Books you want to read, but don't feel ready for yet.

[Pierre Menard]

I think it was Darcy who mentioned on another thread that he didn't feel ready yet to read The Divine Comedy and The Brothers Karamazov, and I was curious if other members have certain books they really want to read, but currently don't feel like they quite can, for whatever reason.

A few off the top of my head:
The Divine Comedy: I'm fascinated by this work, but I can't help but feel if I read it right now, I won't quite grasp the scope and depth of the work. It's something that I really want to put a lot of effort into.

Canterbury Tales: I've read a bit of this in a modernized translation, and greatly enjoyed what I read but I don't feel ready to read it in the original english just yet. I know a lot of people say that it's not too hard once you understand the basic words and so on, but I still feel daunted by it whenever I flick through.

Faerie Queen: I think it has something to do with the length. I have no problem reading long novels, but I'm not sure if I'm quite ready for a 1200 page poem, regardless of my love of poetry. The longest epic poems I've read are The Iliad and The Metamorphoses, both of which I loved, but I think I may a read a few more epics before moving on to this one.

[Charles Darnay]

Good question. But what makes you ready? Is it historical knowledge? When I first read a tale of two cities I knew very little about the French revolution so I guess I was not ready. Or is it a state of mind?

[Pierre Menard]

Different for different people I think.

State of mind comes into it a lot though, as far as I can see. I know a lot of people who read a book when they were young, couldn't stand it, read it a few years later and loved it. I can also think of people who were older, but had significant changes in their life that changed them as a person. This could also change ones perception of a work or how/what they read.

For me, it's a bit of a state of mind thing, also mixed with my experience with literature. I mean, I love literature and the classics as well as other works, but I'm only 20, and have so much to read. It's probably reasonable to assume certain works would become less difficult after exposure to certain other works that are similar, but a little easier to read.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

One word: Ulysses. I treid reading it a couple years ago and wasnt ready, and I don't think I am still, but I'm getting closer. Maybe next year.

And you should try The Divine Comedy. It's not that difficult.

[JuniperWoolf]

The Divine Comedy really isn't that hard. There are a lot of references to early 14th century Italian politics which you won't get, but no one does so don't worry about it. If you have a grasp of Greek and Roman classics, you'll be able to get quite a bit out of Dante.


One word: Ulysses.

Same here. Someone told me not to read it until I'm forty, so I'm waiting until then.

[mal4mac]

I don't get this thread. If you want to read something, then read it! If it's hard, why do you think it will get any any easier?


One word: Ulysses. I treid reading it a couple years ago and wasnt ready, and I don't think I am still, but I'm getting closer. Maybe next year.

Tried it three times, I don't think I'll ever be ready. So it's now on my "I give up!" pile.


And you should try The Divine Comedy. It's not that difficult.

I agree. Try Mandelbaum's translation.

[mal4mac]

Same here. Someone told me not to read it until I'm forty, so I'm waiting until then.

Tried that - didn't work... but I now feel less guilty about not finishing things, not guilty at all, in fact. Maybe that was what "someone" had in mind?

[Aylinn]

I will not be original.

One word: Ulysses.
I once tried to read it, but after the first page I realised I'm too young. I'm waiting to get old and wrinkled. I hope then I'll be able to understand it.


I don't get this thread. If you want to read something, then read it! If it's hard, why do you think it will get any any easier?
Because some books are not good until you gain some life experience. There are books that I read now that I know I would not have enjoyed few years ago.

[Helga]

I own the Canterbury tales in the old language , not sure if I'll ever be ready to read it....

There are three books I have been planning to read for a few years and they are on my summer reading list 'The Divine Comedy' 'Metamorphosis' and 'Anna Karenina'. I don't know if I haven't read them because I wasn't ready or just lazy, these books are pretty big.

When I was 13 I read Macbeth and Romeo & Juliet, I wasn't ready.

[Paulclem]

I put off War and Peace until last year, and I prepared for it. It was worth it, and being older I definately got more out of it.

I read Graves I Claudius when I was in my early twenties, and I read it last year. The two experiences were not the same, though I enjoyed it both times. I just knew more about Rome and Roman politics this time round, and so the experience was better.

The best example of the difference is with Eliot's poetry, which I first came across when I was 18. I liked it, but I found it difficult to intellectualise why. I recognised quality lines though, despite the attitude current at that time that Eliot was an intellectual snob. I just knew I'd come back to Prufrock and The Waste Land, and I did over a number of years. I gradually understood more and more of it.

It's the same with Phillip Larkin - I now get a lot out of his poems. He seems to have been perpetually middle aged.

[Desolation]

I've been "preparing" for Ulysses for a long time, and I'm hoping to be ready by June 16th this year. I'm gearing up with books that range from being directly inspired by Joyce, to friends of Joyce, to stream of consciousness, to otherwise long and difficult in general.

Also in this category, I suppose, would be Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace. It's not that I don't think I would understand it, but rather that I'm waiting to clear everything else off of my to-read list so that I won't be tempted to stray away from it.

I'm holding off on works like The Divine Comedy, The Odyssey, Paradise Lost, and Shakespeare's plays until I get them assigned in college. There's no particular reason for this.

[Paulclem]

A friend of mine read The Odyssey in tandem with Ullyses, as there is a link between the two. He said The Odyssey illuminated what was happening in Ullyses, and he found it useful.

[RicMisc]

I'm holding off on works like The Divine Comedy, The Odyssey, Paradise Lost, and Shakespeare's plays until I get them assigned in college. There's no particular reason for this.

The Odyssey is amazing, or at least I thought so. I have read the major part in Ancient Greek and the other part in Dutch. It took me a couple of months to get through it but the stories and Homer's writing are great. The things he does to keep his metre (dactylic hexameter) are not always a treat when you have to translate everything but it was definitely worth the time :)..

[Quintus Ennius]

Remembrance of Things Past. I tried to read it a little over a year ago and couldn't.

[Pierre Menard]

I don't get this thread. If you want to read something, then read it! If it's hard, why do you think it will get any any easier?





You honestly think that people don't build on their experience with literature?

I mean, even if I use my short life as an example, I probably started reading more of the classics when I was about 17 and the more I've read over the last 3 years, the easier some of the classic works have become.

[Calidore]

Took me a half-dozen tries and twenty years (and seeing the first film) before I managed to get through Lord of the Rings.

