NationStates Jolt Archive

Boy here! It's not being ignored by the whole gender, you know!
but are you a TEEN boy?

well ok i know youre not but did you live jane austen when you were in high school?

but are you a TEEN boy?

well ok i know youre not but did you live jane austen when you were in high school?

I was a teen boy the first time I read Pride and Prejudice (and thought it quite magnificent). Then again, I was the person who got all excited when I found out we were getting Macbeth as one of our English Lit. texts, too...

Skinny Legs and All by Tom Robbins.

Nobody weaves sex, religion, philosophy, politics and neuroses together as well as Robbins does.

I was a teen boy the first time I read Pride and Prejudice (and thought it quite magnificent). Then again, I was the person who got all excited when I found out we were getting Macbeth as one of our English Lit. texts, too...
you freak!

how many of the other boys loved austin?

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
you are not the first person to mention jonathan livingston seagul.

its a facile piece of crap. why would you have even finished it let alone recommend it as best ever?

you are not the first person to mention jonathan livingston seagul.

its a facile piece of crap. why would you have even finished it let alone recommend it as best ever?

Must agree. Yech. However, there's no arguing taste.

Must agree. Yech. However, there's no arguing taste.
id say that its an age thing so that the ideas might seem revolutionary if you are 14 but i think that that is the age i was when i read it...when it was new...and i thought it was philosophically stinky.

im amazed that it has found any audience in the current generation.

id say that its an age thing so that the ideas might seem revolutionary if you are 14 but i think that that is the age i was when i read it...when it was new...and i thought it was philosophically stinky.

im amazed that it has found any audience in the current generation.

You'd be surprised at what scans and what doesn't with each new class of Literature students.

you freak!

how many of the other boys loved austin?

I don't know... :confused:

Like I said, I've never really picked my reading based on popularity. I've always been a fan of style. I've always considered writing to be part of the arts, rather than an alternative to arts - so the delicate brush that paints Pride and Prejudice, the careful attention to the details of the characters... I think you weigh a book on many values, and Pride and Prejudice just scores well for me.

you freak!

how many of the other boys loved austin?

Hated her when I was 16...struggled to pick it up again for college, but found that I enjoyed it.

Granted, when I was 16, I didn't really "read" it...

I don't know... :confused:

Like I said, I've never really picked my reading based on popularity. I've always been a fan of style. I've always considered writing to be part of the arts, rather than an alternative to arts - so the delicate brush that paints Pride and Prejudice, the careful attention to the details of the characters... I think you weigh a book on many values, and Pride and Prejudice just scores well for me.
well.....

maybe the point is that THOSE boys wouldnt enjoy any book that might be read in a highschool english class so it may as well be P&P

Hated her when I was 16...struggled to pick it up again for college, but found that I enjoyed it.

Granted, when I was 16, I didn't really "read" it...
we didnt read austen in highschool

i didnt become aware of her until the endless stream of movies started coming out

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?

One of the best satires ever: The Good Soldier Svejk (Jaroslav Hacek) It's surprisingly not hard to find in America, it's biting, it includes a lot of interesting characters, and it's still damn funny.

we didnt read austen in highschool

i didnt become aware of her until the endless stream of movies started coming out

I don't actually recall if we read Austen in school. At 14 my usual diet was things like Asimov's Foundation books, but I was a voracious reader, and had already read a lot of what became set texts, just... because.

So - Lord of the Flies, Brighton Rock, Macbeth... already read them before we studied them. Great Expectations, Animal Farm, Pride and Prejudice (and half of "Crime and Punishment", which I decided was shit, and I've never given it another shot, to be honest) I read, and I'm not sure if we studied them or not.

I describe it as having a 'hungry head'. I'm like Number 5 (I'm alive!), I'm always seeking 'more input'.

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.

To Kill a Mockingbird I'll grant you is up there. But Owen Meany? It's just an ode to infantilism. I thought that Of Mice and Men portrayed a bleak picture of adulthood in which the end of one's childhood is made out to be an inherently violent and traumatic event. But at least that hero grew up. Owen Meany is like Old School (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0302886/) without the saving grace of being funny when you're drunk.

Meh, Moby Dick sucks in all ways.

