NO point reading more than 1 by any author

[True@1stLight]

Not read Crime and Punishment because The Brothers Karamazov might be better. Treason!!!!

 

[Bountyhunter]

So what about The Time Machine, Hamlet and The Lost World?
How can you choose the best book of an author when you havn't read all of them?
You think King Lear is Shakespeare's best book, but that may not be the popular opinion.

I completely agree. Everyone has there own opinion on what was BEST. There may be some that were recognized by the media, but it's still a matter of opinion.

I thought Prey was probably Crichton's best. And I think Gizmo pretty much said what I wanted, if you haven't read all of em how can you know the author's best book?

 

[fluffy bunny]

It's an interesting issue. I'd have to say that it depends on the author.

Some authors I've come across seem to repeat the same stories and ideas with only minor differences, and when moving outside their realm of 'expertise' seriously mess it up. Other authors seem to stike oil with nearly every book they write.

 

[Ou Be Low hoo]

it seems pointless to read finnegans wake if you haven't read ulysses, pointless to read ulysses if you haven't read a portrait of the artist as a young man, and pointless to read a portrait ... if you haven't read the dubliners.

No, it isn't.

You don't need to read the whole catalogue of novels by an author to pick up the themes an author is interested in. Also, these themes can change from novel to novel. Furthermore, pluralistic novel thematic-continuity is not in itself an important trait of reading, unless you are studying such a topic.

As for only reading one play by Shakespeare...uh-oh...I smell bullshit...

 

[Cathy C]

Furthermore, pluralistic novel thematic-continuity is not in itself an important trait of reading, unless you are studying such a topic.

Sorry, I don't agree. This same logic can be applied to entire genres, so if you've read Frank Herbert, you never need to read Orson Scott Card, or Asimov, or any other in the genre. Likewise mysteries, or horror, etc.

The importance of a variety of books isn't whether or not there is thematic continuity, but whether within a theme, there is something new to be learned or experienced.

While I don't have a high regard for most of Shakespeare's works, if I didn't read them all, I couldn't say I disliked them all en masse.

Cathy

 

[Ou Be Low hoo]

My post was in response to bobbyb's assertation that you need to read an authors whole collection to fully understand what each particular book is about - a point I dispute.

Following on from that I said that thematic continuity is not important. I agree with you that you shouldn't pigeon-hole your reading choices to a single author.

 

[bobbyburns]

My post was in response to bobbyb's assertation that you need to read an authors whole collection to fully understand what each particular book is about - a point I dispute.

not any author, just james joyce.

 

[Ou Be Low hoo]

not any author, just james joyce.

You don't need to have read Ulysses to understand Dubliners. As for Ulysses, I think it is more pertinent to have an understanding of classical mythology, symbolism and philosophy rather than having read other works by Joyce.

 

[bobbyburns]

then you're right and I'm wrong.

 

[Ou Be Low hoo]

then you're right and I'm wrong.

It's not the first time and I'm sure it won't be the last. Oh! How I long to experience the feeling of being 'wrong'! What must this perception feel like? What does it mean? Does it glitter? Is the road to it paved in regret?

Sometimes..sometimes...I feel like how can I ever be right, if I am never wrong..?

Strange...these beautiful stars...where are they brought to life?

 

[Sun-SSS]

Oh how I miss that Ou-Be.

 

[Delta_doh!]

Let's face it everyone writes a book that completely stands head and shoulders over the rest of their works>>
With so much to read [so little time] there's not a lot of point reading the shmaltz

you might as well move on, ex to the next and pickup a new authors BEST book.


or not>>>>>
???

Defy or Not!

Loved both these..

Now thoroughly enjoying

 

[Sergo]

Heh...

I really thought that Europeans should be more... how should I say... tolerant? to ideas of different people...
It is customary for us uncultured Russians to beat one another on the head, with a slight difference of opinions on some religious matter or on abilities of some sport team, as the only reason for that...
But one should imagine that everybody has a right to like what one finds likable...
One likes to read only one single book by every author - that's OK, another just loves to read every book by some writers - that's just great, and somebody else prefers to write himself, having read nothing at all in his life - that's wonderful.