[stlukesguild]

The Divine Comedy is rather strait-forward in terms of language. The challenge comes from the layers of symbolic meaning and the allusion to a vast wealth of historical, literary, and theological persons, places, events, and ideas. There is no getting around the need for solid footnotes. I personally prefer the Jean and Robert Hollander translation with its unrivaled notes. The Comedia is one of those works that should be read again and again over a lifetime. You will be rewarded with new revelations and aesthetic pleasures from each successive reading as a result of your own increased experience and grasp of literature over time... so don't be afraid to jump in now. The Inferno is especially accessible. I believe I read it at 16.

[Carolie86]

http://www.infoocean.info/avatar2.jpgThere are three books I have been planning to read for a few years and they are on my summer reading list 'The Divine Comedy' 'Metamorphosis' and 'Anna Karenina'.

[AlysonofBathe]

Excellent post, I can totally relate. I've always felt intimidated by Ulysses as well; having profs with tenure go on and on about difficult it is doesn't encourage little me to try it.

As to Canterbury Tales, I did my undergraduate in Middle English, and I can assure you Tales isn't anything to be worried about, even in the original Middle English. First and second year undergraduates with no background routine read a tale or two; all you really need is a good edition with an excellent glossary, and if you're particularly dedicated, maybe a Middle English reference book. It's no biggie. :)

Cheers,
Alyson

[dysfunctional-h]

George Eliot's Middlemarch, for starters. Obviously Joyce's Ulysses and Finnegans Wake, but also Dubliners too. Didn't get too much out of the first story, so I don't really feel like reading the rest. o_oll but I really liked Portrait, so I think there may be hope.

Given that I'm Episcopalian, still an impressionable teen, and already somewhat depressed from being half in the closet (yeah im gay), I worry reading any Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, or continuing in my reading of Lolita or 1Q84 will push me over the edge. I really don't want to create yet another Quentin Compson (my mom, many friends of mine, and a romantic interest all could not be more nihilistic). fuuuuuu

Then there's the bible. XD it's sometimes tough and sometimes bleh. but sometimes it's a riot, so I read on.

[Charles Darnay]

Going into Ulysses fearing it only makes it worse - like getting a needle, or....something else.

Just abandon everything anyone told you about the book, dive into it - laugh your *** off because it's hilarious - and occasionally look up the references to Irish/Gaelic culture that you don't get. Seriously, just read the first page out loud and you will see what the fuss is about...or should....of course, not everyone will love it - as with anything, but it does not need the universal fear.

[Desolation]

Before I watched the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, somebody gave me some very good advice. "Don't try to intellectualize it, don't worry about what you don't understand, just float along with it and EXPERIENCE it."

I'm taking that same (very good) advice, and applying it to works like Ulysses and Gravity's Rainbow. I think when the word "difficult" is thrown around, it ruins the experience with prejudice.

[Pierre Menard]

The Divine Comedy is rather strait-forward in terms of language. The challenge comes from the layers of symbolic meaning and the allusion to a vast wealth of historical, literary, and theological persons, places, events, and ideas. There is no getting around the need for solid footnotes. I personally prefer the Jean and Robert Hollander translation with its unrivaled notes. The Comedia is one of those works that should be read again and again over a lifetime. You will be rewarded with new revelations and aesthetic pleasures from each successive reading as a result of your own increased experience and grasp of literature over time... so don't be afraid to jump in now. The Inferno is especially accessible. I believe I read it at 16.

Yeah, it wasn't so much the language, but rather the scope and depth I was worried about.
And yeah, the Hollander's translation was the one I was most leaning towards when I do decide to read it. I've also heard great things about Ciardi's Inferno.
It is a work I hope to visit and re-visit various times throughout my life, for the number of quality translations alone.

[mal4mac]

Because some books are not good until you gain some life experience.


Like what? Even if this is true, I don't see why you shouldn't attempt a book if you really fancy reading it. You'll only find out if it's "not good", for you, by trying to read it. Then you can try it later.

There are exceptions - in my experience. Ulysses is one. There are some "great books", I feel, that might put you off reading other great books! If you read Ulysses, or Proust's "masterpiece", because someone has said they are the "greatest novels ever" you may be turned off "the classics". Just give Tolstoy, Dickens, Balzac, and a hundred others, a chance, before you run back to King...

[PoeticPassions]

I will agree with those who noted Ulysses... I have yet to be ready for it.

I also think I am not ready to read any Faulkner. Maybe because my only attempt was Absalom! Absalom!, or maybe because it just isn't the right time yet...

And the Kuran, though I plan on getting a good copy soon and starting...

[mal4mac]

http://www.infoocean.info/avatar2.jpgThere are three books I have been planning to read for a few years and they are on my summer reading list 'The Divine Comedy' 'Metamorphosis' and 'Anna Karenina'.

These are great books, can't go wrong with Tolstoy and Kafka, almost any translation will do.

Metamorphosis is very short, treat yourself to some more of his works!

Careful on the translation of "The Divine Comedy" you choose. I like Mandelbaum because the notes are good but not too extensive, and I like his poetic style. (For some, Hollander's notes may be too extensive and his style too proesy... for a first read at least...)

I think St Luke is right about the words being easy, but the concepts deep & difficult. The same is true about Tolstoy and Kafka. But I think with these three works you can have a really enjoyable experience from just reading them like any modern novel. Unlike with most modern novels, I found I was left wanting to re-read them (more slowly!) to try and get deeper into them -- this is the sign of a true classic.

[mal4mac]

George Eliot's Middlemarch, for starters...

Middlemarch is an easy, deep, and interesting read. Adults needn't be afraid! (Kids might find it a bit slow.)

[Paulclem]

Middlemarch is an easy, deep, and interesting read. Adults needn't be afraid! (Kids might find it a bit slow.)

Not just kids....:cornut:

[hawthorns]

Great question

Remembrance of Things Past

Actually already read it, but when I reread it I'm going to make sure and get a degree in 19th cent French lit first. TONS of references.

Absalom, Absalom

Loved Sound&Fury, but the online guide I needed was practically as long as the novel. Couldn't figure out what the hell was going on, esp at the beginning.

[AlysonofBathe]

Great question
Absalom, Absalom

Loved Sound&Fury, but the online guide I needed was practically as long as the novel. Couldn't figure out what the hell was going on, esp at the beginning.

I hear you there! The devolution of all coherence in the Quentin section was absolute misery the first time I read it, so confused.

[dysfunctional-h]

I also think I am not ready to read any Faulkner. Maybe because my only attempt was Absalom! Absalom!, or maybe because it just isn't the right time yet...


I really loved reading the Sound and the Fury. I just felt a deep connection to Quentin, and actually found his style to make sense once you get the hang of identifying who he is thinking about (and quoting without quotation marks). Absalom, Absalom! was definitely a good bit harder, but was just as powerful, if not even more than the S&F. I'll read As I lay Dying or Light in August and get back to you. I've heard they are easier.

