NationStates Jolt Archive

I my self have a personal library with all my favorite novels in it, however I'm not sure what makes a good novel a great novel, or then a great novel the best novel. In your opinion whats the best novel ever and why is it the best?

"The Gate to Women's Country", by Sheri S Tepper.

She is almost certainly the most skilled wordsmith of a generation, and even her weakest works are a pleasure to read because of the elegant silken perfection of her prose... and "Gate" is far from her weakest work.

It's a book that might change the way you think, and I can't think of a higher recommendation.

just about any book by Douglas Adams.

He died way too soon....

I love me some Moby Dick. Where a normal story provides you with the linear story line and you pull in references ("this passage reminds me of this poem and this song and I don't know this word, so here's a dictionary passage"), Moby Dick gives you the references, and forces your mind to do the linear thing.

Also love Ordinary People...I love how the story is told, blocking out the mother. I love the brutal honesty, mixed with obvious warping.

"Illusions: The Adventures of Reluctant Messiah" by Richard Bach.

It takes a few hours to read, and leaves you thinking about it for a good long time.
It's probably the only book I could read once a week for the rest of my life.

"The Great Gatsby" by Fitzgerald is up there too.
"been down so long it looks like up to me" by Richard Farina is a great one too just for the originality of it.

What does everyone think of The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexander Dumas? I think the way he changes and molds characters over such a large period of time is tryuly the work of a genius

I would probably say To Kill A Mockingbird or a Prayer for Owen Meany. If really pressed, I'd have to go with the latter.

Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett.

Or World Without End, but Pillars is better.

I would probably say To Kill A Mockingbird or a Prayer for Owen Meany. If really pressed, I'd have to go with the latter.

Curious. I've never encountered "Mockingbird" as being in best-novel-ever contention before. I found the writing fairly... I don't know... earnest? Workmanlike? What is it that leaps out at you about that book, in particular?

*genuine interest*

There is no "best novel ever." There may be best novels in various genres, but not one best ever. Can you compare Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein with the Winds of War by Herman Wouk? How about comparing All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque with The Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan?

You have to take into consideration the time in which it was written, the genre, the style, the intent of the author and a whole plethora of criteria. In addition, you're talking thousands of years of literature with translations and paraphrases - The Iliad, The Odyssey, Oedipus Rex, Chaucer's work, Jane Austen's work, Flaubert and so on.

And, for the record, I detest Moby Dick.

The Art of War by Sun Tzu is my 'best novel ever', but it's not the best novel ever. I don't think there is one.

Curious. I've never encountered "Mockingbird" as being in best-novel-ever contention before. I found the writing fairly... I don't know... earnest? Workmanlike? What is it that leaps out at you about that book, in particular?

*genuine interest*

It's definitely up there for me ... the writing style is tailored to fit the perspective. I think that's the main reason why it works so well; it's a child's perspective on racism.

Also some of my favorites:

"Crime and Punishment", "Fight Club", plus more that I can't think of at the moment. It's too hard to pick out a 'best ever'.

There is no "best novel ever." There may be best novels in various genres, but not one best ever. Can you compare Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein with the Winds of War by Herman Wouk? How about comparing All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque with The Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan?

You have to take into consideration the time in which it was written, the genre, the style, the intent of the author and a whole plethora of criteria. In addition, you're talking thousands of years of literature with translations and paraphrases - The Iliad, The Odyssey, Oedipus Rex, Chaucer's work, Jane Austen's work, Flaubert and so on.

And, for the record, I detest Moby Dick.
I detested Moby Dick my first time reading it...it was horrible. But then, I had the chance to discuss it with a great class, then read it again with another great professor. So I've had a bit of fun with it, I guess.

But then, I've also written a 10 page paper about sex jokes in Moby Dick...

Dune.

Dune.

Also that. Though I never got around to reading any of the sequels.

Also that. Though I never got around to reading any of the sequels.

The sequels aren't, imho, worth reading. Dune was, however, an excellent book.

Hmmm...Thats a tough one...Im not sure really...

I think my favorite(s) have to be the Zahn Trilogy from Star Wars...I think ive re-read them more than any of my books...

And, for the record, I detest Moby Dick.

killitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkill itkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitki llitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillit killitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkill itkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillitkillit

The sequels aren't, imho, worth reading.

Haha, everyone I ask usually tells me this ... hence why it's such a low priority for me.

Milton Steinberg's As a Driven Leaf remains the most tempting argument for religion I have ever encountered, and is a wonderful novel quite independent of its message.

I'd say that Crime & Punishment should win overall, the other contenders tend to be James Joyce, who I find tedious and War & Peace, notable mainly for the fact that no one has actually ever read it.

For me though, Buddenbrooks by Thomas Mann.

1984 by george orwell was also one of my favorite books of all time.

1984 by george orwell was also one of my favorite books of all time.

OMG I forgot about that one, that was an Awesome book...Animal Farm Ruled too..

For whatever reason it made the Space Odyssey books come to mind...those were great too...

So many to choose from...

Dune.

Dune. And the sequels have their charms too. It's kind of impressive to get a book series to span 10 millenia.

IMHO, it largely depends on what you're looking for.

I've always had a tough time looking at translations as being capable of being truly regarded as one of the best, as the original language is the most effective. If I could read Russian, for instance, I might nominate Crime and Punishment for it. Of course, the Russians churn out so many good authors, that I wish I could at least read the language to get it best.

Inventiveness in story telling, though, also makes for exceptional tales. Be it in the literary style or viewpoint, for instance, I'll still regard Clockwork Orange as being a phenomenal read, because I rather enjoy Nadsat and all of the attendant linguistic fun. Similarly, I love the drug-addled psychosis of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Truly a literary trip...why would I ever need drugs when I have books like that? :)

I've never really cared about what a book has said--it's message is not what makes a book great. I've never really read anything that has a truly transcendent message, the sort of thing that can change how I view the world or whatnot. General positive themes about living your own life and keeping yourself human are pretty good...although some of my favorite authors usually blast your ability to believe in that with their books.

Curious and entertaining writing styles, such as the hyper-description of Tolkien or the preachy, prattly, wordiness of Ayn Rand are also a blast to me for whatever reason.

These are just some of my favorite things.

Also that. Though I never got around to reading any of the sequels.

Don't.

OMG I forgot about that one, that was an Awesome book...Animal Farm Ruled too..

For whatever reason it made the Space Odyssey books come to mind...those were great too...

So many to choose from...

indeed.
I also enjoyed many of peter benchleys novels...

Dune. And the sequels have their charms too. It's kind of impressive to get a book series to span 10 millenia.

The sequels detract from the original piece, in my opinion. It's like reading Asmiov's Foundation trilogy... and then never being able to UN-read the "Foundation's Edge" and "Foundation and Earth".

My favorites, but probably not the best novels ever:

1984 By George Orwell

The Catcher in the Rye By JD Salinger

Obviously Big Brain: The Aardvark Affair is the single greatest novel in the English language. The protagonist has X-Ray Intelligence (whatever the Hell that means), what more can I say? That he's a secret agent? That there are gratuitous sex scenes?
Yes, I can say all those things, and I will.

White Fang by Jack London. I've also gotten into the Horatio Hornblower series, but I admit that it's not for everyone. But if you love sea tales...

If you REALLY want a challenge, go read The Tale of Genji by Lady Murasaki. It was the first novel in the world.

The Catcher in the Rye By JD Salinger

How could I ever forget that? In my opinion, a truly phenomenal book.

Curious. I've never encountered "Mockingbird" as being in best-novel-ever contention before. I found the writing fairly... I don't know... earnest? Workmanlike? What is it that leaps out at you about that book, in particular?

*genuine interest*

I think the voice fit the character and the story. The details noticed that an adult wouldn't, the stark reality of the situation that a child can't comprehend--I found the language and rhythm carried me along, drew me in, took down my guards and gave me a different perspective.

I also have to note that the first time I read the book, I was 9--roughly the same age as the narrator. There was a LOT about it I didn't understand (a lot which coincided with Scout's confusion). I loved it, but I knew there were layers I wasn't grasping. When I read it again as a teenager, and then again as an adult, each new reading brought about a new perspective and appreciation.

Dune. And the sequels have their charms too. It's kind of impressive to get a book series to span 10 millenia.

Kage Baker's series spans more than that... kinda.

I'll still regard Clockwork Orange as being a phenomenal read, because I rather enjoy Nadsat and all of the attendant linguistic fun.

I read a few pages of A Clockwork Orange in high school and got sick of looking up the words. It was both infinitely easier and more interesting to read it after a year of Russian classes.

Anyone mention Dune yet?

If not, this.

i would nominate my favorite book...lord of the rings...but its laughable to suggest that it could be the best novel ever.

i loved count of monte cristo, dune, to kill a mockingbird, a plague of angels by sheri tepper, the caine mutiny by herman wouk, call of the wild by jack london, great expectations, pride and prejudice, jane eyre and wuthering heights...

but there IS no best novel ever. as anti-social pointed out, its too varied a category.

and the dune sequels are bitter disappointments.

and no book that discusses severed whale heads or the demerits of whale paintings can ever be "best ever".

and no book that discusses severed whale heads or the demerits of whale paintings can ever be "best ever".

What about, Best ever book about whales?

A White Merc With Fins is a very decent novel. Forgot who wrote it, mind.

One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish

>.>
<.<

What about, Best ever book about whales?
moby dick.

the parts you skip so that the story is interesting enough to read to the end

I would vote for Victor Hugo's Les Miserables.

I'm tempted to also vote for Lord of the Rings, but Tolkien himself considered the work not to be a "novel" but a "heroic romance."

i would nominate my favorite book...lord of the rings...but its laughable to suggest that it could be the best novel ever.

i loved count of monte cristo, dune, to kill a mockingbird, a plague of angels by sheri tepper, the caine mutiny by herman wouk, call of the wild by jack london, great expectations, pride and prejudice, jane eyre and wuthering heights...

but there IS no best novel ever. as anti-social pointed out, its too varied a category.

and the dune sequels are bitter disappointments.

and no book that discusses severed whale heads or the demerits of whale paintings can ever be "best ever".
Any time a book discusses a painting, it is teaching you how to read the book.

And any book that has an entire chapter occur with a person wearing a whale penis or that has potential homosexual orgasms can be best ever.

And Moby Dick lies in the interweving chapters. First time reading it is painful. Second is good. Third on is amazing.

but there IS no best novel ever. as anti-social pointed out, its too varied a category.

Catagory and genres are irrelevant really. If one was to pick the 'best ever' novel then you would do so by judging the novels based on Quality of writing, depth of story and entertainment capacity/value.

Of course that still doesnt mean one can choose a 'best ever'. I certainly wouldnt come up with one as I like too many equally as much.

So my top list list:

'Tomorrow, when the war began' and all of its sequels.
'Horus Rising', and the sequels i've read, 'False Gods', 'Galaxy in Flames' and 'Flight of the Eisenstein'.

Any time a book discusses a painting, it is teaching you how to read the book.

And any book that has an entire chapter occur with a person wearing a whale penis or that has potential homosexual orgasms can be best ever.

And Moby Dick lies in the interweving chapters. First time reading it is painful. Second is good. Third on is amazing.
now im not saying that moby dick cant be GOOD.

but any book that requires 3 readings to love, cant be BEST EVER.

Catagory and genres are irrelevant really. If one was to pick the 'best ever' novel then you would do so by judging the novels based on Quality of writing, depth of story and entertainment capacity/value.

Of course that still doesnt mean one can choose a 'best ever'. I certainly wouldnt come up with one as I like too many equally as much.

So my top list list:

'Tomorrow, when the war began' and all of its sequels.
'Horus Rising', and the sequels i've read, 'False Gods', 'Galaxy in Flames' and 'Flight of the Eisenstein'.
yeah but surely there are 1000 contenders that are all excellently written, great plot, intriguing characters, entertaining and reasonably priced.

not that *I* have read that many but over the lifetime of the novel all around the world....

yeah but surely there are 1000 contenders that are all excellently written, great plot, intriguing characters, entertaining and reasonably priced.

not that *I* have read that many but over the lifetime of the novel all around the world....