The problem starts when somebody begins to explain others what they should like, or should dislike etc.

My own opinion at the moment is that most people use books mostly to overfill their brain, so that to make their lives easier - to fill their everyday routine with something artificial & predictable rather that to get real life emotions, together with real joy and failures...

 

[Hollis]

I think there's a big difference between being intolerant of others' ideas and disagreeing with someone's statement. Just like I must disagree with your last one. I'm fully tolerant of your opinion. I just don't share it.

Perhaps it's true for some people, but why look past the people who simply read because it's fun. They're not necessarily trying to live through stories, neglecting their own reality. They just enjoy it. It's like accusing writers or artists who are creating their own works and stories with only trying to escape true life, when in reality, it's simply a fulfilling task.

Just my opinion...

 

[Herenya]

I don't agree, but I'm the sort of person who finds an author I like, reads everything that author's written I can get my hands on, and then find another author.

I don't do that consistantly...I'll read other stuff in between, and I don't always have an author I'm reading, and then I'll find something by another author I really like and... you get the picture.

 

[jenn]

why have cotton when u can have silk?

silk!! silk!!! i will take a pair of cotton granny panties over some sad silky knickers any day.....silk ha! disgraceful.

 

[Sergo]

I think there's a big difference between being intolerant of others' ideas and disagreeing with someone's statement. Just like I must disagree with your last one. I'm fully tolerant of your opinion. I just don't share it.

Perhaps it's true for some people, but why look past the people who simply read because it's fun. They're not necessarily trying to live through stories, neglecting their own reality. They just enjoy it. It's like accusing writers or artists who are creating their own works and stories with only trying to escape true life, when in reality, it's simply a fulfilling task.

Just my opinion...

Hi Hollis

OK, great. That's just another proof of how tolerant cultured people are.
When I had said so in one of Russian forums - I was nearly killed for it.
But. Of course, lots of people have fun over it. OK. I am reader for all my years minus four. Reading has done lots and lots of good to me, including even getting about my current business.
But sometimes, quite often really, I feel that in reading something I just waste my time. I usually quit on it. But many people do not. They read things that just cannot give anything aside from keepeng mind busy. OK, so they need exactly that stuff for exactly that purpose. As to authors - OK, not everybody creates only for the fun of it. Most people do so to get themselves fed etc. And that is just wonderful. But some of these authors MUST be using their skills just to get something from the people, without giving them anything at all except an instrument to keep themselves busy. Why do they MUST? Because this is the way the life is. So the question is proportion. As to readers... Surely everybody have a right to read what one wishes. But there are TONS of dumbest stuff in the bookstores all over the world. These tons get written and read. Because somebody wanted to get known or a new Porshe, and another needed something to distract him/her.

Please do not beat me too hard...

 

[Hollis]

I'd never beat you! *grins*

I understand better what you're saying. I do believe that some people use books as a means of escape, much in the same way that some people use television or video games or movies.

I think a lot of the popular authors out there are far inferior to some of the lesser knowns, but simply because people recognize their names, theirs are the books that get read. I admit, I'm guilty of hating to put down a book even if I'm not enjoying it. I do feel a compulsion to get to the end of it, which is silly.

 

[Sergo]

Hi Hollis:

Yep, it seems now you understand me perfectly.

And it was our USSR propaganda that originally had given me that idea about books as means of getting one's mind busy: we were always told that Russians are "the most reading nation in the world". I am sure it is silly to pretend that some nation could be "the most reading", or "the most happy", or "the most wise" or the most anything else, so I started to think why almost everybody were really reading while in public transport, getting to work or back home... Most people do not have any sign of joy or interest on their faces while reading in public places. They just have to kill their time - and reading is about the best & easyest way to do so.

To continue reading when not liking it enough I have to like the author. For example, Graham Green makes me yawn sometimes, or Tom Clancy...

 

[Sergo]

By the way, Hollis, what kind of jewelry do you make?