I started the Scarlet Letter thinking it would be another season-long slog (like Absalom Absalom! was, tho I did like it). I finished it in three days. XDDD

[Veho]

I don't feel ready for Homer yet. Or War and Peace because of the history involved.

Ulysses is an obvious one but I'm not bothered about reading that for a long time anyway.

[Alexander III]

I don't understand why there is such fear of Dante, in Italy every highschool student has to read the comedia in the classical liceo - and all middle schools teach them extracts from la comedia and other works.

If the goverment thinks that the average 16 year old can handle it, I am sure all of you can face it.

Personaly I think that the difiulty stament of "i am not ready yet" is trying to delay reading a book which has such high expectations of perfection and beauty from what our society and those of the past say, that we are scared because on one hand it might not live up to the beauty and dash that hope of finding that one perfect grat human creation

[Buh4Bee]

Veho- War and Peace will wrap you in a warm blanket and take itself to bed with you- it is just that good. You'll do a little background research on Wiki to catch yourself up to speed. It'll be all you talk about for three months. It's great.

[Veho]

Veho- War and Peace will wrap you in a warm blanket and take itself to bed with you- it is just that good. You'll do a little background research on Wiki to catch yourself up to speed. It'll be all you talk about for three months. It's great.

That's actually reassuring - I feel more confident about it already.

[Buh4Bee]

Cheers to you and Tolstoy- but yet Andre.

[chandy]

i have lot of e book. ask me what do you want.

chandy

[dysfunctional-h]

I don't understand why there is such fear of Dante, in Italy every highschool student has to read the comedia in the classical liceo - and all middle schools teach them extracts from la comedia and other works.

If the goverment thinks that the average 16 year old can handle it, I am sure all of you can face it.

Personaly I think that the difiulty stament of "i am not ready yet" is trying to delay reading a book which has such high expectations of perfection and beauty from what our society and those of the past say, that we are scared because on one hand it might not live up to the beauty and dash that hope of finding that one perfect grat human creation

LOOOL we just don't feel like it because we may totally disagree with its portrayal of hell and heaven and didn't get much out of what we HAVE read of it (almost everybody reads excerpts from it in elementary school) other than that. I, for one, am not even sure I believe in hell, even if i am Episcopalian. XDDDD There's just so much other stuff out there. Between Shakespeare, Webster, Chaucer, Faulkner, Woolf Dostoevsky and my own relatively fragile sanity (given my insanely intensive high school) and equally fragile grades, I just don't feel like it right now. Frankly your statement is quite arrogant.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

LOOOL we just don't feel like it because we may totally disagree with its portrayal of hell and heaven and didn't get much out of what we HAVE read of it (almost everybody reads excerpts from it in elementary school) other than that. I, for one, am not even sure I believe in hell, even if i am Episcopalian. XDDDD There's just so much other stuff out there. Between Shakespeare, Webster, Chaucer, Faulkner, Woolf Dostoevsky and my own relatively fragile sanity (given my insanely intensive high school) and equally fragile grades, I just don't feel like it right now. Frankly your statement is quite arrogant.

What elementary school did you go to?

Whether or not we agree or disagree with it's portrayal of heaven and hell is completely irrelevant. That's not the point. It's not a didactic work to instruct one on the facts of the afterlife.

In any case, it's not that hard. If you can read Shakespeare, it shouldn't pose much problem for you. It's definitely easier than Chaucer. I found it to be a pretty quick read, relative to its size, at least. Read it for it's story and aesthetic beauty and worry about all the political allusions later if you want to.

From what you say, Alex, it sounds like Dante is to Italy what Shakespeare is to America. We all have to read Shakespeare around 15 years of age in its original form. I envy you, though--Dante is much more enjoyable.

[dysfunctional-h]

What elementary school did you go to?
In any case, it's not that hard. If you can read Shakespeare, it shouldn't pose much problem for you. It's definitely easier than Chaucer. I found it to be a pretty quick read, relative to its size, at least. Read it for it's story and aesthetic beauty and worry about all the political allusions later if you want to.


I didn't say it was hard. I think I make it pretty clear I live in an insanely academic area, and that's why I have had exposure to sections of it. I just don't feel like reading it right now, that's all. And what's wrong with that? Maybe i was just off put by the extension of its implications made in Portrait of the Artist, I dunno. I'll give it a try tho. But people should be free to try something if they wish, recognize the meaning behind it and NOT like it. XDD It's very much that way with me and Vonnegut.

I never said i wouldn't like it if i did feel like reading more of it. But now is just not the right time for me. I will wait until I have more patience, given I'm still a teen. I don't see anything wrong with waiting to read something until you understand the background behind it. People who push books on people tend to just be snobs, frankly. As much as I love Thomas Mann's Doctor Faustus and everything by Faulkner, I never have gotten all over my friends about reading them. And if I did, I'm sure I wouldn't have them for very long. ^_^ Funny, whenever anybody tells me a classic is horrible I ALWAYS read it and end up loving it. So I think diversity of opinion is important.

[FranzS]

Middlemarch is an easy, deep, and interesting read. Adults needn't be afraid! (Kids might find it a bit slow.)

Agreed. It's the only 800-page novel that I didn't, at times, start getting bored of.

It's perhaps not for everyone - if you like action, look elsewhere. If you want penetrating psychology and insight into the small ways in which people mess up their lives, there's nothing better.

(Hope you don't mind me butting in - I've just joined.)

[FranzS]

That's actually reassuring - I feel more confident about it already.

I read War and Peace in bits, over a year. I needed a break from it from time to time to read other things. It was a bit difficult reading it this way, because there are a lot of characters, some of whom only appear on a few pages, and therefore it was easy to lose the thread. I ended up making a list of secondary characters on the inside back page.

I admit that also found some bits of it less interesting than others. (The same was true of "Anna Karenina".) But the characters really stay with you, and Tolstoy's understanding of the interaction of character and fate is brilliant.

[FranzS]

It's the same with Phillip Larkin - I now get a lot out of his poems. He seems to have been perpetually middle aged.

We studied Larkin at school, but I never really "got" him until I was in my 20s. The reason was simple: our teacher never explained rhythm to us! Once you realise that, for example, "The Whitsun Weddings" is written in iambic pentameters - i.e. that the syllabic "template" is -x-x-x-x-x, and that there is an implicit 6-syllable pause at the end of each line - you start to understand the incredibly subtle way Larkin had of playing with the reader's "rhythmic expectations", and his capacity for dramatic effect.