Exactly, that is why one no-one can really say what the 'best ever' is even though it is very much possible to choose one if one had the time and inclination to read all the contenders.

now im not saying that moby dick cant be GOOD.

but any book that requires 3 readings to love, cant be BEST EVER.

well, again, depends what we mean by "BEST EVER!"

Are we talking something with mass appeal? Then yes...Moby Dick, Faulkner, and hundreds of other books/authors are out.

But then, is mass appeal the critical factor? Is "The Davinci Code" the BEST EVER?!?! Or is there something more? I like to think there is.

A great piece of literature is one that forces you to see the world in a different light and somehow changes you. Moby Dick does that several times over...be it the first time, or the 50th.

well, again, depends what we mean by "BEST EVER!"

Are we talking something with mass appeal? Then yes...Moby Dick, Faulkner, and hundreds of other books/authors are out.

But then, is mass appeal the critical factor? Is "The Davinci Code" the BEST EVER?!?! Or is there something more? I like to think there is.

A great piece of literature is one that forces you to see the world in a different light and somehow changes you. Moby Dick does that several times over...be it the first time, or the 50th.
dunno

all i know is that if it requires reading 3 times to love it, it cant be best ever.

dunno

all i know is that if it requires reading 3 times to love it, it cant be best ever.

but why?

My first read, I would have agreed...granted, that was in the middle of mid terms, swampped with work and impatient...but by my 3rd read (middle of finals, still impatient, still swampped with work), I would have to disagree.

Why do you have to be able to read it once through and immediatly love it for it to be eligable for best ever?

"The songs you grow to love never stick at first"

but why?

My first read, I would have agreed...granted, that was in the middle of mid terms, swampped with work and impatient...but by my 3rd read (middle of finals, still impatient, still swampped with work), I would have to disagree.

Why do you have to be able to read it once through and immediatly love it for it to be eligable for best ever?

"The songs you grow to love never stick at first"
because there are great novels that are great the first time through even though you gain more insight every time you read them

because there are great novels that are great the first time through even though you gain more insight every time you read them

Yes, this is true. But my struggles with Moby Dick only served to deepen the insights. My time spent thinking about different symbols and ideas is exactly what made me love the book.

moby dick.

the parts you skip so that the story is interesting enough to read to the end
now im not saying that moby dick cant be GOOD.

but any book that requires 3 readings to love, cant be BEST EVER.
You don't skip the parts not related to the narrative. You bear with them. And it doesn't take three readings to love the book. I only read it once, in great detail, and I'm very fond of Ahab.

As for the best novels - well, I still consider John Steakley's Armor and Vampire$ to be among the, if not the best novels I've read.

What makes them so great? Complexity in simplicity, their characters, the story, and that they are some of the very few books I couldn't put down while reading them.

Yes, this is true. But my struggles with Moby Dick only served to deepen the insights. My time spent thinking about different symbols and ideas is exactly what made me love the book.
which is why it has stood the test of time regardless of the severed whale heads and critiques of whaling painting.

did you see that tv special on the incident that form the basis of moby dick? the whale attack in the pacific that left the crew in small boats rowing for land, lost, eating the dead...

You don't skip the parts not related to the narrative. You bear with them. And it doesn't take three readings to love the book. I only read it once, in great detail, and I'm very fond of Ahab.

Exactly. Moby Dick is in the interweaving chapters...not the "action". It took me three reads because, shortly after finishing the book, I had to move on to a new book and put Moby Dick behind me.

I have to say, "Call me Ishmael" deserves all the attention it gets, and that line was the basis for quite a good paper.

which is why it has stood the test of time regardless of the severed whale heads and critiques of whaling painting.Not in spite of, but because of. Moby Dick investigates every aspect of the whale in many ways.

the painting (and any painting) is very much a time to pay attention to what is being said.

In Moby Dick, it says that "you" approach a smoked over painting...you can see what is behind the grime, but not clearly. Everyone offers an interpretation. None are validated. None are confirmed.

This is Melville telling you how to read his book. And possibly one of the most important sections.

did you see that tv special on the incident that form the basis of moby dick? the whale attack in the pacific that left the crew in small boats rowing for land, lost, eating the dead...

Can't say I have, though, I am interested. There are a few essays at the back of my book that I have yet to read...I know one includes some history.

"Illusions: The Adventures of Reluctant Messiah" by Richard Bach.

It takes a few hours to read, and leaves you thinking about it for a good long time.
It's probably the only book I could read once a week for the rest of my life.

"The Great Gatsby" by Fitzgerald is up there too.
"been down so long it looks like up to me" by Richard Farina is a great one too just for the originality of it.

Another for Richard Bach with Jonathan Livingston Seagull. However Fitzgerald can go to Hell. If I am to read about rich and spoiled brats then I will read The Razor's Edge by Maugham.

Not in spite of, but because of. Moby Dick investigates every aspect of the whale in many ways.

the painting (and any painting) is very much a time to pay attention to what is being said.

In Moby Dick, it says that "you" approach a smoked over painting...you can see what is behind the grime, but not clearly. Everyone offers an interpretation. None are validated. None are confirmed.

This is Melville telling you how to read his book. And possibly one of the most important sections.


Can't say I have, though, I am interested. There are a few essays at the back of my book that I have yet to read...I know one includes some history.
its a compelling story. one that was very well known at the time.

the history channel show was called: The Essex: The True Story of Moby Dick

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essex_(whaleship)

Moby-Dick is a strong contender (and for the record, I loved it the first time through - Ahab's speech to the lightning in particular just blew me away). So are several of Faulkner's books - if I had to choose one of them, I'd give the edge to As I Lay Dying simply because one can actually understand what the hell is going on on the first try, which I can't honestly say for The Sound and the Fury. Don Quixote and Les Miserables both deserve mentions among non-anglophone lit. Heart of Darkness is technically a novella, but I still think it makes the short list of possibilities.

I suppose I define a truly great novel as one that you simply can't forget - having read it, it sticks in your head and influences, at least slightly, the way you look at the universe forever. All of the above books seem to do that for most people who read them.

Moby-Dick is a strong contender (and for the record, I loved it the first time through - Ahab's speech to the lightning in particular just blew me away). So are several of Faulkner's books - if I had to choose one of them, I'd give the edge to As I Lay Dying simply because one can actually understand what the hell is going on on the first try, which I can't honestly say for The Sound and the Fury. Don Quixote and Les Miserables both deserve mentions among non-anglophone lit. Heart of Darkness is technically a novella, but I still think it makes the short list of possibilities.

I suppose I define a truly great novel as one that you simply can't forget - having read it, it sticks in your head and influences, at least slightly, the way you look at the universe forever. All of the above books seem to do that for most people who read them.
If you liked As I Lay Dying, I suggest reading Getting Mother's Body by Suzan-Lori Parks. A great retelling. It stick to the Faulknerian basics, while being very contemporary and able to stand independently.

If you liked As I Lay Dying, I suggest reading Getting Mother's Body by Suzan-Lori Parks. A great retelling. It stick to the Faulknerian basics, while being very contemporary and able to stand independently.

Neat! I'll have to look for that. :)

its a compelling story. one that was very well known at the time.

the history channel show was called: The Essex: The True Story of Moby Dick

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essex_(whaleship)

Interesting. I feel like I know the Essex, but then, there is a town called Essex right near my home town.

I read a few pages of A Clockwork Orange in high school and got sick of looking up the words. It was both infinitely easier and more interesting to read it after a year of Russian classes.

When I read A Clockwork Orange, I didn't bother to look from the from the back for translations.

Neat! I'll have to look for that. :)
I'll just throw this out there...the entire content of one chapter is "She pees standing up".

I have to agree with the Art of War- Incredible book and extremely insightful.

I'll just throw this out there...the entire content of one chapter is "She pees standing up".

Hahaha. Still, as minuscule chapters go, I think I prefer "My mother is a fish." :p

I have to agree with the Art of War- Incredible book and extremely insightful.

But not a novel.

I have to agree with the Art of War- Incredible book and extremely insightful.
It's not a novel, it's a book for army fanboys.

Hahaha. Still, as minuscule chapters go, I think I prefer "My mother is a fish." :p

What I like about Parks is I can read her on the bus without people giving me that "You're reading FAULKNER?! For FUN?!" look (sadly common on both my bus and subway line).

And...you know...girls pee standing up ;)

Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn. Especially Huck.

I've always had a thing for rivers.

George Orwell's 1984, which I read when I was 14 was the book that changed my life - it set me on the path to anarchism.

What I like about Parks is I can read her on the bus without people giving me that "You're reading FAULKNER?! For FUN?!" look (sadly common on both my bus and subway line).

And...you know...girls pee standing up ;)

Ha. I actually enjoy that look - I used to make a point of bringing something particularly dense and literary to read on airplanes just so people would give me the "you're reading THAT?" look and I could look right back at them with the "yes I am, and it's AWESOME, bitches" look. :D

Ha. I actually enjoy that look - I used to make a point of bringing something particularly dense and literary to read on airplanes just so people would give me the "you're reading THAT?" look and I could look right back at them with the "yes I am, and it's AWESOME, bitches" look. :D
haha...I got made fun of at work because I was reading Watchmen. My coworkers (and yeah, people on the T) would say "you're 22 and reading comic books?!" to which I would say "It's a graphic novel, okay?!"

Mind you, I still read a lot of dense literature for the hell of it, and do sometimes like the looks I get.

Tough call...but I'll go with Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

Thomas Mann's Faust.

There's just so much in there.

Oooh. Ordinary People.

While I'm thinking briefly about it.

Tough call...but I'll go with Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

I cried when I finished that book. :/ In my defense, I was like 14.

Tough call...but I'll go with Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

I'd say Heinlein's three best were Stranger in a Strange Land, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Farnham's Freehold. (This does not include his juveniles like Starship Troopers, which are whole other category).

Can I be a complete douche and say "La Nausée"? Yeah, I know - sorry. :p

I'd say Heinlein's three best were Stranger in a Strange Land, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Farnham's Freehold. (This does not include his juveniles like Starship Troopers, which are whole other category).

Starship Troopers is not generally considered to be one of the juveniles...it did win a Hugo after all.

I'd put The Door into Summer, Glory Road, or Job: A Comedy of Justice ahead of Farnham's Freehold.

Freehold was good, but I thought the ending was too drawn out, and I didn't like what was done with Joe's character, even though it was supposed to be representative of the oppressed becoming the oppressor.

...but to each their own. :)

Another for Richard Bach with Jonathan Livingston Seagull. However Fitzgerald can go to Hell. If I am to read about rich and spoiled brats then I will read The Razor's Edge by Maugham.See that's why I sandwiched Fitzgerald between Bach and Fariña, because people usually have that reaction to Fitzgerald. I can't say I don't understand that reaction; I just really like Fitzgerald's writing for some reason.

I like so many novels, don't make me pick a best one...

I like so many novels, don't make me pick a best one...

No, no. You really must choose. *Cocks pistol* ;)

No, no. You really must choose. *Cocks pistol* ;)

Glad I put on my bullet proof head today...

i would nominate my favorite book...lord of the rings...but its laughable to suggest that it could be the best novel ever.

i loved count of monte cristo, dune, to kill a mockingbird, a plague of angels by sheri tepper, the caine mutiny by herman wouk, call of the wild by jack london, great expectations, pride and prejudice, jane eyre and wuthering heights...


3 more of my faves there. Nice to see someone other than me mention Tepper.

Have you read "Raising the Stones"?

Glad I put on my bullet proof head today...