Thats actually the one novel I read, unless you count Twilight, and all the Harry Potter books.

Bumbumbum

Best Novel:

Small Favor by Jim Butcher. Hands down best novel ever.

I promise to listen to, and completely ignore, any arguments against this amazing piece of literature.

Best Novel:

Small Favor by Jim Butcher. Hands down best novel ever.

I promise to listen to, and completely ignore, any arguments against this amazing piece of literature.

Since I've never heard of the author, or the book, prepare for an infinitely long wait.

We used to have big conversations in class about the difference between a 'good' and a 'great' novel. I'm not sure where I stand on that, but in very vague terms I feel great novels should be good novels that have at least one of the following characteristics:
- they perfectly capture a particular moment, such as an historical period or cultural milieu, and link it to more universal themes;
- they have real effects: you literally laugh out loud, or cry, or genuinely gulp before turning the page;
- they bring together abstract concepts into a coherent narrative.

Three of the classically great novels I didn't really like all that much: The Unbearable Lightness of Being, Love in the Time of Cholera, and Madame Bovary (I read all three in translation, of course).

The most astounding two works I have read recently are Look Homeward, Angel by Thomas Wolfe and Light in August by William Faulkner.

My top five would probably be pretty conventional choices: John Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath, (in translation) Carlos Fuentes's Where the Air is Clear, J.G. Farrell's The Siege of Krishnapur, Ursula K. Le Guin's The Left Hand of Darkness, and Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale. Though not a personal favourite, I recognise Salman Rushdie's Midnight's Children is pretty special.

Since I've never heard of the author, or the book, prepare for an infinitely long wait.

Did you watch Dresden Files before Sci Fi took it off the air? Butcher writes the series on which that's based. The books are good. I wouldn't call them literature in the artistic sense, but a damned good read, nonetheless.

i like sci-fi of David Weber (Honor Harrington ftw!) and alternate history of S.M. Stirling and Eric Flint. i consider them greats certainly. currently reading the graphic novel Watchmen and am in awe. wish i read it much sooner.

Best Novel:

Small Favor by Jim Butcher. Hands down best novel ever.

I promise to listen to, and completely ignore, any arguments against this amazing piece of literature.
book 10 of the dresden files is the best novel ever written!?

was he holding back in the first 9 or what?

there is no "best ever" novel. However, MY "best ever" novels were The Sum of All Fears by Tom Clancy and When Worlds Collide/After Worlds Collide by Philip Wylie and another person.

book 10 of the dresden files is the best novel ever written!?

was he holding back in the first 9 or what?

Ah... it's a Dresden Files book? Aha... then I do have a passing familiarity with the author, if not THAT particular book. I've read one of them, although I couldn't tell you which one, now. :)

It wasn't that bad. The style wasn't Tom Harris or Steven King horrible, but it wasn't all that memorable, either. It doesn't even make 'good' on my scale, much less 'great'.

Also that. Though I never got around to reading any of the sequels.Don't.

Do read them, it will allow you to form your own opinion of them.

Do read them, it will allow you to form your own opinion of them.

I don't know...

I still wish someone had advised me - after reading the Foundation trilogy, to ONLY read the stories he wrote that are set BEFORE the main trilogy (because the ones that come chronologically after, are shit).

I don't know...

I still wish someone had advised me - after reading the Foundation trilogy, to ONLY read the stories he wrote that are set BEFORE the main trilogy (because the ones that come chronologically after, are shit).

OK, how about at least one of the sequels?

My best is Sidney Sheldon - Otherside of Midnight I believe I simply love his works

Best Novel:

Small Favor by Jim Butcher. Hands down best novel ever.

I promise to listen to, and completely ignore, any arguments against this amazing piece of literature.

No single Dresden Files novel is, strictly speaking, a novel. Together they comprise a multi-volume story that is still being written. Rather like how all the Harry Potter novels add up to a single story.

But yes, the Dresden Files are wonderful. Falls into neither trap of making the hero so flawed you wonder why you care and so perfect that you wonder what there is to worry about.

book 10 of the dresden files is the best novel ever written!?

was he holding back in the first 9 or what?

No, it's just that Small Favor was the best. I honestly appreciate that and White Night as the two best novels of all time.