Of course there is vastly more to Larkin than that, but it was my grasping of rhythm that opened him up for me.

[blazeofglory]

War and Peace is one of the masterpieces I have always deferred and the reason is it is too bulky and it may exhaust a great deal of my time and energy. I know it has no equivalent; Tolstoy was a matchless writer and his style,his theme and the grandeur of his prose remains unparalleled. But I cannot lose my time to this extent since today by virtue of the fact that I have been born in the century of technological momentum a book like this cannot take away most of my time.

[Charles Darnay]

War and Peace is one of the masterpieces I have always deferred and the reason is it is too bulky and it may exhaust a great deal of my time and energy. I know it has no equivalent; Tolstoy was a matchless writer and his style,his theme and the grandeur of his prose remains unparalleled. But I cannot lose my time to this extent since today by virtue of the fact that I have been born in the century of technological momentum a book like this cannot take away most of my time.

There is an interesting point here, that probably deserves its own thread. "At what point is reading a book about the destination rather than the journey." It is so easy to get caught up in "I have to read this classic, than this one, and my friends are talking about this book so I have to read it, and then this one." that it becomes more about having read a book than reading a book.

Do you read "War and Peace" to have had the experience of reading War and Peace? Or do you read it to.....read it? We are living in a world where everything is instantly delivered to us - except books. Books still take the time (and subsequent energy) to consume.

And while I think we can say that we all love reading here, do we get caught up in the idea of the destination we forget about the journey?

I think we would all love to say "well of course I read books for the journey, because that's what reading is," but have you ever had the experience where your "to read" list grows so fast that you feel like you have to keep up?

[FranzS]

There is an interesting point here, that probably deserves its own thread. "At what point is reading a book about the destination rather than the journey." It is so easy to get caught up in "I have to read this classic, than this one, and my friends are talking about this book so I have to read it, and then this one." that it becomes more about having read a book than reading a book.

Do you read "War and Peace" to have had the experience of reading War and Peace? Or do you read it to.....read it? We are living in a world where everything is instantly delivered to us - except books. Books still take the time (and subsequent energy) to consume.

And while I think we can say that we all love reading here, do we get caught up in the idea of the destination we forget about the journey?

I think we would all love to say "well of course I read books for the journey, because that's what reading is," but have you ever had the experience where your "to read" list grows so fast that you feel like you have to keep up?

I don't worry about this. The reason I've read classics is that I assumed they must be worth reading. Where I've started a classic and found myself still not enjoying it after 50 pages, I've just quit. Tastes differ.

The longer the book, the more tentatively I approach it. If "Don Quixote" were only 200 pages long, I'm sure I'd have read it by now. As it is, I have to admit it's not top of my "must read" list.

I'm in my 40s now, so I have had lots of time to get things read. I don't feel inadequate about books I haven't read. I read a lot of non-fiction, and would rather have the broader view that this provides than be able to tick off every single book in the "100 all-time classics" list.

All that said... To some extent it is also about the destination. I think the goal of "getting something done" is common to much enjoyment... For example, I do a bit of computer programming as a hobby, but if I actually ask "Am I really happy?" while I'm doing it, I realise that the satisfaction comes from contemplating the completed task rather than the activity itself.

There are a mere handful of books that I found so compelling I could keep reading them for hours on end without wanting to do something else. ("Tess of the D'Urbevilles" and "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" are two of them.) For the most part, I find reading quite hard work, but satisfying work nonetheless.

[Veho]

There is an interesting point here, that probably deserves its own thread. "At what point is reading a book about the destination rather than the journey." It is so easy to get caught up in "I have to read this classic, than this one, and my friends are talking about this book so I have to read it, and then this one." that it becomes more about having read a book than reading a book.

Do you read "War and Peace" to have had the experience of reading War and Peace? Or do you read it to.....read it? We are living in a world where everything is instantly delivered to us - except books. Books still take the time (and subsequent energy) to consume.

And while I think we can say that we all love reading here, do we get caught up in the idea of the destination we forget about the journey?

I think we would all love to say "well of course I read books for the journey, because that's what reading is," but have you ever had the experience where your "to read" list grows so fast that you feel like you have to keep up?

I really do agree with this. I think reading for some people who are 'serious' about it, myself included, can tend to make it become about the challenge instead of the, to use your word, journey. I wonder how much of the enjoyment diminishes because of this mindset.

[mal4mac]

Veho- War and Peace will wrap you in a warm blanket and take itself to bed with you- it is just that good. You'll do a little background research on Wiki to catch yourself up to speed. It'll be all you talk about for three months. It's great.

Yes. It really is that good, and not a hard read. If you can read this thread you are ready for this!

[Paulclem]

There is an interesting point here, that probably deserves its own thread. "At what point is reading a book about the destination rather than the journey." It is so easy to get caught up in "I have to read this classic, than this one, and my friends are talking about this book so I have to read it, and then this one." that it becomes more about having read a book than reading a book.

Do you read "War and Peace" to have had the experience of reading War and Peace? Or do you read it to.....read it? We are living in a world where everything is instantly delivered to us - except books. Books still take the time (and subsequent energy) to consume.

And while I think we can say that we all love reading here, do we get caught up in the idea of the destination we forget about the journey?

I think we would all love to say "well of course I read books for the journey, because that's what reading is," but have you ever had the experience where your "to read" list grows so fast that you feel like you have to keep up?

It's one of the reasons I dislike lists - 100 books to read before you expire or canons- etc. It's nice to wander more organically through a series of books - one leading to another if you are following a thread. For example I intended to read War and Peace and so I read a history book - 1812 - about Napoleon's invaision of Russia. This gave me some good context for the book, which I got more out of. It then led onto Hitler's invasion of Russia, and so i read Beevor's Stalingrad, followed by Beevor's book on Vassily Grossman, a red army correspondant who later wrote the novel War and Fate. I then followed this through with Beevor on the fall of Berlin. On that particular thread of reading, I will be getting War and Fate in the future. It was great how the books related to each other such as Beevor's accounts of the red army at Stalingrad and their use of extracts from War and Peace in their newspaper propaganda.

War and fate may well lead me back to Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago, which incidentally, I read in my early twenties, but want to revisit as I don't think I got as much out of as I think I should due to my general ignorence at that time of what the Soviet Union was like. .

[blazeofglory]

There is an interesting point here, that probably deserves its own thread. "At what point is reading a book about the destination rather than the journey." It is so easy to get caught up in "I have to read this classic, than this one, and my friends are talking about this book so I have to read it, and then this one." that it becomes more about having read a book than reading a book.