Ah, foiled again I guess. :(

strainger in a strainge land - r. heinline

what can it say? this is the ulitimate uber novel on a personal level. even to some extent on a moral level.

always comming home - u. leguinne

this is not so much for its main story line as the world it portrays and the little periferal references it incorporates about it. leguinne's science in her science fiction is anthropology, and coming up with cultures, often veriants of what our own might evolve into given a few centuries and or cataclysmic event, that are very believable, and without ever getting preachie about it, the odd parable here and there about ourselves and our collective perceptions.

skeens ... series - jo clayton

for charicter level action adventure with both space and fantasy and a zillion fun interesting twists.

also her diadem of the stars series.

pride of chenur, chenur's ... series c.j.cherreh

misbegoten humans with issues wander into a universe of cat anthro (the han), gorila anthro (mahendo'sat), horse/rat/"alien" alien anthros (the kiff), VERY alien aliens (s'to and methane breathing Hnnnnn), all with divided houses and issues of their own, and believably unique alien cultures.

then for just plain fun, there's shmitz's telzey amberdon stories and other's set in the same or related universe. ok, not A novel as such (although i think witches of keres qualifies as at least a novella, as i recall).

for more fun there's r.a.lafferty. his short story collections are much better then his attempts at writing novels, though i've not by any means exausted those.

Can I be a complete douche and say "La Nausée"? Yeah, I know - sorry. :p
What's douchey about that? It's a good book with some fascinating descriptions and philosophy. It also isn't half as pretentious as some of the other things being mentioned here.
Ah, foiled again I guess. :(
Cases like this are why they invented shooting people in the groin, duh.

Everything from Eco Umberto, Joseph Heller, Bret Easton Ellis, Anne Rice, Aldous Huxley and Desmond Morris

Why? They don't create crap.

I cried when I finished that book. :/ In my defense, I was like 14.

Hey, I gotta find that one.

Everything from Eco Umberto, Joseph Heller, Bret Easton Ellis, Anne Rice, Aldous Huxley and Desmond Morris

Why? They don't create crap.
everyone creates SOME "crap", we just usually don't see it because they either have better sense then to send it in, or their publishers usually have better sense then to publish it, unless the're really sure it'll sell anyway.

most of those names i'm not familiar with, as i find mainstream mundania rather tedius. and anne rice didn't invent the anxty vampire, there were the humble and modest minivampires of the russian step inventied by sue petry, (who tragically died and has a writhing scolarship named after her), and one other self published, who'se name i forget at the moment, both LOOOOONG before anne rice.

huxley of course everyone(?) (well as much as that term can be used about anyone or anything) has at least heard of. those other names i'm not familiar with as to their writing, but i'm reasonably confident the're all more then competent at their craft.

I don't claim to know the best book ever, but I do know which books moved me most. Among them are :

"Death in Venice" by Thomas Mann
"Silk" by Alessandro Barricco
"Grace" by Margaret Atwood
"City of the Blind" by Jose Saramago
"The Name of the Rose" by Umberto Eco
"Schlafes Bruder" by Robert Schneider
"The Reader" by Bernhard Schlink

There are many more, but those came to mind first.

Everything from Eco Umberto, Joseph Heller, Bret Easton Ellis, Anne Rice, Aldous Huxley and Desmond Morris

Why? They don't create crap.

I've read Bauodolino, and it was crap.
And absolutely everything I read by Anne Rice so far was... well, very poor.

I don't think there is one 'best' novel. If pushed I might go for The Tin Drum by Gunther Grass - but it would probably change from one day to the next.

I don't think there is one 'best' novel. If pushed I might go for The Tin Drum by Gunther Grass - but it would probably change from one day to the next.

I'm reading that at the moment... very promising so far.

everyone creates SOME "crap", we just usually don't see it because they either have better sense then to send it in, or their publishers usually have better sense then to publish it, unless the're really sure it'll sell anyway.

most of those names i'm not familiar with, as i find mainstream mundania rather tedius. and anne rice didn't invent the anxty vampire, there were the humble and modest minivampires of the russian step inventied by sue petry, (who tragically died and has a writhing scolarship named after her), and one other self published, who'se name i forget at the moment, both LOOOOONG before anne rice.

huxley of course everyone(?) (well as much as that term can be used about anyone or anything) has at least heard of. those other names i'm not familiar with as to their writing, but i'm reasonably confident the're all more then competent at their craft.


It is difficult to tell a real new story, because most stories are already told.
I don't mind that Rice wasn't the first, her version is pretty well written.

Eco Umberto his most famous book is “The Name of the Rose” but I would recommend “Foucault's Pendulum”

Bret Easton Ellis is the excellent writer of American Psycho, Lunar Park, Less than Zero, Glamorama and other works

Desmond Morris is an anthropologian, his most famous work is “The Naked Ape”

Joseph Heller, does "Catch-22" does ring a bell?

I don't think it's all mainstream, surely not in my country.

Bret Easton Ellis is the excellent writer of American Psycho

If Bret Easton Ellis is the 'excellent' writer of American Psycho... why is American Psycho so bad?

And, even if you like the 'stories'... Anne Rice is a writer of almost Stephen King-ishly bad stature. And that's not including the stuff she wrote under other names, etc...

It is difficult to tell a real new story, because most stories are already told.
I don't mind that Rice wasn't the first, her version is pretty well written.

Eco Umberto his most famous book is “The Name of the Rose” but I would recommend “Foucault's Pendulum”

Bret Easton Ellis is the excellent writer of American Psycho, Lunar Park, Less than Zero, Glamorama and other works

Desmond Morris is an anthropologian, his most famous work is “The Naked Ape”

lafferty must(/may) have been familiar with umberto as he several times used a charicter he called foucault ogg!

still not familiar with ellis, who'se stuff you've mentioned doesn't sound at all like the sort of thing i'd be interested in.

"name of the rose" and "naked ape" i have, after all, heard of, just my being terrible with names, not associating their authors. don't know as i've read either of them though. something i'll have to get around to 'some day' (along with about a million zilllion other things that would take several lifetimes to do, and thus may or may not get around to happening)

If Bret Easton Ellis is the 'excellent' writer of American Psycho... why is American Psycho so bad?

And, even if you like the 'stories'... Anne Rice is a writer of almost Stephen King-ishly bad stature. And that's not including the stuff she wrote under other names, etc...


That's your opinion. It's not because Easton Ellis is selling well that he's bad. I liked the story a lot and it's much better than the movie. It's partly reflecting very well how life was in the yuppie 80ties. The greed, the jealous, everything…

A quick tour around some book sites showed me that they are rewarding it as an excellent book. Maybe you felt offended by the pornography and the meaningless violence (he's a serial killer for something)?

I have only read "Interview with the Vampire" from Anne Rice, not her other work.

Well I liked it, in other vampire stories it's just slash-kill-bite stuff. In this story you feel the pain of being a vampire. She humanized the vampire, which was nice.

I'm reading that at the moment... very promising so far.

Hope you like it -I only read it in the English translation and it was brilliant.

Hope you like it -I only read it in the English translation and it was brilliant.

I got the German version when I was there a few weeks back. I'd been meaning to for a long time, but always forgot about it when I was in the bookshop. Only this time I was in a really crappy bookshop, so that was about the only interesting book. ;)

If Bret Easton Ellis is the 'excellent' writer of American Psycho... why is American Psycho so bad?

And, even if you like the 'stories'... Anne Rice is a writer of almost Stephen King-ishly bad stature. And that's not including the stuff she wrote under other names, etc...
taste is in the eye of the beholder. there ARE actually people who LIKE stephen king (yes, god help us, but there are). not high on MY list, but i have read one or two things by him that were at least readable. (but i definately would NOT want to see as a movie)

sometow sucritkle, blarg, i really can't remember how its spelled, which is almost nothing like how its pronounced, which is much more simple then the actual spelling looks like, compares WAY favorably against s.king. for that matter, even gene wolf does. actually sometow's pretty dard good, if really really strainge, read his utopias series, especially about the space whales used as engines, how their captured, and then 13th utopia. yes he's mostly more distopian then my taste too, but he can does write.

mostely i read more short stories, long short stories, and novellas, then full length novels, let alone multilogies, which publishers like to publish more then writers like to write.

my genre is mostly skiffy, though there've been some darn good mystery writers too, most of who'se names i don't remember, and then there's a few, VERY interesting and satisfying crossovers between the two genre's

i just, mundane mainstream just doesn't really do it for me. (nor westerns nor romance, nor historical and religeous novelizations. which is not to say good workmanship can't be done there, just not subject areas that interest me)

moroseness isn't really my thing either, though perkey goths are a trip.

taste is in the eye of the beholder. there ARE actually people who LIKE stephen king (yes, god help us, but there are). not high on MY list, but i have read one or two things by him that were at least readable. (but i definately would NOT want to see as a movie)

sometow sucritkle, blarg, i really can't remember how its spelled, which is almost nothing like how its pronounced, which is much more simple then the actual spelling looks like, compares WAY favorably against s.king. for that matter, even gene wolf does. actually sometow's pretty dard good, if really really strainge, read his utopias series, especially about the space whales used as engines, how their captured, and then 13th utopia. yes he's mostly more distopian then my taste too, but he can does write.

mostely i read more short stories, long short stories, and novellas, then full length novels, let alone multilogies, which publishers like to publish more then writers like to write.

my genre is mostly skiffy, though there've been some darn good mystery writers too, most of who'se names i don't remember, and then there's a few, VERY interesting and satisfying crossovers between the two genre's

i just, mundane mainstream just doesn't really do it for me. (nor westerns nor romance, nor historical and religeous novelizations. which is not to say good workmanship can't be done there, just not subject areas that interest me)

moroseness isn't really my thing either, though perkey goths are a trip.

Well, I like good meals but once in every 3 months I go to McDonalds.

I don't think the authors I mentioned are that mainstream. They are certainly not on the same level as Dan Fucking Brown.

Also, English is, obvious, not my mother tongue and I rarely read translations. The translations are often 'different' books. The real 'difficult' books are also too difficult for me to read in the language of the author. But I'll do my best. A 'Catch-22' by instance was, for me, a very hard book to read.

Well, I like good meals but once in every 3 months I go to McDonalds.

I don't think the authors I mentioned are that mainstream. They are certainly not on the same level as Dan Fucking Brown.

Also, English is, obvious, not my mother tongue and I rarely read translations. The translations are often 'different' books. The real 'difficult' books are also too difficult for me to read in the language of the author. But I'll do my best. A 'Catch-22' by instance was, for me, a very hard book to read.

As a librarian, let me assure you that they all are very mainstream indeed. You are very likely to find all of those books in, say, a small bookshop in Dieppe, France.

Why would it be difficult reading translated books?
I love Chinese and Japanese literature, without speaking the languages. I read the English, German or French translation (whichever is available).
Umberto Eco, in case you weren't aware, writes in Italian.

But I'll do my best. A 'Catch-22' by instance was, for me, a very hard book to read.

Worth the effort, I hope. Catch-22 would be my favourite book. Don't know if it's the best one ever though. Just the best that I've personally encountered.

As a librarian, let me assure you that they all are very mainstream indeed. You are very likely to find all of those books in, say, a small bookshop in Dieppe, France.

Why would it be difficult reading translated books?
I love Chinese and Japanese literature, without speaking the languages. I read the English, German or French translation (whichever is available).
Umberto Eco, in case you weren't aware, writes in Italian.


Mainstream is in my opinion not the same as famous. Most of these authors are famous but not mainstream. I believe that you're a librarian, so I assume that you smell the difference between Joseph Heller and Dan Brown?

About the translating thing, I think you understood me wrong. I have read American Psycho in my mother language and in English. Due the translation it felt as a different book. Some nuances, expressions are hard to translate. Sometimes the translator used not the best synonym for a given word. The original American Psycho was much better for me.

So if possible I prefer the original version.

Yes, I know that Eco is Italian.

Worth the effort, I hope. Catch-22 would be my favourite book. Don't know if it's the best one ever though. Just the best that I've personally encountered.

Yeah, it's on my toplist as well.

"The Stand" By Stephen King. So much power in that book. I wanna read it a second time.

"The Stand" By Stephen King. So much power in that book. I wanna read it a second time.

Then do. I re-read most books I like, eventually.

I've read Bauodolino, and it was crap.
And absolutely everything I read by Anne Rice so far was... well, very poor.

I have the book on my shelves, but I didn't read it yet.

This book is containing dozen pages in a fantasy language (kind of Italian, Latin and other languages). So what did they do with these pages in the translation?