No single Dresden Files novel is, strictly speaking, a novel. Together they comprise a multi-volume story that is still being written. Rather like how all the Harry Potter novels add up to a single story.

But yes, the Dresden Files are wonderful. Falls into neither trap of making the hero so flawed you wonder why you care and so perfect that you wonder what there is to worry about.

No, they are novels. Dead Beat, Proven Guilty, White Night, and Small Favor all state "A Novel of the Dresden Files" as part of the subtitle. How can it not be a novel if it specifically states that it's a novel? I'm pretty sure there's something about false advertising if that were the case.

As far as a single story goes, doesn't that apply in the case of Frank Herbert and Dune? You had Dune, then Dune Messiah, and Children of Dune, followed by God-Emperor of Dune, all of which are part of the same multi-volume story. Yet we consider those individual novels.

Ender's Shadow is the most emotionally powerful book I've ever read, so I would have to label it the best. I guess if you want something more literary, I would say Crime and Punishment, but Ender's Shadow would be my honest choice.

Well, if I really had to, I'd go with Lord Of the Rings. But there's just too many great books out there, Galaxy Blues, The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, Guns Of The South...

I'll admit I've not read a whole lot of novels in my life, and most of the ones I've read have been school related. Fictions never really been my thing so I tend to be drawn to nonfiction books so...

Anyways, within the few novels I have read, I would say To Kill A Mockingbird is one of my favorite/best. Sure, it may not be the best written, but I'll admit to being an idealist of sorts and Atticus Finch=awesome. Besides, I like the way it was written, and it being told in Scout's POV provided a chance to get a view on racism and prejudice without being greatly influenced from it. Cold Sassy Tree was pretty good to.

i like sci-fi of David Weber (Honor Harrington ftw!) and alternate history of S.M. Stirling and Eric Flint. i consider them greats certainly. currently reading the graphic novel Watchmen and am in awe. wish i read it much sooner.

Oh God no.

Honor Harrington is crap. I'm sorry, it just is.

I liked the first book at times, though I found it rather melodramatic. Never read the second one, but I thought the third one was fairly entertaining. Then we got to book four, with its endorsement of vigilanty violence, and it basically went down hill from their.

First their's the melodramatic writing style. Then their's the ever growing list of (as the series went on) more poorly described minor characters I couldn't keep track of. By around book ten, the series was both boring and near incomprehensible. Plus I got tired of how how no one ever disagreed with Honor out of principle, or for valid reasons. It came to seem like everyone who opposed her was either acting on petty personal motivations, or was simply an utter bastard. Frankly, I just got tired of the same garbage again and again.

Plus their life-prolonging treatments are just creepy. 20 year olds that look like kids?

Meh, Moby Dick sucks in all ways.

Thats actually the one novel I read, unless you count Twilight, and all the Harry Potter books.

Bumbumbum

I don't think Moby Dick sucks, it is simply very hard to read. I tried to get through it, and their are paragraphs that are so long, that by the time you reach the end you've forgotten how they started. A very difficult writing style.

Harry Potter was ok at times, but everything fell apart in the last book, with needless filler material, teenage suicide soldiers (yes Dumbledore you are an asshole), and a contrived ending hinging on the magical equivalent of Star Trek technobable, which came out of no where and seemed to contradict things in earlier books just to give Harry a "get out of Death free card".:headbang:

Though really a lot of it was simply laying bare the existing flaws in the series. I'm still quite bitter about this, since their was a time when I really like Harry Potter. I really wanted the last book to be great, though I guess I wasn't too suprised. The way I see it, she wrote herself into a trap with the Harry Voldemort connection (among other things), where the most logical outcome was probably Harry's death. Also, with such high expectations among fans, their was no middle ground. It was going to be either a stunning success or a resounding faliure, and the odds favored the latter.:(

Snip...
Harry Potter was ok at times, but everything fell apart in the last book, with needless filler material, teenage suicide soldiers (yes Dumbledore you are an asshole), and a contrived ending hinging on the magical equivalent of Star Trek technobable, which came out of no where and seemed to contradict things in earlier books just to give Harry a "get out of Death free card".:headbang:

Though really a lot of it was simply laying bare the existing flaws in the series. I'm still quite bitter about this, since their was a time when I really like Harry Potter. I really wanted the last book to be great, though I guess I wasn't too suprised. The way I see it, she wrote herself into a trap with the Harry Voldemort connection (among other things), where the most logical outcome was probably Harry's death. Also, with such high expectations among fans, their was no middle ground. It was going to be either a stunning success or a resounding faliure, and the odds favored the latter.:(

The first three books are quite fine, after that her style changes a lot. In my opinion she really freaked out on fan expectations.
BTW the last book's hero is really Neville Longbottom... No profecy, no scar, no hallows. Just him, Griffindor's sword and chopped Nagini :D

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?Too many.
Only one i remember right now is 3. The Historical Illuminatus Chronicles, by Robert Anton Wilson.
Enjoy.

The first three books are quite fine, after that her style changes a lot. In my opinion she really freaked out on fan expectations.
BTW the last book's hero is really Neville Longbottom... No profecy, no scar, no hallows. Just him, Griffindor's sword and chopped Nagini :D

Personally I thought number five was a high point in the series. It had a lot of character development for Harry, established him becoming a real rebel against the establishment, and then set up a serious dilema over the prophecy that either he or Voldemort must kill the other. By establishing the link between them, it also created a situation where the logical outcomes was both Harry and Voldemort's death.

Unfortunately this meant Rowling had written herself into a trap, as she apparently lacked either the courage to follow through on the most logical choice (Harry's death), on the skill as a writer to come up with a way out that was compelling, believable, and did not rely on the magic equivallent of Star Trek technobable.

Spellobable?;)

Dune.

Agreed

No, they are novels. Dead Beat, Proven Guilty, White Night, and Small Favor all state "A Novel of the Dresden Files" as part of the subtitle. How can it not be a novel if it specifically states that it's a novel? I'm pretty sure there's something about false advertising if that were the case.

As far as a single story goes, doesn't that apply in the case of Frank Herbert and Dune? You had Dune, then Dune Messiah, and Children of Dune, followed by God-Emperor of Dune, all of which are part of the same multi-volume story. Yet we consider those individual novels.

It's part of how language changes over time. Since the thread states "best novel of all time," it is fair to consider what "an novel" has historically meant. Once upon a time a lot of novels weren't printed as books. They were printed in a serialized format in magazines. Many others were published as a single book, but the whole story was expected to be wrapped up by the end. If an author wrote a very long story in book format, but took several books to do so, such as Samuel Richardson's Clarissa, the first book (what we would today call the first novel of the Clarissa series) was not a novel, it was Volume 1 of the novel.


Spoiler Alert.
Now a case could be made that the first Dresden Files novel was a complete story. There aren't really any cliff hangers. It begins with a social outcast (Harry) threatened with destruction both from Society (the White Council with its Doom of Damocles) and the Villain, his dark alter-ego. By the end of the novel he has overcome his dark alter-ego and gained society's acceptance. The hero's victories were modest, but complete.

After the first novel, they no longer end that way. Every book ends with a question. Who is the Black Council? What is the Red Court's next move? What's going on with the Fairy Courts? Will he and Murphy finally get together? Is Thomas good or evil?

The novels don't have endings anymore. And weighed against the standards of "Novels of all time," you'd have to compare the entire Dresden series (which does not yet exist) to any other novel (or series thereof).

-snipping that whole historical evolution of the novel-


-You know what, snipping the summary of Storm Front as well.

After the first novel, they no longer end that way. Every book ends with a question. Who is the Black Council? What is the Red Court's next move? What's going on with the Fairy Courts? Will he and Murphy finally get together? Is Thomas good or evil?

The novels don't have endings anymore. And weighed against the standards of "Novels of all time," you'd have to compare the entire Dresden series (which does not yet exist) to any other novel (or series thereof).

I really must protest. But I won't, that's a topic for another thread and I'm busy with other stuff.

But for the sake of argument, I'll state that in the hypothetical agreement that we must consider all of The Dresden Files as a single long work (if they ever print them all in one singular work, it'll be big enough to be bullet proof), then the whole work stands as the greatest novel of all time. But since you point out that it isn't finished yet, then I with hold my judgment until the series has been finished.

I really must protest. But I won't, that's a topic for another thread and I'm busy with other stuff.