Do you read "War and Peace" to have had the experience of reading War and Peace? Or do you read it to.....read it? We are living in a world where everything is instantly delivered to us - except books. Books still take the time (and subsequent energy) to consume.

And while I think we can say that we all love reading here, do we get caught up in the idea of the destination we forget about the journey?

I think we would all love to say "well of course I read books for the journey, because that's what reading is," but have you ever had the experience where your "to read" list grows so fast that you feel like you have to keep up?

This is really a good point of course and that really demands a great deal of contemplation and indeed you have raised my mind to one more book I always took to my attention and the project of reading the book is really tiresome. It is really cumbersome to read a book from the lens of the destination and of course a book like Ulysses is generally read to pride on the fact that one has read number one book without enjoying it. But there an allure of style at times. I like the Great Gatsby for its style mainly. So is Tolstoy and his prose and storytelling is unique and has a history of its own unmatched by any other writers.

[mal4mac]

War and Peace is one of the masterpieces I have always deferred and the reason is it is too bulky and it may exhaust a great deal of my time and energy. I know it has no equivalent; Tolstoy was a matchless writer and his style,his theme and the grandeur of his prose remains unparalleled. But I cannot lose my time to this extent since today by virtue of the fact that I have been born in the century of technological momentum a book like this cannot take away most of my time.

I recently re-read it. It only took a week - OK I didn't do much else that week, but what else would have given me a better time? Playing with my ipod? Nah...

[blazeofglory]

I recently re-read it. It only took a week - OK I didn't do much else that week, but what else would have given me a better time? Playing with my ipod? Nah...

Indeed this is worth doing and if one has time enough and I am mostly busy and when I just try to read a classic of this measure in my little spared time I feel exhausted and that is why I always look toward leisurely hours especially when I have no cares.

[Veho]

I read War and Peace in bits, over a year. I needed a break from it from time to time to read other things. It was a bit difficult reading it this way, because there are a lot of characters, some of whom only appear on a few pages, and therefore it was easy to lose the thread. I ended up making a list of secondary characters on the inside back page.

I admit that also found some bits of it less interesting than others. (The same was true of "Anna Karenina".) But the characters really stay with you, and Tolstoy's understanding of the interaction of character and fate is brilliant.

I never really got that with Anna Karenina and I didn't find the names as confusing as I thought I would, my copy did have a list at the beginning though which is always helpful. :D You're right about the characters staying with you, especially Anna.

Anyway War and Peace is sounding not too bad actually after all the positive comments but I want to read about the background history before reading it, like Paulclem did.

[Darcy88]

I read 4 Dostoevsky novels when I was 17. Most of it went over my head, I read them as I used to read as a boy John Grisham and R.L Stine. If I had gone on to read Brothers Karamazov at that time or even a few years later it would have been the same. Its a paradox. You must read great literature in order to gradually enhance your reading ability, your capacity for criticism and for picking up nuance, but those first few dozen or more classic books you read are not appreciated as they ought to be. Or at least this was the case with me. There probably is no classic I am not ready for now. I've been reading great books steadily for almost 6 years. That's not to say some won't be very challenging and require slow, careful and maybe multiple readings.

[FranzS]

I recently re-read it. It only took a week - OK I didn't do much else that week, but what else would have given me a better time? Playing with my ipod? Nah...

Cripes. You read 52 times faster than I do. (As I said, it took me a year to read "W & P".)

I'm envious of fast readers and I often wonder why I read so slowly. It's partly that I am easily distracted - by both other activities, and my own thoughts. My mind is often trying to pursue a dozen different trains of thought at once, and they tend to interfere with and undermine each other.

I'm also kind of obsessive about making sure I've taken things in - if a scene is described, I have to ensure that I can picture it before I move on. If I can't work out why a character behaves in a certain way, I have to sit there thinking about it until I feel I understand.

Finally, I have a poor memory for plot; half my time reading is spent flipping back to remind myself how a character got from A to B.

[Desolation]

There's nothing wrong with reading slowly.

Lately, I tend to read finish books at a very good pace. But, it's mostly a matter of myself having the free time required to read 100-150 pages a day. Once I start classes next month, I'll be slowing down pretty substantially.

Even with lots of free time at my hands, it still took me four months to read War & Peace, and a year to finish Anna Karenina, though.

[dysfunctional-h]

I'm envious of fast readers and I often wonder why I read so slowly. It's partly that I am easily distracted - by both other activities, and my own thoughts. My mind is often trying to pursue a dozen different trains of thought at once, and they tend to interfere with and undermine each other.

I've always wondered how fast other people read, because with me it varies a huge amount. Sometimes I'm reading three or four books at once, and in those times it usually takes me a good long time to finish anything. When I was reading 1Q84, The Adventures of Huck Finn, Doctor Faustus (Thomas Mann), and Absalom, Absalom! concurrently it took me a few months to finish even Doctor Faustus, and another two weeks for Absalom, Absalom! and Huck Finn. Then again, these are generally acknowledged to be their respective author's most difficult books. It only took me a week each to finish The Scarlet Letter and The Sound and the Fury. I wrapped up Beckett's Waiting for Godot in a couple fun hours. But with all of these I was not distracted at all--they were the only things I was reading (other than the stuff i read for school, obviously). But other books seem to take longer. Portrait of the Artist took me about three weeks, and Lolita is taking a lot longer than I expected. So I'm not sure. But subject matter is important: because of the main character's lack of moral fiber I find it difficult to get myself to continue reading the book because they are such guilty pleasures. Much of the time I abandon the novel halfway through because I am utterly bored. Such happened with 1Q84, and it almost happened with both Absalom, Absalom! and Doctor Faustus, both of which took a month-long break from while I brought my grades up, and had to review thoroughly before i picked up where i had left off. But it was worth every minute, as those are now two of my all time favorite novels.

I think it's also important to get a background with the author before reading their hardest works. I'm gonna try to read Dubliners before Ulysses, similarly The Crying of Lot 49 before Gravity's Rainbow, and I think reading Absalom, Absalom! (on my father's recommendation) before I attempted The Sound and the Fury helped me not fall in the pit that everybody else does: hating the first chapter because of Benjy, and assuming all Faulkner is like that. There's simply no substitute for doing your research.

[FranzS]

I remember a few years ago, the UK novelist A S Byatt was on a TV arts show, and she said she skim-read a lot of books in order to get through them. She said, "I wouldn't be able to read as much as I do if I didn't skim-read."

I was quite surprised. I don't see the point in skim-reading novels: seems to me you might as well not read them.