And besides the fantasy language, all books from Eco are difficult to translate.

Did you finish the book? Because, in most his books, Eco is using a snobbish procedure. The first 100 pages are rather difficult to read. After the hard part, the writing is often much better. I heard once, that Eco is doing this to 'reward' the real fans.

Mainstream is in my opinion not the same as famous. Most of these authors are famous but not mainstream. I believe that you're a librarian, so I assume that you smell the difference between Joseph Heller and Dan Brown?

About the translating thing, I think you understood me wrong. I have read American Psycho in my mother language and in English. Due the translation it felt as a different book. Some nuances, expressions are hard to translate. Sometimes the translator used not the best synonym for a given word. The original American Psycho was much better for me.

So if possible I prefer the original version.

Yes, I know that Eco is Italian.

Well, judging by the demand we saw in our library when Baudolino came out, I would say Umberto Eco is EXTREMELY mainstream indeed. We had dozens of people asking to reserve the book before it was even published.

Yes, books tend to loose in translation, that's quite inevitable. However, I personally don't feel like shutting myself off from the most fascinating books and writers of our times, and I don't have the time to learn another 10 languages. So translations it is.

And the difference between Joseph Heller and Dan Brown is that Joseph Heller had an original point, while Dan Brown just about avoided several lawsuits for plagiarisation. There isn't an original thought anywhere in his books.

I have the book on my shelves, but I didn't read it yet.

This book is containing dozen pages in a fantasy language (kind of Italian, Latin and other languages). So what did they do with these pages in the translation?

And besides the fantasy language, all books from Eco are difficult to translate.

Did you finish the book? Because, in most his books, Eco is using a snobbish procedure. The first 100 pages are rather difficult to read. After the hard part, the writing is often much better. I heard once, that Eco is doing this to 'reward' the real fans.

They left them as they were, same as they did in The Name of the Rose.
And yes, I did finish it. I had the distinct impression that he ran out of ideas about two-thirds into the book.

Interpreting 'best' as my personal favourites:

Nineteen Eighty-Four - George Orwell (which I'm in the middle of re-reading; again).

Moby Dick - Herman Melville (and I like the whale bits).

War and Peace - Leo Tolstoy (which I picked up as a 'duty' after marrying a Russian, but ended up really, really enjoying. Honest, I did. Well, except perhaps for that final section of broad philosophising).

Lanark - Alasdair Gray (Scottish magical realism combined with a satire of neo-liberal economics as trenchant as Orwell's attack on totalitarianism; more fun than it sounds).

Lord of the Rings - J.R.R Tolkein (might as well admit it)

Dying Inside - Robert Silverberg (Portnoy's Complaint via Kafka; with telepaths)


And does 'Watchmen' count as a novel?


Comments on a couple of other posts, with apologies for not using the 'quote' button...

Grave_n_Idle keeps bringing up Sheri Tepper - but I regret that I've never been able to go back to her since reading her 'True Game' series over 20 years ago. Those books struck me as a cynical exercise in trying to merge 'Wizard of Earthsea' with the then-peak mass popularity of role-playing games (apprentice wizard in land where most people have a rigid caste with caste-specific powers that look an awful lot like RPG character classes). Given her subsequent reputation, perhaps these are dismissable juvenalia, and I'm almost certainly being unfair, but they turned me off her for life.


And just to prove that the whaling bits in Moby Dick don't have to be boring, here's the novel's single most homoerotic sequence (to the modern reader), from the chapter 'A Squeeze of the Hand':

That whale of Stubb's, so dearly purchased, was duly brought to the Pequod's side, where all those cutting and hoisting operations previously detailed, were regularly gone through, even to the baling of the Heidelburgh Tun, or Case.

While some were occupied with this latter duty, others were employed in dragging away the larger tubs, so soon as filled with the sperm; and when the proper time arrived, this same sperm was carefully manipulated ere going to the try-works, of which anon.

It had cooled and crystallized to such a degree, that when, with several others, I sat down before a large Constantine's bath of it, I found it strangely concreted into lumps, here and there rolling about in the liquid part. It was our business to squeeze these lumps back into fluid. A sweet and unctuous duty! No wonder that in old times sperm was such a favorite cosmetic. Such a clearer! such a sweetener! such a softener; such a delicious mollifier! After having my hands in it for only a few minutes, my fingers felt like eels, and began, as it were, to serpentine and spiralize.

As I sat there at my ease, cross-legged on the deck; after the bitter exertion at the windlass; under a blue tranquil sky; the ship under indolent sail, and gliding so serenely along; as I bathed my hands among those soft, gentle globules of infiltrated tissues, wove almost within the hour; as they richly broke to my fingers, and discharged all their opulence, like fully ripe grapes their wine; as. I snuffed up that uncontaminated aroma,-literally and truly, like the smell of spring violets; I declare to you, that for the time I lived as in a musky meadow; I forgot all about our horrible oath; in that inexpressible sperm, I washed my hands and my heart of it; I almost began to credit the old Paracelsan superstition that sperm is of rare virtue in allaying the heat of anger; while bathing in that bath, I felt divinely free from all ill-will, or petulance, or malice, of any sort whatsoever.

Squeeze! squeeze! squeeze! all the morning long; I squeezed that sperm till I myself almost melted into it; I squeezed that sperm till a strange sort of insanity came over me; and I found myself unwittingly squeezing my co-laborers' hands in it, mistaking their hands for the gentle globules. Such an abounding, affectionate, friendly, loving feeling did this avocation beget; that at last I was continually squeezing their hands, and looking up into their eyes sentimentally; as much as to say,-Oh! my dear fellow beings, why should we longer cherish any social acerbities, or know the slightest ill-humor or envy! Come; let us squeeze hands all round; nay, let us all squeeze ourselves into each other; let us squeeze ourselves universally into the very milk and sperm of kindness. Would that I could keep squeezing that sperm for ever! For now, since by many prolonged, repeated experiences, I have perceived that in all cases man must eventually lower, or at least shift, his conceit of attainable felicity; not placing it anywhere in the intellect or the fancy; but in the wife, the heart, the bed, the table, the saddle, the fire-side; the country; now that I have perceived all this, I am ready to squeeze case eternally. In thoughts of the visions of the night, I saw long rows of angels in paradise, each with his hands in a jar of spermaceti.

Snip...
Eco Umberto his most famous book is “The Name of the Rose” but I would recommend “Foucault's Pendulum”
Snip...

A caveat on Focault's pendulum.
Eco admitted in an interview on Antenne 2 that he wrote the first 100 or so pages to be extremely boring on purpose. If you get past that the rest of the book is very good.
By Eco I like the "Bustine di Minerva" much more.

Book list in random order follows. I'll put only my favourite book for each author.
The moon is a harsh mistress - Heinlein
1984 - Orwell
Siddharta - Hesse
A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court - Clemens (aka Mark Twain)
The Evolution Man, aka Once Upon A Time Age, aka What We Did To Father - Roy Lewis (it's the same book, it is published with three titles)
Small Gods - Pratchett
The Royal Game - Zweig
The trial - Kafka
The Cloven Viscount - Italo Calvino
Martin Eden - London
The Blue Flowers, aka Between Blue and Blue - Queneau
The sosia - Dostoevskij
Rendezvous with Rama - A.C.Clarke
The Mysterious Island - Verne
The Hobbit - Tolkien

Well, judging by the demand we saw in our library when Baudolino came out, I would say Umberto Eco is EXTREMELY mainstream indeed. We had dozens of people asking to reserve the book before it was even published.

Yes, books tend to loose in translation, that's quite inevitable. However, I personally don't feel like shutting myself off from the most fascinating books and writers of our times, and I don't have the time to learn another 10 languages. So translations it is.

And the difference between Joseph Heller and Dan Brown is that Joseph Heller had an original point, while Dan Brown just about avoided several lawsuits for plagiarisation. There isn't an original thought anywhere in his books.

It's not only the concept I believe. The writing style of Brown is much easier. They call his books page turners for something. Catch-22 is clearly not in that category

They left them as they were, same as they did in The Name of the Rose.
And yes, I did finish it. I had the distinct impression that he ran out of ideas about two-thirds into the book.

I just have read one of his books so I don't know.

It's not only the concept I believe. The writing style of Brown is much easier. They call his books page turners for something. Catch-22 is clearly not in that category

In my eyes, that's not the most important difference. I've read good books that were pageturners as well. Dan Brown's are written in that style, but still managed to bore me beyond words, their predictability was simply staggering.

I just have read one of his books so I don't know.

I never call a book good or bad before I've read the end.
And I never call a writer good or bad, I've seen them develop in both directions. ;)

Another addition - most of John le Carré's work - nice to read spy novels by an actual spy and all that.

I never call a book good or bad before I've read the end.
And I never call a writer good or bad, I've seen them develop in both directions. ;)

It's a difficult profession as well. But still there are zillion good books we'll never read.

Think about all those writers in small countries...

It's a difficult profession as well. But still there are zillion good books we'll never read.

Think about all those writers in small countries...

I tend to go out of my way to get literature from as many countries as possible. Robert Schneider is an Austrian writer, but did managed to get his books translated into English.
VS Naipaul (Nobel laureate) is from South Africa I believe, Assia Djebar writes in France but is from Algeria and writes about her native country, Yassar Kemal is from Turkey...

There is a lot of literature out there that can be read in translation, and is still worth being read.
Not that anybody will ever be able to read everything, of course, but that doesn't mean we can't keep looking for good books. ;)

I tend to go out of my way to get literature from as many countries as possible. Robert Schneider is an Austrian writer, but did managed to get his books translated into English.
VS Naipaul (Nobel laureate) is from South Africa I believe, Assia Djebar writes in France but is from Algeria and writes about her native country, Yassar Kemal is from Turkey...

There is a lot of literature out there that can be read in translation, and is still worth being read.
Not that anybody will ever be able to read everything, of course, but that doesn't mean we can't keep looking for good books. ;)

You should try Dimitri Verhulst once. I believe they translated his work to English.

'The Misfortunates' is hilarious.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimitri_Verhulst

VS Naipaul (Nobel laureate) is from South Africa I believe

Sir Vidia Naipaul is originally from Trinidad and Tobago.

Which reminds me...

I could I have forgotten to add to my list his classic 'A Bend in the River' (post-colonial decline in a nation that looks a lot like Mobutu's Zaire), which I much preferred to 'A House for Mr. Biswas' and 'In A Free State'. Absolutely one of my favourite novels.

It also includes one of my three favourite, though deeply depressing, opening lines in a novel (others 1984 and Neuromancer):

"The world is what it is; those who are nothing, who allow themselves to become nothing, have no place in it."


In other English-language post-colonial novels, I'm also fond of Chinua Achebe's 'No Longer at Ease', a sort-of sequel to 'Things Fall Apart' - which many of you were presumably forced to read in school.

You should try Dimitri Verhulst once. I believe they translated his work to English.

'The Misfortunates' is hilarious.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimitri_Verhulst

Sounds good. I'll keep an eye open for him.

If you're interested in literature from this little island, I would advise to pick up a book by Roddy Doyle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roddy_Doyle). The best one I read so far was A Star Called Henry.

It's not only the concept I believe. The writing style of Brown is much easier. They call his books page turners for something. Catch-22 is clearly not in that category

If you find Catch-22 difficult to read, you clearly have no sense of humour.

As for greatest novel, considering the row about translations, I'll go for greatest English language novel. For its expression, artistic merit, original use of language, complex literary techniques, depth and integration of theme, effective and genius manipulation of plot, and mastery of overall style, my choice goes to Worstward Ho by Samuel Beckett. This novel is the most complete development of style, and the most perfect translation of mind on to paper that I have ever read.

Sir Vidia Naipaul is originally from Trinidad and Tobago.

Which reminds me...

I could I have forgotten to add to my list his classic 'A Bend in the River' (post-colonial decline in a nation that looks a lot like Mobutu's Zaire), which I much preferred to 'A House for Mr. Biswas' and 'In A Free State'. Absolutely one of my favourite novels.