But for the sake of argument, I'll state that in the hypothetical agreement that we must consider all of The Dresden Files as a single long work (if they ever print them all in one singular work, it'll be big enough to be bullet proof), then the whole work stands as the greatest novel of all time. But since you point out that it isn't finished yet, then I with hold my judgment until the series has been finished.
im not that enamored of the books. i read a few then didnt buy any more. they just arent compelling to me.

I don't know about 'best novel ever' but books I've always enjoyed and thought deserved a wide, wide audience...I suppose nobody is going to have a heart attack from the surprise of my nominating Stranger In A Strange Land, The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress or Starship Troopers. Also, I think that Atlas Shrugged should be required reading in every high school in the country.

Three Men in a Boat- Jerome K Jerome

Oh God no.

Honor Harrington is crap. I'm sorry, it just is.

I liked the first book at times, though I found it rather melodramatic. Never read the second one, but I thought the third one was fairly entertaining. Then we got to book four, with its endorsement of vigilanty violence, and it basically went down hill from their.

First their's the melodramatic writing style. Then their's the ever growing list of (as the series went on) more poorly described minor characters I couldn't keep track of. By around book ten, the series was both boring and near incomprehensible. Plus I got tired of how how no one ever disagreed with Honor out of principle, or for valid reasons. It came to seem like everyone who opposed her was either acting on petty personal motivations, or was simply an utter bastard. Frankly, I just got tired of the same garbage again and again.

Plus their life-prolonging treatments are just creepy. 20 year olds that look like kids?

boring and melodramatic? seems you're all over the place. but whatever. hardly my fault if you can't follow the plot but then i suppose part of it may be the technobabble he insists on putting into the books to add some "realism"? i know some people don't like that in novels. and of course you are adding your personal politics into the series as to reasons not to like it which is hardly the way to take on a series, you can agree with everything the character does nor are you supposed to take the actions of the characters as necessarily believing in what the author does.

and minor characters are just that, minor. you don't need deep backgrounds into them and if you think no one was disagreeing with Honor you clearly weren't reading that closely. or do you expect junior officers to be outright insubordinate with her? just curious on you expected. further petty personal motives are often the cause of conflicts, not everone will oppose you out of some highminded moral principles especially when the individual against you is a politician as often occurs in the series.

i don't think sciencefiction is for you if you find prolong creepy, that is nothing compared to other sci-fi occurances, you ever read Altered Carbon by Richard Morgan? they take someone elses body and put your "consiousness" inside it. i find that a bit more creepier then being able to live longer and maintaining your youth over that time.

Three Men in a Boat- Jerome K Jerome

Ooh, nice pick.

I personally nominate Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman. It's not perfect, and it's almost certainly not great literature, but it's a wonderful piece nonetheless. I think it's best described as an adult fairy story, and a damn good one too.

Ooh, nice pick.

I personally nominate Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman. It's not perfect, and it's almost certainly not great literature, but it's a wonderful piece nonetheless. I think it's best described as an adult fairy story, and a damn good one too.
i liked that book very much. good mention even if it cant be the best novel ever.

I am a sincere fan of the Harry Potter books* and The Dresden Files, but I see no need to quibble over people's tastes.

Neither series nor Neil Gaiman's works (as good as they are) come close to "BEST NOVEL EVER."

Gabriel Garcia Marquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude (http://www.amazon.com/Hundred-Solitude-Gabriel-Garcia-Marquez/dp/0060929790) is at least a serious candidate.

As to good books in general, I'll repost an old list (hopefully the links are still good):

Jeremy Lethem, Motherless Brooklyn (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0375724834/103-0345811-1703011?v=glance)

Colson Whitehead, The Intuitionist (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385493002/qid=1118473483/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/103-0345811-1703011?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

Kurt Vonnegut, Player Piano (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385333781/qid=1118473516/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/103-0345811-1703011)

Sherman Alexie, Reservation Blues (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0446672351/qid=1118473546/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/103-0345811-1703011?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

Iain Banks, The Wasp Factory (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684853159/qid=1118473573/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/103-0345811-1703011?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

Douglas Adams, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0671746723/qid=1118473640/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/103-0345811-1703011?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

Neal Stephenson, The Diamond Age : Or, a Young Lady's Illustrated Primer (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0553380966/qid=1118473672/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/103-0345811-1703011?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) (anything else by Stephenson is recommended as well, especially the System of the World series)

Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus : And Other Essays (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0679733736/qid=1118473724/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/103-0345811-1703011?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

I'm afraid I could go on and on and on. Books are my greatest passion.