I often skim-read news stories, because in that case it's the salient facts I'm interested in, and I can typically get a sense of those from the first sentence of each paragraph. I know I won't remember the detail in a month's time, but with current affairs a general sense of what's happening can be useful.

But in novels - or at least literary novels - surely you want to read them for the quality of the prose, and not just to "get the gist"? Well, that's how I see it, anyway.

(Of course, I'm aware that literary reviewers are obliged to skim-read, insofar as they open the books in the first place - and that, I understand, is by no means a given :) )

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I think it's also important to get a background with the author before reading their hardest works. I'm gonna try to read Dubliners before Ulysses, similarly The Crying of Lot 49 before Gravity's Rainbow, and I think reading Absalom, Absalom! (on my father's recommendation) before I attempted The Sound and the Fury helped me not fall in the pit that everybody else does: hating the first chapter because of Benjy, and assuming all Faulkner is like that. There's simply no substitute for doing your research.

Dubliners is a pretty "easy" read. If you find out what's so amazing about it, let me know. If you're trying to prep for Ulysses, though, you may want to read Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man because the main character in that shows up in Ulysses, and Homer's The Odyssey since there're a lot of parallels.

As to prep for Gravity's Rainbow, you may want to read V. instead of The Calling if Lot 49 since that too features a character and connections to Gravity's Rainbow, though Lot 49 is really good and quick, so worth a read anyways. Not much can really prepare you for Gravity's Rainbow, though; that book's a trip.

[dysfunctional-h]

Dubliners is a pretty "easy" read. If you find out what's so amazing about it, let me know.
EXACTLY! I read the first chapter I'm just kinda *meh.* But I loved portrait of the artist so there must be SOMETHING to it. I just don't know what. o_oll Maybe it'll become apparent when i read the rest (which is not gonna happen for a while, given all the other stuff enjoy reading).

Speaking of Joyce, Finnegans Wake is hilarious in small shots, but I don't feel like reading it all at once right now, and I don't think it was meant to be read in one shot in the first place. I think it is basically a joke book. But I don't know. To get anything more than that out of it would take a good year out of your life, I'd bet. XD

[Desolation]

I'm kind of inclined, in my preparations for Ulysses, to skip right to "The Dead" instead of reading all of Dubliners. It just seems like a kind of tedious read, to me.

Anyone here ever read Exiles? I'm thinking of throwing that onto the list.

[Charles Darnay]

I'm kind of inclined, in my preparations for Ulysses, to skip right to "The Dead" instead of reading all of Dubliners. It just seems like a kind of tedious read, to me.

Anyone here ever read Exiles? I'm thinking of throwing that onto the list.

Exiles was alright....not great, not terrible. It's probably my least favourite of his works (that I have read).

[stlukesguild]

Edit* Rewrite tomorrow when I'm more awake.

[mortalterror]

Edit* Rewrite tomorrow when I'm more awake.

Edit* Respond tomorrow when I'm more awake.

[Adolescent09]

I first read The Lord of the Rings when I was 13 but I didn't really care for it and I thought the whole plot was mundane. I read it again this year, and thought it to be a lot more fascinating so I guess back then I wasn't ready to read it, and now I am.

[Snowqueen]

Our English teacher used to insist that we should read Tom Jones because it’s a perfect example of a good plot. It was also his favourite book. So I bought the novel, started reading but couldn’t finish it. It’s still lying on the shelf with my bookmark in it.
I hope I’ll manage to get though it.

[Tallulah]

Ulysses is definitely the one that I keep putting off. I guess it's because I've always heard what a difficult read it is so it's scared me off a bit. When (if) I ever do read it, it will be difficult to go into it with a clear mind and not think about how hard it's supposed to be.

War & Peace is an excellent read. I didn't find it difficult at all. My edition does have a list of characters at the beginning and I'm somewhat familiar with Russian history so maybe that helped. It's looooong but very good. It stayed with me for a while.

I'm now considering reading some Dante since so many people on here commented that it wasn't that hard. I don't know why I thought it would be over my head. I'll try and let y'all know what I think...

[Jason Cardona]

William Faulkner - The Sound and the Fury. I tried reading it about 5 years ago, couldn't get through it.

[Italian83]

Hi everyone,
first of all let me introduce myself as I am new in this forum :hurray:
I am an Italian guy who loves reading. I graduated in Classics and I mostly like...well, classics. :-) I first started being interested in English authors a couple of years ago, when I fell in love with both your language and culture, so that I started learning it better, with particular regard to the English grammar and literature. The reason why I'm here is also due to my desire to practise my English skills... Like we say in Italy "due piccioni con una fava = two pigeons with one bean" :-)

I am so glad that I've heard you talking about Dante and his immortal "Divine Comedy"... As you may already know, here in Italy this poem is taught in high school as a compulsory part of our schedule, that a sort of pillar of our literary education, in particular at the "liceo classico", which is the kind of high school where Italian pupils learn Latin, Greek and so on.
No need to say that I've read every single verse of it in its original '300 Italian version, so that I know every nuance pretty well. Dante's Italian is quite difficult, at such a point that some parts necessarily need to be clarified by the professor in actual Italian.
I must completely agree with those who think it's worth reading although it's a bit difficult. I'm afraid their concerns are right, in particular about the social and political background which must be known... Somewhere above I've read that, about the political issues, "who cares, nobody knows about them..." ... well... I'm afraid I have to disagree: the Comedy is ALL about that, unless you want to read it quite literally and understand 10% of it... Not only politics is involved though, for Dante, as I like to say, has one foot still in the Middle Ages and the other one headed towards the Renaissance, its cultural point of view is of crucial importance in order to understand not only the Italian cultural background but also the European one of that time... If you compare Dante with Petrarca (you know Petrarca don't you? Kind of a god here...), you will see how in a handful of years everything changed culturally and politically, and these changes are indeed the "engine" of the Divine Comedy... Most of Dante's anxiety is due to this process of cultural changing... One example above all: his passionate polemic against the Catholic church of that time... consider that half of the Comedy is about it... polemics that will soon lead to the Reform... So what we see is an intellectual that sharply precedes his comtemporaries of a few decades but isn't still completely aware of what's going on (I mean, he probably didn't use to see himself as the last man of the middle ages, or an eraly pioneer of the early reinassance)...