It also includes one of my three favourite, though deeply depressing, opening lines in a novel (others 1984 and Neuromancer):

"The world is what it is; those who are nothing, who allow themselves to become nothing, have no place in it."

I admit it's been a while since I read it, but wasn't A Bend in the River set in Africa? I might be confusing things, though...

I admit it's been a while since I read it, but wasn't A Bend in the River set in Africa? I might be confusing things, though...

Yes. As noted in my post, it's set in a country that looks a lot like Mobutu's Zaire. Even more specifically, it's set in a city that's clearly Kisangani. I first read the book in 1989, when camping at the Greek hotel in Kisangani while trying to avoid any English speakers in the local security forces noticing I was reading it.

Happy days.

But Naipaul himself is from T&T, not Africa, though he's set books in both. "...Mr. Biswas" is set in T&T; "...River" and "In a Free State" are set in Africa (Free State in a country that looks a lot like Uganda).

3 more of my faves there. Nice to see someone other than me mention Tepper.

Have you read "Raising the Stones"?
if its tepper, i have read it unless its new and i didnt notice. yeah im pretty sure i read it... her last few books (that ive read) have seemed like a variation on a theme so i dont remember which one was which.

she is one of those authors that i check for in the bookstore almost every time im there...

but with the price of gas i havent been to albuquerque as often as i used to.

Terra Oceanis;14276806']If you find Catch-22 difficult to read, you clearly have no sense of humour.


Oh oh, I had a more than good laugh with this novel.

I had to read it in high school. Everybody was excited about the book, but all of us considered it as difficult.

I have the feeling that there’s a difference in perception of ‘difficult’ for people speaking English as mother tongue and between those who don't.

there was one by fred pohl i forgot to mention, i forget the name of, about the yerks and the nancy, hah, now i remember, i think it was called black star rising. it had a statue of bem's on the dust jacket raising a flag, with the lead charicter and the multi-brained or the several secondary charicters, and one of the yerks (cute but deadly little bug guys) in uniform.

neven's ringworld is pretty hefty for gratifying content too, though perhapse not as much as phylosophically some of the things that have been mentioned.

hesse's sidartha and for mad men only (or is that the same book, i forget, but i think the're two different ones, it's been ages) i've also read. they were interestingly strainge, whatever his intentions in writing them, which i went into mistrusting and still continue to.

and there was something called abraxis by someone, no, not the music alblum, whoever THAT was buy, but a novel lenght book of the same name by someone. i remember reading that along about the same time i read hesse, sometime back in the mid 70s.

tepper wrote one of those crossover novels (or novellas, short for novels, as mysteries tend to be) between mystery and skiffy that was damd good, i can't remember what it was called or any of the details of what it was about, i just remember my reaction to it at the time was that i liked it a lot.

Oh oh, I had a more than good laugh with this novel.

I had to read it in high school. Everybody was excited about the book, but all of us considered it as difficult.

I have the feeling that there’s a difference in perception of ‘difficult’ for people speaking English as mother tongue and between those who don't.

You have a point. With English as my first language I find the book very easy to read, because the language is not pretentiously difficult. However, I do not know any other languages, so do not know how difficult it is to read a novel in a second-language. I am learning French currently with the express purpose of reading the writing of my favourite author, who also wrote in English.

Oh oh, I had a more than good laugh with this novel.

I had to read it in high school. Everybody was excited about the book, but all of us considered it as difficult.

I have the feeling that there’s a difference in perception of ‘difficult’ for people speaking English as mother tongue and between those who don't.

Wow, you're lucky. We were forced to read McBeth and Wuthering Heights...

Terra Oceanis;14276840']You have a point. With English as my first language I find the book very easy to read, because the language is not pretentiously difficult. However, I do not know any other languages, so do not know how difficult it is to read a novel in a second-language. I am learning French currently with the express purpose of reading the writing of my favourite author, who also wrote in English.


Well, you'll understand me soon. :)

It will be even more difficult for you as for me. We hear English all the times (movies, music, etc...), we received English classes at high school, college, etc...

In most English spoken countries, French is not the second language and are you not overwhelmed by French spoken media.

Mais...courage avec votre leçons français.

In most English spoken countries, French is not the second language and are you not overwhelmed by French spoken media.
Err... outside of the caribbean, most of Africa, Canada, the UK itself and some areas of India I'd agree fully.

*edits*

And it's "vos" leçons IIRC :p

Wow, you're lucky. We were forced to read McBeth and Wuthering Heights...

It is the teacher who can determine such things here.

My sister her children are now in high school and receive English classes but have to read silly books.

Err... outside of the caribbean, most of Africa, Canada, the UK itself and some areas of India I'd agree fully.

*edits*

And it's "vos" leçons IIRC :p

Hehe :)

Do they hear French music or see French movies in UK ?

When I hear English people talking French, I always have to think about 'Allo Allo'


"I was pissing by the door when I heard two shats. You are holding in your hind a smoking goon. You are clearly the guilty potty!"

They have had a direct hot on the pimps!" "The pimps?" "The pimps! The pimps in the pimping station! No water is being pimped through the poops!"

"I am mauving in a ginger fashion becerrs my poloceman's pints are full of dinamote!"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/'Allo_'Allo!

It is the teacher who can determine such things here.

My sister her children are now in high school and receive English classes but have to read silly books.

Well, there's a list of things the teacher could choose from in our case as well, but McBeth was compulsory. Instead of Wuthering Heights, we could also have read Pride and Prejudice and Great Expectations...

Hehe :)

Do they hear French music or see French movies in UK ?
A little bit. I do quite a bit, but then I'm a pretentious student :tongue:
When I hear English people talking French, I always have to think about 'Allo Allo'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/'Allo_'Allo!
:D

Yeah that's about the level of most peoples' French - we all have to learn it in school, but a lot of people don't like to.

Yeah that's about the level of most peoples' French - we all have to learn it in school, but a lot of people don't like to.

That's always puzzled me to be honest... why is that?

Well, there's a list of things the teacher could choose from in our case as well, but McBeth was compulsory. Instead of Wuthering Heights, we could also have read Pride and Prejudice and Great Expectations...
wuthering heights is so dark. id have gone with great expectations (in a mixed gender class. its cruel to force pride and prejudice on teen boys)

That's always puzzled me to be honest... why is that?
Tout le monde (quite literally in this case) speaks English nowadays. And we all know it.

I like to learn languages because I enjoy being polite and meeting new people. A lot of Brits drop their languages at GCSE if they can, because they know that if they ask for something in English anywhere in the UK (esp on their plebby holidays to the Costa del Sol), they will get it.

wuthering heights is so dark. id have gone with great expectations (in a mixed gender class. its cruel to force pride and prejudice on teen boys)

Well, out of the three I like Pride and Prejudice best these days. The irony is wonderful. I get the feeling most people don't really get it, though, otherwise they wouldn't keep making these crappy films...
Wuthering Heights takes itself far too seriously, and Great Expactations is too preachy.

Well, out of the three I like Pride and Prejudice best these days.
As a teenage male, reading Pride and Prejudice for GCSE English Lit. was like pulling teeth :tongue:

Well, out of the three I like Pride and Prejudice best these days. The irony is wonderful. I get the feeling most people don't really get it, though, otherwise they wouldn't keep making these crappy films...
Wuthering Heights takes itself far too seriously, and Great Expactations is too preachy.
oh i think P&P is best too. but ....think of the boys.

Tout le monde (quite literally in this case) speaks English nowadays. And we all know it.

I like to learn languages because I enjoy being polite and meeting new people. A lot of Brits drop their languages at GCSE if they can, because they know that if they ask for something in English anywhere in the UK (esp on their plebby holidays to the Costa del Sol), they will get it.

Well, true that, English is pretty international these days. However, your little next door neighbour Ireland manages to teach every kid 2 languages - Gaelic and a modern European one. Mind you, not everybody will end up proficient in any of them, but the majority of Irish I've met so far can speak more than one language.

oh i think P&P is best too. but ....think of the boys.

I guess the irony and sarcasm dripping from the pages might be lost on them ;)

As a teenage male, reading Pride and Prejudice for GCSE English Lit. was like pulling teeth :tongue:

*lol
So you didn't see the funny side to it? At all?

That's always puzzled me to be honest... why is that?

Several reason, I guess.

It's an island, so few influences come from border countries.
It's also a cultural island, the country is big enough to produce enough culture on its own.
Education, if you don't learn French at school, you'll be not in the mood for listening to French music, watching French movies, reading French books etc...

But the French can't speak decent English either. I worked for an international tire company and they had a factory in Béthune. Most of the people there couldn't talk English (even the doctor...).

What does everyone think of The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexander Dumas? I think the way he changes and molds characters over such a large period of time is tryuly the work of a genius

Alexandre Dumas was THE BEST AUTHOR EVER. :hail:The Count of Monte Cristo is the only book I've read that was still good after it became a film (although the film did change a whole heap).

There is no contest, this thread should have ended at post 6, awesome though the topic is.

Well, true that, English is pretty international these days. However, your little next door neighbour Ireland manages to teach every kid 2 languages - Gaelic and a modern European one. Mind you, not everybody will end up proficient in any of them, but the majority of Irish I've met so far can speak more than one language.
I think the majority of Brits probably can but keep it quiet and all that.
*lol
So you didn't see the funny side to it? At all?
No, I was too busy being bored :tongue:
Education, if you don't learn French at school, you'll be not in the mood for listening to French music, watching French movies, reading French books etc...
Everyone learns French at school, most learn German too and some learn Spanish. They just don't enjoy it.
But the French can't speak decent English either. I worked for an international tire company and they had a factory in Béthune. Most of the people there couldn't talk English (even the doctor...).
More French can speak decent English than English can decent French.

I guess the irony and sarcasm dripping from the pages might be lost on them ;)
maybe just a little.

if they can find it through all the social talk.

great expectations was one they made me read when i was in highschool. it had its points, but i really couldn't get into the old lady and her cobwebs. maybe with my nievette at the time, the visions in my head reading it might not have been exactly what the author had had in mind. mercifully the details as i perceived them at the time, along with the actual content i've pretty thoroughly forgotten.

people constantly surprise me when the talk about it, appearently interpreting it as a very different book then how it seemed to me when i was reading it at the time. probably totally missed the intentions of some the references.

i remember one part of it, toward the end i think, talked about debter's prison, some guy escaping or having been recently freed from, and now we live in a world that's gone all the way over to the opposite extreme of that and is just as heavily beggining to pay for it.

I've always been a science fiction fan, and I have to say I like Alastair Reynold's Revelation Space -saga... Hard scifi with some very dark themes (malfunctioning anti-inertia engines, anyone?), combined with rather lovecraftian horror.

Also, Dan Simmons's Hyperion quadrology blew my mind a few years back.

Well, true that, English is pretty international these days. However, your little next door neighbour Ireland manages to teach every kid 2 languages - Gaelic and a modern European one. Mind you, not everybody will end up proficient in any of them, but the majority of Irish I've met so far can speak more than one language.

You would be surprised how many people can't speak English. Enter a small town as Wuppertall in Germany and you'll have a hard time to find one who's speaking English.

In Bari, Italy, the same.

Barcelona, even the guys in the hotel had lots of problems to express themselves in English...

maybe just a little.

if they can find it through all the social talk.
Aye it's all interpersonal relationships and not enough suspense and action and such.

Maybe if Mr. Bennet had been sent on a mission to assassinate Napoléon or something then it would have been more interesting to teenage boys.

You would be surprised how many people can't speak English. Enter a small town as Wuppertall in Germany and you'll have a hard time to find one who's speaking English.

In Bari, Italy, the same.

Barcelona, even the guys in the hotel had lots of problems to express themselves in English...
I bet any of the young people in Wuppertal can speak a bit even if they don't want to. Ich kann quite a bit of German, so it'd all be good regardless. Barcelona - aye this is a bit more difficult, and because I can speak Spanish but not Catalan I got some funny looks too. Italy - aye, fair point, but a lot of people in the North at least seem to be ok with speaking English.

Everyone learns French at school, most learn German too and some learn Spanish. They just don't enjoy it.