But I'll spare you all. ;)

I will add a recommendation for F. Paul Wilson's Repairman Jack (http://www.repairmanjack.com/works.htm#rjseries) series, anything by Neil Gaiman, any of the "Newford" Novels by Charles De Lint (http://www.sfsite.com/charlesdelint/newbook.htm), Jim Butcher's The Dresden Files (http://www.jim-butcher.com/books/dresden/), and any of the Burke novels (http://vachss.com/av_novels/burke_novels.html) by Andrew Vachss (download free samples here! (http://vachss.com/av_books/samples.html)).

*J.K. Rowling's Tales of Beedle the Bard, however, is disappointing drek. Her desire to aid charity is laudable, but that book sucks.

you are not the first person to mention jonathan livingston seagul.

its a facile piece of crap. why would you have even finished it let alone recommend it as best ever?

Although I was going to refrain from criticizing other's choices, I must agree that Jonathan Livingston Seagull is not a great novel. I liked it OK when I was 7, but I grew up. As literature it is silly and tedious. As philosophy, it is more so.

Although I was going to refrain from criticizing other's choices, I must agree that Jonathan Livingston Seagull is not a great novel. I liked it OK when I was 7, but I grew up. As literature it is silly and tedious. As philosophy, it is more so.
i think its the only one i criticized. for the same reason as you--who am i to say that something that blew someone else aways is really crap.

it really was more surprise that anyone still read it. the same reaction i would have if someone brought up that great von daniken book about ancient astronauts.

Although I was going to refrain from criticizing other's choices, I must agree that Jonathan Livingston Seagull is not a great novel. I liked it OK when I was 7, but I grew up. As literature it is silly and tedious. As philosophy, it is more so.

I remember it had enough of an impact that I did some introspection after reading it, but can't for the life of me remember what the story was actually about. What is Bach's philosophy?

María, by Jorge Isaacs, is the best. I can read that book thousands of times I do not get tired of it.

I am shocked by the few mentions of Kurt Vonnegut. "So it goes" seems to me to have a much better application of putting things into perspective for the bigger picture of life than anything else.

Of course I have to agree with the Tom Clancy fans that his books make losing a night's sleep easy. But that is more in the realm of entertainment.

But then again, no one has mentioned the Bible either. Kind of influential and still affecting lives today. But I guess it is more of a collection of short stories than an actual novel.

I am shocked by the few mentions of Kurt Vonnegut. "So it goes" seems to me to have a much better application of putting things into perspective for the bigger picture of life than anything else.

The only thing I ever read by Kurt Vonnegut that I thought was worth a damn was 'Harrison Bergeron.'

But then again, no one has mentioned the Bible either. Kind of influential and still affecting lives today. But I guess it is more of a collection of short stories than an actual novel.

That might be because 'novel' implies 'fiction' and people who are inclined to read the Bible are also inclined to take it seriously.

I am shocked by the few mentions of Kurt Vonnegut. "So it goes" seems to me to have a much better application of putting things into perspective for the bigger picture of life than anything else.

Of course I have to agree with the Tom Clancy fans that his books make losing a night's sleep easy. But that is more in the realm of entertainment.

But then again, no one has mentioned the Bible either. Kind of influential and still affecting lives today. But I guess it is more of a collection of short stories than an actual novel.

i love vonnegut but nothing he wrote can be the best novel ever.

neither can tom clancy

the bible isnt a novel.

Fave book, has to be Mary Shelly's - Frankeistien.

Hwat makes a great book is subjective though innit. Myself, I'm of the Stephen King school of thought, a novel is nowt without the story.