Sorry... I didn't want to write a poem myself :-) I just intended to say that it SURELY is worth reading Dante, and as an Italian let me say that I am SO SO SO glad that you people are interested in it... But beware of a merely literal reading, because the greatness of that poem is in its political and cultural meanings, most of which are often well hidden, at such a point that when we study it in high school, our teachers have to explain over and over and over again... That's why most of our pupils SINCIRELY HATE that poem...


p.s. Sorry if there may be some mistakes in my English...I'm doing my best to learn quickly ;-) I'm ready Jane Austeen's Pride and Prejudice now, which, if I had to come here one year ago, I would have elected as "the book that I would like to read but I don't file like yet..." ... while now after doing my best for one year I surely can!! So...believe in yourself and go! :-)

[Darcy88]

Hi everyone,
first of all let me introduce myself as I am new in this forum :hurray:
I am an Italian guy who loves reading. I graduated in Classics and I mostly like...well, classics. :-) I first started being interested in English authors a couple of years ago, when I fell in love with both your language and culture, so that I started learning it better, with particular regard to the English grammar and literature. The reason why I'm here is also due to my desire to practise my English skills... Like we say in Italy "due piccioni con una fava = two pigeons with one bean" :-)

I am so glad that I've heard you talking about Dante and his immortal "Divine Comedy"... As you may already know, here in Italy this poem is taught in high school as a compulsory part of our schedule, that a sort of pillar of our literary education, in particular at the "liceo classico", which is the kind of high school where Italian pupils learn Latin, Greek and so on.
No need to say that I've read every single verse of it in its original '300 Italian version, so that I know every nuance pretty well. Dante's Italian is quite difficult, at such a point that some parts necessarily need to be clarified by the professor in actual Italian.
I must completely agree with those who think it's worth reading although it's a bit difficult. I'm afraid their concerns are right, in particular about the social and political background which must be known... Somewhere above I've read that, about the political issues, "who cares, nobody knows about them..." ... well... I'm afraid I have to disagree: the Comedy is ALL about that, unless you want to read it quite literally and understand 10% of it... Not only politics is involved though, for Dante, as I like to say, has one foot still in the Middle Ages and the other one headed towards the Renaissance, its cultural point of view is of crucial importance in order to understand not only the Italian cultural background but also the European one of that time... If you compare Dante with Petrarca (you know Petrarca don't you? Kind of a god here...), you will see how in a handful of years everything changed culturally and politically, and these changes are indeed the "engine" of the Divine Comedy... Most of Dante's anxiety is due to this process of cultural changing... One example above all: his passionate polemic against the Catholic church of that time... consider that half of the Comedy is about it... polemics that will soon lead to the Reform... So what we see is an intellectual that sharply precedes his comtemporaries of a few decades but isn't still completely aware of what's going on (I mean, he probably didn't use to see himself as the last man of the middle ages, or an eraly pioneer of the early reinassance)...

Sorry... I didn't want to write a poem myself :-) I just intended to say that it SURELY is worth reading Dante, and as an Italian let me say that I am SO SO SO glad that you people are interested in it... But beware of a merely literal reading, because the greatness of that poem is in its political and cultural meanings, most of which are often well hidden, at such a point that when we study it in high school, our teachers have to explain over and over and over again... That's why most of our pupils SINCIRELY HATE that poem...


p.s. Sorry if there may be some mistakes in my English...I'm doing my best to learn quickly ;-) I'm ready Jane Austeen's Pride and Prejudice now, which, if I had to come here one year ago, I would have elected as "the book that I would like to read but I don't file like yet..." ... while now after doing my best for one year I surely can!! So...believe in yourself and go! :-)

Thanks for offering such an informed perspective. Welcome to the forums! :smile5:

[stlukesguild]

Somewhere above I've read that, about the political issues, "who cares, nobody knows about them..." ... well... I'm afraid I have to disagree: the Comedy is ALL about that, unless you want to read it quite literally and understand 10% of it... Not only politics is involved though, for Dante, as I like to say, has one foot still in the Middle Ages and the other one headed towards the Renaissance, its cultural point of view is of crucial importance in order to understand not only the Italian cultural background but also the European one of that time... If you compare Dante with Petrarca (you know Petrarca don't you? Kind of a god here...), you will see how in a handful of years everything changed culturally and politically, and these changes are indeed the "engine" of the Divine Comedy... Most of Dante's anxiety is due to this process of cultural changing... One example above all: his passionate polemic against the Catholic church of that time...

I certainly agree that a core element of the Comedia is an expression of the poet's frustration... anger even... with the Catholic Church and the Empire. In this sense he does indeed point toward the future... not only the Renaissance... but even the Reformation. But of course Dante's desire for the separation of church and state is not exactly the same as ours. He wishes for the Church to keep it's nose out of politics for the simple reason that he believes that this constant interference in earthly, materialistic, secular disputes has distracted the Church from it's true role: that of the salvation of man's immortal soul. At the same time, he is angered as the state... the Empire for not holding its ground... for having ceded to much power concerning earthly materialistic things to the church and as such... for failing at its role in maintaining order here on earth. This concept of a divide between the heavenly, spiritual after life which should ideally be mirrored by the secular rulers of earth is surely rooted in Medieval thought... but the criticism of the Church's interference in earthly matters certainly points toward the future.

Having said this, I would suggest that the Comedia is far more complex than a simply criticism of church and state and contemporary politics. It deals with many more issues and presents a wealth of narratives and characters and a broad variety of poetic devices and poetic language... from the most dramatic, to the most vulgar to the most visionary. In spite of this I don't believe the narrative, nor the language is particularly difficult (excluding the use of archaic language)... rather it is the poet's references to such an array of persons, places, and events with the assumption that his readers are fully aware of what he alludes to (which quite likely, his original readers would have been) that makes the Comedia seem daunting to some readers. To any with a love of history, such as myself, the book is ever a joy.

[Kafka's Crow]

One thing literature taught me is not to give up, never to give up. Old books should be read at a young age, difficult books should be read at young age and only obscure books should be left for later years. As you grow old, the worries of this world, mortgages, bank accounts, parking tickets, kids, spouses etc eat up and consume a large chunk of our intelligence and enthusiasm. If you can't read it when you were young, you can not ever read it. I was 19 when I first read Ulysses. I couldn't understand it but still I read it all the same. Went on to read Finnegans Wake, found it too difficult and instead of giving up, started reading Adeline Glasheen's Census, annotating my copy of the Wake vigorously without realising that I was spoiling a perfectly new copy of the 1st Faber edition!!! I have read Ulysses eight times now.