We already start learning French at elementary school.
We receive 6 hours a week French at High School. We also get 6 hours English each week.

I doubt that the English receive the same volume. If it was, their French would be much better.

The Illuminatus! Trilogy is quite an interesting work, as are the Dune books. Hocus Pocus is an incredibly good novel as well. Art of War, Sun Tzu, has gotta rank up there as well.

Yeah...I'm not good at picking just one. It's entirely dependant on the minute you ask me.

We already start learning French at elementary school.
From 2010 onwards, so will British children (hurrah!)
We receive 6 hours a week French at High School. We also get 6 hours English each week.

I doubt that the English receive the same volume. If it was, their French would be much better.
I got 4 and a half hours of French and German, and that was as an A-Level (a bit like the Abi, but with less subjects), so yeah, we don't learn as much.

I bet any of the young people in Wuppertal can speak a bit even if they don't want to. Ich kann quite a bit of German, so it'd all be good regardless. Barcelona - aye this is a bit more difficult, and because I can speak Spanish but not Catalan I got some funny looks too. Italy - aye, fair point, but a lot of people in the North at least seem to be ok with speaking English.

Wuppertal was a mess :)

You would be surprised how many people can't speak English. Enter a small town as Wuppertall in Germany and you'll have a hard time to find one who's speaking English.

In Bari, Italy, the same.

Barcelona, even the guys in the hotel had lots of problems to express themselves in English...

I'm from Germany myself... I can honestly say I've never seen anybody having difficulties getting along with English.

Italy, on the other hand... well, you might have more luck with German there ;)

Italy, on the other hand... well, you might have more luck with German there ;)
Or French. Or Italian, but then I can't speak much of that.

yeah but the character development in "the art of war" is a bit lacking.




since its not a novel.

We already start learning French at elementary school.
We receive 6 hours a week French at High School. We also get 6 hours English each week.

I doubt that the English receive the same volume. If it was, their French would be much better.

Not to mention their English!

Terra Oceanis;14276948']Not to mention their English!
Our English is fine, for the most part.

From 2010 onwards, so will British children (hurrah!)

I got 4 and a half hours of French and German, and that was as an A-Level (a bit like the Abi, but with less subjects), so yeah, we don't learn as much.

Et voila. When we start with high school, we already can speak French rather well.

It's not a matter of being English or discipline but just education. The English have a brain too. Really :)

yeah but the character development in "the art of war" is a bit lacking.




since its not a novel.

It's all about developing the reader's character. Who doesn't want to be an ass-kicking super general!?

Et voila. When we start with high school, we already can speak French rather well.
Aye, but doesn't where you go to high school affect how much you learn in terms of foreign languages?

I can't see many Realschulen doing 6 hours a week of foreign languages, let alone at a Hauptschule.
It's not a matter of being English or discipline but just education. The English have a brain too. Really :)
Aye I know :tongue:

It's all about developing the reader's character. Who doesn't want to be an ass-kicking super general!?

*raises hand*
Who in their right mind would want to be that? :confused:

I'm from Germany myself... I can honestly say I've never seen anybody having difficulties getting along with English.

Italy, on the other hand... well, you might have more luck with German there ;)

I did and often.

I had to communicate with engineers from Peissenberg. It was hell. Now, I can't speak German as well.

The solution was babelfish :)

It's all about developing the reader's character. Who doesn't want to be an ass-kicking super general!?
it doesnt matter.

its not a novel.

It's all about developing the reader's character. Who doesn't want to be an ass-kicking super general!?

I'm afraid Ashmoria's main point, that The Art of War is not, in fact, a novel, still remains unchallenged. How do you suppose to argue its merits as the greatest novel of all time when it is not a novel?

Aye, but doesn't where you go to high school affect how much you learn in terms of foreign languages?

I can't see many Realschulen doing 6 hours a week of foreign languages, let alone at a Hauptschule.

Aye I know :tongue:

They do. They just get fewer years of it.

Well then, go with any of the other ones I mentioned. There's plenty to choose from.

It's all about developing the reader's character. Who doesn't want to be an ass-kicking super general!?
It's not a novel, it's a slim book for army fanboys.

They do. They just get fewer years of it.
Oh ok.

*raises hand*
Who in their right mind would want to be that? :confused:
im pretty sure that teen boys would rather read it (in the original chinese) than P&P.

even if they had to write a 10 page paper afterwards.

It's not a novel, it's a slim book for army fanboys.

Tell that to the businessmen and philosophy types who regard it as a wee bit better than that.

Tell that to the businessmen and philosophy types who regard it as a wee bit better than that.
Uhu...

The Illuminatus! Trilogy is quite an interesting work, as are the Dune books. Hocus Pocus is an incredibly good novel as well. Art of War, Sun Tzu, has gotta rank up there as well.

Yeah...I'm not good at picking just one. It's entirely dependant on the minute you ask me.
you ruined it by writing "dune books"

only the first one was great. the rest were......not.

Aye, but doesn't where you go to high school affect how much you learn in terms of foreign languages?

I can't see many Realschulen doing 6 hours a week of foreign languages, let alone at a Hauptschule.

Aye I know :tongue:

Yes, it depends. Guys that are studying a profession (plumber, electrician, ...) receive less classes as the ones who are doing economics, computer science, etc...

In elementary school it's the same for all (2 hours a week).

6 hours a week? No 12 hours, and even 14 hours in the last 2 years of high school.

I did and often.

I had to communicate with engineers from Peissenberg. It was hell. Now, I can't speak German as well.

The solution was babelfish :)

Funny, that.
It reminded me of my last visit to Germany... I was waiting for a train to Munich, and there were two Asian ladies waiting as well. One of them walked up to me, showing me a print-out of a schedule to get to Passau. I involved changing trains. I was trying to tell her that, but she spoke no German, English or French, so I tried sign language...
When we got on the train, the conductor thankfully spoke Russian, so he was able to explain to them where they needed to go. They apparently were from Mongolia.

6 hours a week? No 12 hours, and even 14 hours in the last 2 years of high school.
:eek: THIS IS LOTS!

you ruined it by writing "dune books"

only the first one was great. the rest were......not.

Alright, you do have me there. The first was by *far* (far far far) better than the rest. Still, I enjoyed reading them. Chapterhouse was the best out of the rest.

Tell that to the businessmen and philosophy types who regard it as a wee bit better than that.

While I cannot deny that The Art of War has its merits when read in context, I find it pointless arguing this in a thread dedicated to novels. Shall we agree that it is good for what it is, but that it isn't a novel?

:eek: THIS IS LOTS!

You get used to it.
I live in Holland, but I went to Belgian schools which are much better.

In Holland you receive less hours and almost no homework.

Terra Oceanis;14276989']While I cannot deny that The Art of War has its merits when read in context, I find it pointless arguing this in a thread dedicated to novels. Shall we agree that it is good for what it is, but that it isn't a novel?

Indeed. That's why I said to look at the other novels I had posted (Illuminatus! Trilogy, Dune stuff, Hocus Pocus) Argument over, sorry.

You get used to it.
I live in Holland, but I went to Belgian schools which are much better.

In Holland you receive less hours and almost no homework.
No homework, eh?

*goes to Holland to study*

Tell that to the businessmen and philosophy types who regard it as a wee bit better than that.
that doesn't exactly make it a work of creative fiction.
it IS still taught to officers at the air force accadamy, or was the last i heard.
and it does have sensible points in the context of conflict situations.
there is a slight problem with economic leaders treating everything as a conflict situation.

You get used to it.
I live in Holland, but I went to Belgian schools which are much better.

In Holland you receive less hours and almost no homework.

This is interesting. Living in Australia I did not learn foreign languages in the last three years of high-school, and I only went through eight hours a week of English due to my course options - most receive only four, and homework is widely non-necessary.

Indeed. That's why I said to look at the other novels I had posted (Illuminatus! Trilogy, Dune stuff, Hocus Pocus) Argument over, sorry.

I'm afraid I have not read any of your other suggestions. I usually find myself reading what may be called 'classic literature' which others recommend as being 'genius' - not out of some sanctimonious desire to join an elitist realm of society, but because each book differs widely from the others in style. I have learnt from experience that I am very easily bored with prose, even many 'classics', but have found my niche tends to lie within the realm of supposedly 'well-studied' authors.

Terra Oceanis;14277029']I'm afraid I have not read any of your other suggestions. I usually find myself reading what may be called 'classic literature' which others recommend as being 'genius' - not out of some sanctimonious desire to join an elitist realm of society, but because each book differs widely from the others in style. I have learnt from experience that I am very easily bored with prose, even many 'classics', but have found my niche tends to lie within the realm of supposedly 'well-studied' authors.

Everyone has their own tendencies. I usually end up reading a bit of everything. If I were to bring in some 'classics' that I'm fond of, The Brothers Karamazov, and the Modern Prometheus (Frankenstein) are both good novels.

Terra Oceanis;14277029']I'm afraid I have not read any of your other suggestions. I usually find myself reading what may be called 'classic literature' which others recommend as being 'genius' - not out of some sanctimonious desire to join an elitist realm of society, but because each book differs widely from the others in style. I have learnt from experience that I am very easily bored with prose, even many 'classics', but have found my niche tends to lie within the realm of supposedly 'well-studied' authors.
i find the classics to be a mixed bag of great books that have stood the test of time and crap that no one really reads but always recommends as if they had.

i find the classics to be a mixed bag of great books that have stood the test of time and crap that no one really reads but always recommends as if they had.

Actually not a half bad assessment. I really haven't read too terribly many that fall into this category considering how many there are, but the few I have read were good. Though it's always great fun to talk to somebody about a book they reccomend, yet clearly have not read themselves.

Oh, some other very good books I've read that are considered classics (at least I think so) - Journey to the Center of the Earth and The Count of Monte Cristo. I love that second one especially.

i find the classics to be a mixed bag of great books that have stood the test of time and crap that no one really reads but always recommends as if they had.

i'm somewhat more familiar with the latter then the former.

(which is why i tend to prefer the genres i can more often count upon as gratifying)

i find the classics to be a mixed bag of great books that have stood the test of time and crap that no one really reads but always recommends as if they had.

Here I agree, but I must say that, contrary to a previous poster's statement that no one has read War and Peace, I have read an English translation of the book and enjoyed it immensely. However, I've found other classics difficult to admire, like The Handmaid's Tale; or difficult to get through, despite having merits, like Tristram Shandy or Ulysses. I also find that a lot of Shakespeare's work is inaccessible, unless one wishes to take hours to study the work line-by-line.

Terra Oceanis;14277070']Here I agree, but I must say that, contrary to a previous poster's statement that no one has read War and Peace, I have read an English translation of the book and enjoyed it immensely. However, I've found other classics difficult to admire, like The Handmaid's Tale; or difficult to get through, despite having merits, like Tristram Shandy or Ulysses. I also find that a lot of Shakespeare's work is inaccessible, unless one wishes to take hours to study the work line-by-line.

I never thought of the Handmaid's Tale as a classic? The book was written in my lifetime! :eek:

Ulysses, I think, wasn't written to be read. It's the only explanation I've got really.

My favorites are Lord of the Rings and 1984. To me they are each a classic example of a very different type of literary style. Lord of the Rings creates an entire world, history and mythology, drawing on the deep mythilogical traditions of the Western World. Yet at its author's insistence, it has no allegorical meaning. 1984 by contrast is almost an essay on power in literary form.

Both landmark works of literature, however.

Terra Oceanis;14277070']Here I agree, but I must say that, contrary to a previous poster's statement that no one has read War and Peace, I have read an English translation of the book and enjoyed it immensely. However, I've found other classics difficult to admire, like The Handmaid's Tale; or difficult to get through, despite having merits, like Tristram Shandy or Ulysses. I also find that a lot of Shakespeare's work is inaccessible, unless one wishes to take hours to study the work line-by-line.
i find that shakespeare is best accessed live.