If the story is bad is bad, then the novel will be bad.

the "best novels ever" arn't mainstream, but in the generas of science fiction, real science fiction, not popularised hollywood fantasy pseudo science fiction, mystery, of the subgenre of mystery called 'cozey's', and the all too rare crossover between the two.

actually novels arn't the optimal length for story telling. anthologies of short stories and novellas, set in a mutually consistent universe, are.

just like in real life, everyone, all the zillions of us, each have our own story, in which, through the multiple of angles of perception, an image of that perceived universe emerges.

neither can tom clancy




I whole heartedly disagree with you on that. I believe that his book Without Remorse should go down in history as one of the best. I already said why in an earlier post, so I won't rehash my statements, but I believe that that book is among the greats. His others? Not so much.

Edit: I will make one statement about it though. Most of his books tend to have neutral overtones if not at times light hearted. This book almost never hits a light note and typically is a near tear jerker at certain points. The character "John Kelly" was immaculated conceived and his personal growth throughout the book extremely realistic and emotional. But I love darker edged books, take "Man on Fire" for example. Similar concepts really, and similar characters. Excellent stuff.

I whole heartedly disagree with you on that. I believe that his book Without Remorse should go down in history as one of the best. I already said why in an earlier post, so I won't rehash my statements, but I believe that that book is among the greats. His others? Not so much.

Edit: I will make one statement about it though. Most of his books tend to have neutral overtones if not at times light hearted. This book almost never hits a light note and typically is a near tear jerker at certain points. The character "John Kelly" was immaculated conceived and his personal growth throughout the book extremely realistic and emotional. But I love darker edged books, take "Man on Fire" for example. Similar concepts really, and similar characters. Excellent stuff.

without remorse is an amazing novel

*Clancy is ace*
Clancy is pure pish.

"Aye Russkies are bad and stuff, woo bombs and stuff, character development is for pussies"

The Godfather

without remorse is an amazing novel

What he said.

boring and melodramatic? seems you're all over the place. but whatever.

You can be both. Trust me. Indeed I find it potentially revealing about your tastes if you equate melodrama with excitment.

hardly my fault if you can't follow the plot but then i suppose part of it may be the technobabble he insists on putting into the books to add some "realism"?

That's part of it, I'm sure.

I know some people don't like that in novels. and of course you are adding your personal politics into the series as to reasons not to like it which is hardly the way to take on a series, you can agree with everything the character does nor are you supposed to take the actions of the characters as necessarily believing in what the author does.

Fair enough, as a general rule. I think its a bit more in your face than that with Harrington, though. As a matter of fact, I like movies I don't agree with. The Dark Knight, as an example, ran severly contrary to my personal politics, but I still respect it as a very well-made film. Harrington, not so much.

and minor characters are just that, minor. you don't need deep backgrounds into them and if you think no one was disagreeing with Honor you clearly weren't reading that closely.

I might have exagerated, but I've noticed that her political opponents are generally just evil, as opposed to being priniciple opposition. But you're right, its not 100%.

or do you expect junior officers to be outright insubordinate with her? just curious on you expected.

Of course not.

further petty personal motives are often the cause of conflicts, not everone will oppose you out of some highminded moral principles especially when the individual against you is a politician as often occurs in the series.

True. Its hard to explain what I don't like about Harrington. To write a propper review, I suppose I could read it again, but I don't really want to.

I don't think sciencefiction is for you if you find prolong creepy, that is nothing compared to other sci-fi occurances, you ever read Altered Carbon by Richard Morgan? they take someone elses body and put your "consiousness" inside it. i find that a bit more creepier then being able to live longer and maintaining your youth over that time.

That's creepy too, though weather I would like that story (I haven't read it) would depend on how this is portrayed in the story plus a great many other things. Also, different people find different things creepy. In any case, science fiction is my favorite literary genre.

I am shocked by the few mentions of Kurt Vonnegut. "So it goes" seems to me to have a much better application of putting things into perspective for the bigger picture of life than anything else.

To apathetic for my taste.

A long way back someone mentioned The Art of War, just a heads up, Sun Tzu was a pompous old fool who won all the time by luck. I just read the book and it was awful and so repetitive.

What he said.


i'm a girl btw lol

A long way back someone mentioned The Art of War, just a heads up, Sun Tzu was a pompous old fool who won all the time by luck. I just read the book and it was awful and so repetitive.
oh yeah the plot sucks and the character development is nil

i cant imagine why its a classic.