Here, on Litnet, I pronounced '2010 is the year of reading Proust'. I could not get into it. But did I give up? I kept on going back and restarting Swann's Way each time I stopped reading. Great things were happening at work and I was fast-tracked for major promotions so I read a huge amount of books on management and business until recently when I found my career all but derailed by jealous bosses. Proust welcomed me back with open arms. I have read Swann's Way thrice and am about to finish Within the Budding Grove. Always aim high and never give up. Reading great literature is easier when you are young. Nothing is stronger than enthusiasm and enthusiasm is what life takes away when you are not young any more. In fact this loss of enthusiasm is what makes you old. Before that time comes and imagination dies following the death of enthusiasm, read and "rage against the dying of the light".

[Italian83]

[...]Having said this, I would suggest that the Comedia is far more complex than a simply criticism of church and state and contemporary politics. It deals with many more issues and presents a wealth of narratives and characters and a broad variety of poetic devices and poetic language... from the most dramatic, to the most vulgar to the most visionary. In spite of this I don't believe the narrative, nor the language is particularly difficult (excluding the use of archaic language)... rather it is the poet's references to such an array of persons, places, and events with the assumption that his readers are fully aware of what he alludes to (which quite likely, his original readers would have been) that makes the Comedia seem daunting to some readers. To any with a love of history, such as myself, the book is ever a joy.

I completely agree with all you said, the Comedia is indeed far more complex than that... My answer was actually more in response to those who think that you can read it without any clear historical comprehension, rather than a comprehensive analysis. Let me add that, for us Italian humanists, the Comedy is still a bedrock even leaving out all of its content, especially from a linguistic point of view, because not only it indeed is a masterpiece of poetry, but also it is for us the first poem of some importance not written in latin... We say that Dante, Petrarca and Boccaccio are "the three crowns", or "the fathers of language", because with their Comedy, Canzoniere and Decameron respectively, they set a new standard and gave birth to the Italian language, starting from the dialect spoken in Florence at that time. Nowadays it may seem nothing extraordinary... but choosing not to use latin, for that time, I'm sure it must have been, especially for Dante, not only a courageous choice, but also a well thought one...a programmatic one... like if he was well aware of the role he would acquire...

Sticking to our topic (about feeling ready or not for some books), one reason why I mentioded the Comedy, is that it is one of those books that have a peculiar characteristic: they are made of "layers"...levels... A bit like... the Bible... No one mentioned the Bible yet... If you think about it, the reading and comprehension of the Bible, it depends on the layer you want to approach... You can read it literally, and it makes sense somehow, then, when you feel ready for it, you can go deeper into an allegoric comprehension, and you will suddenly discover that literal meanings hide deeper perspective... and even at that point you're not done yet, because you can go further towards a "spiritual" reading, which add more significance to the allegoric explanations...
I hope I wasn't "profane" to mention the Bible here, but I think it is a good example of the concept of "layers" in literature (the Bible is also literature somehow, even if it's special)... for we see that further levels of reading can not only explain the plain literal level, but even completely change it and lead us into a real comprehension...
The point that I'm making here is that the issue of "feeling ready" may be seen not only as "I'm gonna read it/ I'm not gonna read it", but also more like "I'll read it, but I'll stick with this or that layer for now".

Good bye everyone
thanks for sharing your views! (p.s. these forums rock by the way ;-) :hurray: I think I'll be a fixed guest from now on...if you forgive some English mistakes :blush: in a forum about literature... ;-))

[FranzS]

Kafka's Crow: I don't agree that you should try to read all the classics at a young age. I am fairly certain I wouldn't have enjoyed Dickens or Austen when I was 15. I didn't really appreciate good language at the time.

Maybe that's the fault of my education, I don't know - we were led into literature gently, and it was only when we reached the 6th form that we started to read truly important books - except for Shakespeare, and I must admit I loved Shakespeare from the start, once I'd got used to the language.

I guess I'm fortunate in that I don't have children, so I've been able to spend a lot of my spare time reading.

I do notice, though, that most people lose interest in the world of the imagination once they turn 25 or 30. It seems to be a choice, in most cases, rather than dictated by circumstances. They just do what everyone else does. Not only do they lose interest in literature, but they start to get hardened into certain views of the world and of reality, so that when you suggest there is still a great deal of mystery behind the surface of things, they become rather condescending.

Re. management books... I am always rather dismayed when I walk past the desks of intelligent people and see piles of these immensely boring books written by charlatans on their desks. "Life is short," I want to say. "Read something useful!" In fact, the amount I've learned about human nature from books probably exceeds what I've learned from real life. There's nothing more satisfying than observing behaviour by people around you and thinking, "X is just like that character from [book]".

In many ways literature gives you a head start in interpreting the real world. You can't possibly gain all your knowledge of how people behave in all circumstances from your own limited experience - but you can learn vast amounts about this from literature.

[FranzS]

thanks for sharing your views! (p.s. these forums rock by the way ;-) :hurray: I think I'll be a fixed guest from now on...if you forgive some English mistakes :blush: in a forum about literature... ;-))

No need to apologise I83. Your English is excellent - much better than that of most English natives of your age. You use the occasional phrase that is slightly unidiomatic, but I probably wouldn't have guessed English isn't your first language if you hadn't said.

[KCurtis]

I first read The Lord of the Rings when I was 13 but I didn't really care for it and I thought the whole plot was mundane. I read it again this year, and thought it to be a lot more fascinating so I guess back then I wasn't ready to read it, and now I am.

I'm glad you re-read it. I have never, but I know it is a fascinating read!!

[Charles Darnay]

I think I'll be a fixed guest from now on...if you forgive some English mistakes :blush: in a forum about literature... ;-))

I hope you will be. Dante's Comedia comes up from time to time and it will be great to have an "insider's" perspective.

Also, The Decameron is unfortunately unknown to many, despite the fact that it is an and incredible collection, and incredibly funny.

[Paulclem]

I hope you will be. Dante's Comedia comes up from time to time and it will be great to have an "insider's" perspective.

Also, The Decameron is unfortunately unknown to many, despite the fact that it is an and incredible collection, and incredibly funny.

I'll remember that. It's on my shelf waiting...

[TheChilly]

One word: Ulysses. I treid reading it a couple years ago and wasnt ready, and I don't think I am still, but I'm getting closer. Maybe next year.

And you should try The Divine Comedy. It's not that difficult.

As for "Ulysses"... I don't find it as difficult as Pynchon's works have been for me, but the only thing is paying close attention to its stream-of-consciousness narrative and how its prose is trying to emulate a sense of human consciousness.

I'm afraid of "Finnegan's Wake", though.

[msmoonlite]

A Virtuous Woman by Kaye Gibbons. I read this book years ago, and it is the first (and so far only) book to make me cry to the point where I couldn't read anything for days.

I thought I was ready to read it again, but not at all. It sits by my bed waiting to be cracked open and that is where its going to stay.