• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Hard.

I am half-way through Ulysses. It's quite difficult. I bought The Crying of Lot 49, Gravity's Rainbow and Infinite Jest all very recently. House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski is on my Christmas list. Ready to get my 'hard' on.
 
Joyce

'Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man' by Joyce is very good but I completely agree that Ulysses is turgid and impenetrable. If you want a hard book, which shows that even the best can have their off days, try getting through all 800 pages of 'Our Mutual Friend' by Charles Dickens. He completely fails to match the biting brilliance of 'Hard Times' or 'David Copperfield' and because he's one of the best around it makes you realise every author has his off day/book. Any more stinkers from otherwise brilliant authors? For example, I've heard John Grisham's recent factual book is quite flawed and dull, although I must admit I haven't read it yet, although his other stuff is excellent. Anyone?
 
Ashlea said:
I kept trying to think of hard books I'd read, and then I realized that I just gave up on the ones that irritated me (Lord Jim, Moby Dick, Simarillion, Infinite Jest.) Perhaps I'm a bad reader. :(
Click to expand...
I'm like that more than I care to admit to other people.
 
It'd have to be a tie between Pride and Prejudice and A Farewell to Arms, both odious blights upon my memory. It's been a long time since I've enjoyed a book and found it difficult to read. But those two...I just couldn't keep things straight in them for various reasons. I can't decide if I hated them because I didn't understand things or vice versa. I had to buy Cliff's Notes to help me read P&P, but AFTA was worse.
 
I STILL cannot get through Foucault's Pendulum. I picked it up after hearing such great things about it on this forum. The problem is, I find it so hard to absorb the information that I often find myself sitting and holding the book, but my mind is going over and over something that I've just read in it. Eventually, my poor brain hurts, I spot a King novel on my shelf, and wrap myself in that comfort blanket.

Now whenever I pick up Pendulum, I've completely forgotten everything I've read and give up in disgust at the thought of having to start the whole process over again. The parts I vaguely remember were very intersting though, and I hope to get through it one day.

Oh, and The Mill On The Floss. Unless I'm trying to fall asleep.
 
I found The Lord of the Rings difficult to start - it took me about 3 attempts to read past the Tom Bombadil part - but I loved it after that.
 
I tried reading LOTR several times. Each of those times had me quitting the book long before I was finished.

I can't really remember any other books that I had to struggle to get through. Maybe Memoirs of a Geisha, but only because the beginning was so dreadful. After the first 80 pages or so I was able to enjoy the story.
 
i know what you mean with memoirs of a geisha.

i had a lot of trouble with lotr. I quite enjoyed the second book, but the first and third were just a pain to get through, maybe because i'd seen the movie before reading the book. bad idea.
 
It would appear that people have not read through this thread before posting their opinions of 'hard'.
 
Hard

I think the subsidiary debate here is similar to the one about going to a bad film. Go to a big film festival, see a few films and you learn astonishingly quickly to do what most critics do - exercise the right to leave ASAP. Ions - as a matter of interest, and this is not intended to be remotely critical, what are you getting out of Ulysses at the moment? How is it pulling your chain?
 
Peronel said:
I STILL cannot get through Foucault's Pendulum. I picked it up after hearing such great things about it on this forum. The problem is, I find it so hard to absorb the information that I often find myself sitting and holding the book, but my mind is going over and over something that I've just read in it. Eventually, my poor brain hurts, I spot a King novel on my shelf, and wrap myself in that comfort blanket.

I felt exactly the same. I told a friend I hadn't liked " Da Vinci code". She suggested " Foucault's pendulum" which , according to her was so much better. Now, I eventually finished it because I didn't want to have to tell her I couldn't cope with it, but I'd be totally unable to tell you what is was all about.
Click to expand...
 
George Oliver said:
I think the subsidiary debate here is similar to the one about going to a bad film. Go to a big film festival, see a few films and you learn astonishingly quickly to do what most critics do - exercise the right to leave ASAP. Ions - as a matter of interest, and this is not intended to be remotely critical, what are you getting out of Ulysses at the moment? How is it pulling your chain?
Click to expand...

It's hard. Not to be glib but that's mostly what I'm getting out of it at the moment. I've got a guide I found online printed out assisting me. Plot wise I'm doing alright but without the guide I'd be missing the subtext. It's baffling, beautiful, staggering, dense and frustrating. I do plan on rereading this book in 2007 to get more out of it. This is not the type of book where you 'get it' after just one read. I dont feel like I'm reading Ulysses, I feel like I am excavating Ulysses. I have stakes placed along the perimeter and some of the topsoil removed.
 
ions said:
It would appear that people have not read through this thread before posting their opinions of 'hard'.
Click to expand...
Perhaps LOTR can't be placed on the same literary page as novels by Joyce, but that doesn't mean that people can't find it hard to get through.
 
I thought the purpose of the thread was to discuss books that are 'hard' because of a non-traditional style, esoteric content or the work is particularly dense. I too found LOTR 'hard' but not because the subject matter was difficult. It was just so bloody dry and over-written.
 
ions said:
I thought the purpose of the thread was to discuss books that are 'hard' because of a non-traditional style, esoteric content or the work is particularly dense. I too found LOTR 'hard' but not because the subject matter was difficult. It was just so bloody dry and over-written.
Click to expand...
Well seeing as how the founder of the thread mentions LOTR as the book that they found hard to get through, I'm thinking that hard can be interpreted in any way you please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top