"the tempest" came to town last year. so to prepare i bought the book and got the bbc version off netflix.

ohmygod they were horrible! just completely boring crap.

when i got to the theater to see it live, i was suprised to find it funny and.....well not compelling but certainly quote filled. i liked it very much.

most classics are ruined by people being forced to read them in school. the pressure to read something, understand it, analyse it, remember the quotey parts, etc. can ruin almost any book.

i find that shakespeare is best accessed live.

"the tempest" came to town last year. so to prepare i bought the book and got the bbc version off netflix.

ohmygod they were horrible! just completely boring crap.

when i got to the theater to see it live, i was suprised to find it funny and.....well not compelling but certainly quote filled. i liked it very much.

most classics are ruined by people being forced to read them in school. the pressure to read something, understand it, analyse it, remember the quotey parts, etc. can ruin almost any book.

I could not agree more. Though The Tempest is hardly the best of Shakespere's work. I reserve that honor for Macbeth, personally.:)

I never thought of the Handmaid's Tale as a classic? The book was written in my lifetime! :eek:

Ulysses, I think, wasn't written to be read. It's the only explanation I've got really.

I believe that there are modern novels which can be considered 'classics', as far as literary merit goes; an example of a modern classic author who I enjoy would be Ismail Kadare. Going back in time, last century, there has been Beckett, Burgess, Yeats, Sartre, Joyce. All considered brilliant writers, but very close to our lifetimes. One must ask, at what point is a book a classic? I think it's more on merit than on time.

Ulysses was an epic intellectual study by an incredibly talented and ambitious writer indulging in a rich knowledge of literature. I'm sure it's brilliant, but I just don't have the time to go to the effort to appreciate it to its fullest.

I could not agree more. Though The Tempest is hardly the best of Shakespere's work. I reserve that honor for Macbeth, personally.:)
*coughs* Othello *cough*

*coughs* Othello *cough*

I saw a movie version, but it was a long time ago.

Though I love the way Shakespere handles prophecy in Macbeth. And anyone who thinks that Lady Macbeth and not her husband is the true villain is nuts.:)

Terra Oceanis;14277112']I believe that there are modern novels which can be considered 'classics', as far as literary merit goes; an example of a modern classic author who I enjoy would be Ismail Kadare. Going back in time, last century, there has been Beckett, Burgess, Yeats, Sartre, Joyce. All considered brilliant writers, but very close to our lifetimes. One must ask, at what point is a book a classic? I think it's more on merit than on time.

Ulysses was an epic intellectual study by an incredibly talented and ambitious writer indulging in a rich knowledge of literature. I'm sure it's brilliant, but I just don't have the time to go to the effort to appreciate it to its fullest.

I always though "classic" refers to a comparatively old book (as in, not contemporary), that is still being widely read and liked.
I would class The Handmaid's Tale as contemporary... after all, the author is still alive and writing.

i find that shakespeare is best accessed live.

"the tempest" came to town last year. so to prepare i bought the book and got the bbc version off netflix.

ohmygod they were horrible! just completely boring crap.

when i got to the theater to see it live, i was suprised to find it funny and.....well not compelling but certainly quote filled. i liked it very much.

most classics are ruined by people being forced to read them in school. the pressure to read something, understand it, analyse it, remember the quotey parts, etc. can ruin almost any book.

I completely agree. Drama is written for a reason - to be seen in production. Though Shakespeare's work contains so minimal stage directions and character notes from the author that it is open to a lot more variation than, say, Eugene O'Neill's work. This is part of the reason, I believe, that many are encouraged to read Shakespeare's work.

I saw a movie version, but it was a long time ago.

Though I love the way Shakespere handles prophecy in Macbeth. And anyone who thinks that Lady Macbeth and not her husband is the true villain is nuts.:)

I always found the psychological aspect of Lady McBeth's sleepwalking fascinating... considering what was known at the time about psychology, after all.

That said, my favourite is Midsummernight's Dream.

Enders Game, prbly for the whole thought of killing stuff. But I've also enjoyed the Wheel of time books simply for the storytelling and excitement. Having to think up the best book on the spot is hard. will report back later with further thoughts.

*coughs* Othello *cough*

Alas, I also have a weakness for Othello. Though I can definitely see why many consider the likes of Macbeth and Hamlet to be his greatest works, Iago has won my heart; the greatest fictional villain I have encountered thus far.

I could not agree more. Though The Tempest is hardly the best of Shakespere's work. I reserve that honor for Macbeth, personally.:)
agreed.

but it isnt the crap you would think it was if you read it or got the bbc video version. *shudder*

the same company came through town a few years ago with macbeth. it had been a long time since id seen it. i was left thinking..."macbeth was a very bad man"--all the bad stuff is usually put off on his wife but she was just a co-conspirator.

Terra Oceanis;14277070']Here I agree, but I must say that, contrary to a previous poster's statement that no one has read War and Peace, I have read an English translation of the book and enjoyed it immensely. However, I've found other classics difficult to admire, like The Handmaid's Tale; or difficult to get through, despite having merits, like Tristram Shandy or Ulysses. I also find that a lot of Shakespeare's work is inaccessible, unless one wishes to take hours to study the work line-by-line.

Ditto - and said as much here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14276743&postcount=111).

I think War and Peace is one of those books that has a difficult reputation because it's so long - but in fact the plot fairly cracks along. Between vivid descriptions of Napoleonic battles and the love lives of the Russian aristocracy, what's not to like? When I read it, I was giving my wife nightly updates on Napoleon's advance through Russia, or who was filled with unrequited love for whom.

After reading War and Peace, I reached the conclusion that almost every romantic historical fiction potboiler written since bears the same relationship to Tolstoy as most post-Tolkein fantasy bears to Lord of the Rings (and a lot of heavy metal to Led Zeppelin). Just because what came afterwards is mostly debased crap shouldn't detract from just how excellent the original was.

Though again, that final short philosophical section does drag a bit.


Edit:
Macbeth, Julius Caesar and King Lear for the record. Saw Patrick Stewart as Macbeth in London last year - brilliant!

*coughs* Othello *cough*
*cough* hamlet *cough*

*cough* hamlet *cough*
*cough* But Othello is great *cough*

agreed.

but it isnt the crap you would think it was if you read it or got the bbc video version. *shudder*

the same company came through town a few years ago with macbeth. it had been a long time since id seen it. i was left thinking..."macbeth was a very bad man"--all the bad stuff is usually put off on his wife but she was just a co-conspirator.

Well, she pushed him to commit the murder of his King and take power. So perhaps she was more ruthless in the beginning. But Macbeth then went nuts with paranoia and power and began killing everyone who might possibly threaten him (without telling his wife). I'd say that they're both evil, and perhaps she is more to begin with, but in the end Macbeth does the most damage, and probably feels the least remorse.

Its interesting how differently they handle the guilt of their crimes. Macbeth's response is to become increasingly paranoid and cling desperately to life. Lady Macbeth, who ironically committed the lesser crimes, is unable to deal with it and just snaps mentally. Their's irony in the fact that the one who was more ruthless to begin with snaps more easily when pushed past a certain point.

Ditto - and said as much here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14276743&postcount=111).

I think War and Peace is one of those books that has a difficult reputation because it's so long - but in fact the plot fairly cracks along. Between vivid descriptions of Napoleonic battles and the love lives of the Russian aristocracy, what's not to like? When I read it, I was giving my wife nightly updates on Napoleon's advance through Russia, or who was filled with unrequited love for whom.

After reading War and Peace, I reached the conclusion that almost every romantic historical fiction potboiler written since bears the same relationship to Tolstoy as most post-Tolkein fantasy bears to Lord of the Rings (and a lot of heavy metal to Led Zeppelin). Just because what came afterwards is mostly debased crap shouldn't detract from just how excellent the original was.

Though again, that final short philosophical section does drag a bit.


Edit:
Macbeth, Julius Caesar and King Lear for the record. Saw Patrick Stewart as Macbeth in London last year - brilliant!

Took me longer to read the epilogue than the entire story! I felt like he was stating the same thing over and over, using ever-more elaborate metaphors but still saying the same thing. Though it is interesting, and certainly had its influence on me, it was SO boring!

*cough* But Othello is great *cough*
yeah it is. id love to see a good live version.

seeing someone make the iago character work would be well worth the $100 and 150 mile round trip.

Being new to this forum, I found this topic interesting. IMO, there is no one best novel. These are some that I have in my library that I think are worthy of being "the best":
The Art of War by Sun Tzu; The Republic by Plato; Ethics by Bzruch de Spinoza; Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau.
Some reading just for fun: The Brotherehood of War series by W.E.B. Grififfin; The Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan; The Honor Harrington series by David Weber.

Ditto - and said as much here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14276743&postcount=111).

I think War and Peace is one of those books that has a difficult reputation because it's so long - but in fact the plot fairly cracks along. Between vivid descriptions of Napoleonic battles and the love lives of the Russian aristocracy, what's not to like? When I read it, I was giving my wife nightly updates on Napoleon's advance through Russia, or who was filled with unrequited love for whom.

After reading War and Peace, I reached the conclusion that almost every romantic historical fiction potboiler written since bears the same relationship to Tolstoy as most post-Tolkein fantasy bears to Lord of the Rings (and a lot of heavy metal to Led Zeppelin). Just because what came afterwards is mostly debased crap shouldn't detract from just how excellent the original was.

Though again, that final short philosophical section does drag a bit.


Edit:
Macbeth, Julius Caesar and King Lear for the record. Saw Patrick Stewart as Macbeth in London last year - brilliant!
i keep reading people here saying that but i have yet to make the plunge.

one of these days....

Being new to this forum, I found this topic interesting. IMO, there is no one best novel. These are some that I have in my library that I think are worthy of being "the best":
The Art of War by Sun Tzu; The Republic by Plato; Ethics by Bzruch de Spinoza; Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau.
Some reading just for fun: The Brotherehood of War series by W.E.B. Grififfin; The Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan; The Honor Harrington series by David Weber.
well at least some of those were novels.

Being new to this forum, I found this topic interesting. IMO, there is no one best novel. These are some that I have in my library that I think are worthy of being "the best":
The Art of War by Sun Tzu; The Republic by Plato; Ethics by Bzruch de Spinoza; Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau.
Some reading just for fun: The Brotherehood of War series by W.E.B. Grififfin; The Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan; The Honor Harrington series by David Weber.

You've got some strange ideas of what consitutes a novel...

You've got some strange ideas of what consitutes a novel...

Back to literature 101 boys: "No opinion is wrong if you can back it up with evidence." ;)

You've got some strange ideas of what consitutes a novel...
I've heard The Republic described as a novel before... but, yeah.

I've heard The Republic described as a novel before... but, yeah.
as a novel it can hardly be considered the best ever.

the characters are rather lacking.

Terra Oceanis;14277168']Took me longer to read the epilogue than the entire story! I felt like he was stating the same thing over and over, using ever-more elaborate metaphors but still saying the same thing. Though it is interesting, and certainly had its influence on me, it was SO boring!

Agreed. If your eyes can glaze over while reading a book, mine did.

But we'd better not say any more - we might put people off reading the fantastic 95% of the book that comes before the epilogue.

Agreed. If your eyes can glaze over while reading a book, mine did.

But we'd better not say any more - we might put people off reading the fantastic 95% of the book that comes before the epilogue.

This point cannot be stressed enough. I don't think it's the greatest (though if I read Russian I might), but it is certainly my favourite. A truly brilliant read.

I agree that my choices were strange; but should a book be written in a way that the characters and plot are develop or that the book make you think about ideals/philosophy.
Should the best novel be something that excites and pleases me or is it something that has the most influence, thought provokeing.

I agree that my choices were strange; but should a book be written in a way that the characters and plot are develop or that the book make you think about ideals/philosophy.
Should the best novel be something that excites and pleases me or is it something that has the most influence, thought provokeing.



novel
noun
Etymology:
Italian novella
Date:
1639

an invented prose narrative that is usually long and complex and deals especially with human experience through a usually connected sequence of events

Here's a definition for you, to reduce confusion.

