don't agree. I happen to have a penchant for nineteenth century literature, and some eighteenth century literature. Nevertheless, i recognize that the styles in evidence in those works don't wear well with modern audiences.
As far as writing history is concerned, his tone is the least splendid aspect of the work.
How about books you know you should have stopped reading, but kept on slogging through because... well, because.
Da Vinci Code comes to mind. Cardboard characters, but fun puzzles. Lots of lecturing....
Good one. To its credit, though, it wasn't a slog -- quickquickquick!
Despite much mental eye-rolling on my part, I too finished The Da Vinci Code.
It was a gift from the bride. Nuff said.
Every ten years or so I try Proust.
My next attempt will be in 2010.
Kinda like me with the Iliad. I love the story, but the (translated) poetry defeats me.
Noddy-
Don't wait that long. Proust is wonderful.
"John Adams" by David McCullough was a struggle for me, but I persisted even though I thought it was boring. I guess because I love history, I didn't want to miss out on something I should know...or whatever. Anyhow, I was glad when I was finished with it. I do like David McCullough but haven't picked up "1776" even though I have heard that it is excellent.
Oh, I did like learning about the Adams womenfolk...much more interesting than the men.
Heyyo Vietnamnurse.
I didn't know so many people had read Gibbon.
Oof,
The Da Vinci Code -- the fact that there are also people who believe that claptrap, plus a number of earnest TV specials with names like "Is the Da Vinci Code real?" really makes me scratch my head in wonderment at the kinds of things that become popular.
Same here, jespah. i thought the Da vinci code was absolute trash....
But the worst book that I've read is called "The Blue Bedspread" by Rajkamal Jha, an Indian author...this book was nominated for some award and all...but ugh ugh ugh....
And I have to finish a book if i start reading it. I cannot leave it unread....
Hey, sakhi. Sorry 'bout "The Blue Bedspread" sucking. Another book I found tough to get into (although I might do better with it now, I dunno) is Thomas Mann's "The Magic Mountain".
I read "The Blue Bedspread." Did you not like the writing, or subject matter, or both?
The subject itself was fine....but i found his story way too bizarre and perverted...(i do like some bizarre stories but not this one)...by the time I finished it i went "Ugh, i wish i'd never read it"....maybe i missed something because i have read some good reviews of the book in Indian newspapers....
Did you like it?
Sounds like what you mean by "story" I mean by "subject" -- I thought it was a little 80's, a little cliched by the time it came out, as that story/ subject has been done so many times. I didn't mind the writing, thought there was some good descriptions and details, but I kinda rolled my eyes at the big secret, here we go again.
Didn't HATE it, didn't like it much.
true...i probably hated it because i had high expectations of the book because of the reviews...and i have lately read a lot of books by indian authors that i have liked.
and yeah - the "secret" was so very obvious...yeesh
This afternoon I made a horrid, inadvertent pun:
Weak read.
I hated Tarantula, by Bob Dylan. No punctuation or capitlas - one long endless stream of consciousness... if only he had something to say.