Being new to this forum, I found this topic interesting. IMO, there is no one best novel. These are some that I have in my library that I think are worthy of being "the best":
The Art of War by Sun Tzu; The Republic by Plato; Ethics by Bzruch de Spinoza; Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau.
Some reading just for fun: The Brotherehood of War series by W.E.B. Grififfin; The Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan; The Honor Harrington series by David Weber.
Art of War: treatise
The Republic: Socratic dialogue
Ethics: philosophical book
Civil Disobedience: essay

That's your opinion. It's not because Easton Ellis is selling well that he's bad.


I had no idea that the book sold well. I've never bought a book yet, based on popularity.


I liked the story a lot and it's much better than the movie.


I've never seen the movie. Indeed, when I read it, there wasn't a movie.

That doesn't bode well for the movie.


A quick tour around some book sites showed me that they are rewarding it as an excellent book. Maybe you felt offended by the pornography and the meaningless violence (he's a serial killer for something)?


The pornography didn't bother me. The meaningless violence was excessive. I think my problem was that I have no problem with violence that is in context, but for American Psycho it IS the context. Take the excess from the violence, and the book becomes a pamphlet, take the violence away, and the pamphlet becomes a strongly worded paragraph.


I have only read "Interview with the Vampire" from Anne Rice, not her other work.


Which is a shame because, (aside from her 'Beauty' books, which I found excremental), that's arguably the most poorly written book in her canon.


Well I liked it, in other vampire stories it's just slash-kill-bite stuff. In this story you feel the pain of being a vampire. She humanized the vampire, which was nice.

She's neither the first, nor the last, to do it. And her writing is so turgid. I was surprised by how good a movie they made, considering how badly written the book was.

Grave_n_Idle keeps bringing up Sheri Tepper - but I regret that I've never been able to go back to her since reading her 'True Game' series over 20 years ago. Those books struck me as a cynical exercise in trying to merge 'Wizard of Earthsea' with the then-peak mass popularity of role-playing games (apprentice wizard in land where most people have a rigid caste with caste-specific powers that look an awful lot like RPG character classes). Given her subsequent reputation, perhaps these are dismissable juvenalia, and I'm almost certainly being unfair, but they turned me off her for life.


Ah. "The True Game". That's where I entered the Tepper world, too... but with a different reaction. She was writing in a genre I like, I admit - but what really hooked me, at that point, was her style. That's easily twenty years ago, and I've only encountered one other writer so far with the same easy flair, and casual poetry (Sharon Shinn) in the interim.

So - it was her actual writing itself which sent me deeper down the rabbit hole and - yes - on this you are right, the True Game books are unrepresentative. Don't expect the style to change, but there are a few masterpieces in there: "The Gate to Women's Country", "Raising the Stones", and "Fresco", for example.

I my self have a personal library with all my favorite novels in it, however I'm not sure what makes a good novel a great novel, or then a great novel the best novel. In your opinion whats the best novel ever and why is it the best?

I too have my own personal library of at least a thousand books. I love all kinds, though 95% of which are at least military related. Typically they're memoirs of various kinds, though some actual novels slip in there on occasion. As for novels, I can't exactly say which is the BEST, but of the ones I've read the most would likely be either God's Children by Harold Coyle (The story of a young Infantry 1st Lieutenant accompanying a recently commissioned 2nd Lieutenant on his first patrol in a civil war torn Slovenia, which leads to them being cut off from the rest of their battalion and having to fight their way back) OR Without Remorse by Tom Clancy (Not a typical Clancy techno-thriller. This is a much darker, more sombre book about a PTSD riddled ex-Navy Seal who saves a run away prostitute and falls in love with her. They heal each others demons and help each other, but the "Pimp" finds her and has her killed. The SEAL, in Clancy lore called "Mr. Clark" or simply "Kelly", hunts down everyone responsible for ever hurting her and wages a sort of war against them. Very powerful book).

For memoirs thats a definate toughie, but I'd probably have to say Good to Go by Harry Constance. Knowing all these guys really helps, since I'm quite familiar with Chief James Watson (Point Man and Walking Point), Richard Marcinko (Rogue Warrior books), Chief Gallagher (Mentioned in basically every SEAL book ever written), Chief Davis (Mentioned in most), and Chief Wallace (Cameo appearances or a decently important character in most Seal books), all prevalent in the book. Marcinko and Watson's books, respectively, are excellent as well, but I associate closer with Constance due to the physical, emotional, and lifestyle similarities we've both shared (other than his detached father whereas mine is extremely involved with me on a best friend basis). Basically he failed at everything he'd ever tried until going into the Navy (much like myself). Definately worth a read to anyone interested in the military.

if its tepper, i have read it unless its new and i didnt notice. yeah im pretty sure i read it... her last few books (that ive read) have seemed like a variation on a theme so i dont remember which one was which.

she is one of those authors that i check for in the bookstore almost every time im there...

but with the price of gas i havent been to albuquerque as often as i used to.

I'm the same. Tepper and Sharon Shinn are the two I always look for.

"Raising the Stones" is the middle book in the Westriding series (although it stands alone), and deals with the 'Gods' of Hobbs Land...

oh i think P&P is best too. but ....think of the boys.

Boy here! It's not being ignored by the whole gender, you know!

Well, out of the three I like Pride and Prejudice best these days. The irony is wonderful. I get the feeling most people don't really get it, though, otherwise they wouldn't keep making these crappy films...
Wuthering Heights takes itself far too seriously, and Great Expactations is too preachy.

I haven't read Wuthering Heights, but based on the song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv0azq9GF_g), I can't imagine it's that bad.

Pride and Prejudice was a surprise. I didn't know that Jane Austen was so...the only word I can think of is "mean", or maybe snarky. It's not at all the chick lit romance movies and popular culture make it appear.

The greatest novel is probably Ulysses. I can't make heads or tails of it without a key, but even in my confusion I could recognize the impressiveness of it. Or maybe my confusion was the reason I thought it was impressive, the way it dazed me. Hm.

As far as books I enjoy, The Name of the Rose is one of the most entertaining I've read. It reminds me of a Borges short story made novel length.

I my self have a personal library with all my favorite novels in it, however I'm not sure what makes a good novel a great novel, or then a great novel the best novel. In your opinion whats the best novel ever and why is it the best?

what makes a 'best novel' ever? that is a matter of opinion. I for one, love Anne McCaffery's books as well as Mercedies Lacky, Terry Brooks, Gael Baudino, etc... but would I say you would consider them great novels?

some go by number of copies sold, others by their relevance in their lives. me, a great book is one that makes you want to read it again and again and again.


that being said, I have alot of books in my library that I consider great.

...a great book is one that makes you want to read it again and again and again.


I like this measure, but for me, that makes a good book, not a great one.

In my estimation, to move from good to great, you not only have to want to re-read it (again and again), but it also has to change the world in some way.

(By which I mean, it has to change your perspective.)

I like this measure, but for me, that makes a good book, not a great one.

In my estimation, to move from good to great, you not only have to want to re-read it (again and again), but it also has to change the world in some way.

(By which I mean, it has to change your perspective.)

This is what I would tend to go with. It is a somewhat rare instance, given the ammount that I have read, that a book really does make me look at my world differently

I like this measure, but for me, that makes a good book, not a great one.

In my estimation, to move from good to great, you not only have to want to re-read it (again and again), but it also has to change the world in some way.

(By which I mean, it has to change your perspective.)

Does it have to change the perspective of everyone who reads it, or just enough to get notice?

I like this measure, but for me, that makes a good book, not a great one. depends on how many times one re-reads it. 2... 6... 156 times?

In my estimation, to move from good to great, you not only have to want to re-read it (again and again), but it also has to change the world in some way.

(By which I mean, it has to change your perspective.) another good measure of the worthiness of a book. *nods*

Does it have to change the perspective of everyone who reads it, or just enough to get notice?

depends. do you label a book good or great by your own judgement or by the judgement of the book by others?

depends. do you label a book good or great by your own judgement or by the judgement of the book by others?
That was sort of my question. Are there thousands of great books, each for a particular person, or are some objectively great, regardless of how a majority of people feel about them?

This is what I would tend to go with. It is a somewhat rare instance, given the ammount that I have read, that a book really does make me look at my world differently

I apply the same measure to other artforms, also. It's the reason why I consider (the movie) "Fight Club" to be one of cinema's 'great' movies.

It means I don't tend to consider there are a vast number of great novels, but I think it's the best defence of 'greatness'.

Does it have to change the perspective of everyone who reads it, or just enough to get notice?

I think there's an argument that it only needs to change how ONE person thinks...

I think it has to make some kind of greater impact to move from "I think it's great" to "yeah, it's great", maybe - but I don't think it's likely that EVERYONE will ever be similarly moved by ANY book.

I think it has to make some kind of greater impact to move from "I think it's great" to "yeah, it's great", maybe - but I don't think it's likely that EVERYONE will ever be similarly moved by ANY book.
I agree, it's just tricky to say how it makes that impact. Maybe the depth of the impact it makes on one person is more important than the breadth of people it affects; I don't know.

depends on how many times one re-reads it. 2... 6... 156 times?


Falling back on my example of Tepper, it's not unusual for me to read Tepper every day - and not just those of her books I think would be 'great'. I love reading her. Even the weakest products in her canon are still delicious to the eye. There are several Tepper books I have read cover-to-cover literally hundreds of times (several Shinn books, and several Asimov books, also), but only a few of them that have shaped my outlook.

That was sort of my question. Are there thousands of great books, each for a particular person, or are some objectively great, regardless of how a majority of people feel about them?
Hence why I said 'great' is a matter of opinion. there are some books that I consider 'great' that many here would object to and vice versa. People praise Asminov's works but I find them dry and boring. Does that mean Asminov's books are not great? not to me. I can't read Tolken's books, and many say they are great and I won't disparange them since it's their opinion.

This is why I don't put much stock in reviewers who bandy around such praise as "masterpieces" and "modern classic". If your tastes in books run similar with mine, then we can agree on what is a good or great book, but if not... well, I cannot say you're wrong and I'm right when it comes to how one judges the books read.

I apply the same measure to other artforms, also. It's the reason why I consider (the movie) "Fight Club" to be one of cinema's 'great' movies.

It means I don't tend to consider there are a vast number of great novels, but I think it's the best defence of 'greatness'.

We'd get along well, my friend.


I think another aspect of it is not just that the book or movie changes your worldview the first time you read it, but continues to do so every time. Ordinary People has succeeded in changing my point of view since I was 16 and read it for the first time. Each subsequent reading has shown me something different...often contradicting what I saw previous times.

A good book will make you want to read it again. An excellent book will teach you something. A great book will do this every time.

Catch-22

I agree, it's just tricky to say how it makes that impact. Maybe the depth of the impact it makes on one person is more important than the breadth of people it affects; I don't know.

Well, I always shy away from populist interpretation of art. If we just look at how many people think x, y, or z - then Stephen King and J. K. Rowling are arguably the greatest writers of our time, and Britney Spears is potentially the paragon of the field of music.

On the other hand - when there are a number of people who are all moved deeply? That seems more significant.

So... yeah. :)

1984 by George Orwell

What does everyone think of The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexander Dumas? I think the way he changes and molds characters over such a large period of time is tryuly the work of a genius

I love it too. It also debates the boundaries of justice, and suicide, and love.

The Brothers Karamazov. Abslutely brilliant novel, what do you think ?

Well... 'best' in terms of enjoyablity my choices would be Lost Souls - Poppy Z Brite and Anansi Boys - Neil Gaiman.

Best in terms of leaving me with a feeling of 'wow', leaving me thinking or changing how I see things would be:

Norwegian Wood - Haruki Murakami
Call of the Wild - Jack London
Ender's Game - Orson Scott Card
Jonathan Livingston Seagull - Richard Bach
Count of Monte Cristo - Alexandre Dumas

Falling back on my example of Tepper, it's not unusual for me to read Tepper every day - and not just those of her books I think would be 'great'. I love reading her. Even the weakest products in her canon are still delicious to the eye. There are several Tepper books I have read cover-to-cover literally hundreds of times (several Shinn books, and several Asimov books, also), but only a few of them that have shaped my outlook.
that's your way to determine the 'greatness' of a book and one I can see that working for alot of people.