So you are using it as a sleep inducer? That's an effective method.Originally Posted by Alan_M
So you are using it as a sleep inducer? That's an effective method.
I can definitely agree on Eco's Foucault Pendulum, it was extremely laborious to read, filled with references to semiotic theory, intertextuality etc. Eco is a brilliant writer, but he rarely cares about whether he's book are accessible to readers or not.
If I'm allowed to go to the philosophy department, I'd have to say Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics by Immanuel Kant.
Last edited by Freudian Monkey; 08-24-2012 at 10:38 AM.
De omnibus dubitandum.
The Prolegomena is the easy version of the First Critique (ie, the First Critique done backwards).
J
I know, that's why I didn't even try to read Critique of Pure Reason. It would certainly be even more tedious. I can only comment on what I've read, sorry. Being and Time was a much easier read for me.
Last edited by Freudian Monkey; 08-24-2012 at 12:58 PM.
De omnibus dubitandum.
I won't read Umberto Eco any more. The Name of the Rose was good, Focault's Pendulum was annoying and The Island of the Day Before was unforgivable. Don't read Focault's Pendulum anyway; read The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln. It deals with the same stuff (which is interesting) but is betterer.
According to Aldous Huxley, D.H. Lawrence once said that Balzac was 'a gigantic dwarf', and in a sense the same is true of Dickens.
Charles Dickens, by George Orwell
Totally agree with The Sound and Fury (the only book out of these which I actually remember having completed). I had to struggle really hard to make sense of the happenings!
I also think To The Lighthouse could have qualified for the list - stream of consciousness making it such a complicated read. Another book that springs to my mind is For Whom The Bell Tolls even when Hemingway is supposed to be known for his simple style!
I sang of leaves, of leaves of gold, and leaves of gold there grew.
A book I can recall having incredible difficulty with is The Silmarillion by Tolkein. From memory, it had no real plot, was ridiculously written - full of old language and overly complicated sentences - and there were endless long and bizarre names you were supposed to remember. I guess it didn't help I was in my young teens at the time but nevertheless I imagine I would still struggle with it. Almost unbelievable it was produced by the same author of The Hobbit and LOTR.
Why do you trust Sartre so much? I've never seen any serious critic recommend this above his other works. I've read enough Sartre, or enough about him, not to want to read this or anything else by him.
Thanks for the recommendation.
De omnibus dubitandum.
There seems to be a consensus that length doesn't matter, so what is it about a book that makes it difficult for you?
For me it is ignorence of the philosophy, or the author's ideas that they are trying to get across. I had this with Sartre, though the stories were readable enough. I got the stream of consciousness in To The Lighthouse, which I found to be quite readable and illuminating.
all those books written by Henry James are difficulty for me. I read several times GOLD BOWL rying hard to finish it but fail
As did I.
But, for more of a challenge, try getting the stream of consciousness in Henry James' The Awkward Age (1899), ostensibly a story about intricacies entangling family and friends of 18-year-old Nanda Brookenham, as she comes of age.
"Love does not alter the beloved, it alters itself"
After The Turn of the Screw, I won't be reading any James. I didn't find it difficult, just annoying. I'm in the enviable position of not having to read anything I don't enjoy - difficult or not. Fortunately there are plenty that I do like.
Not exactly literature, but written with style, a killer difficult work: The Noonday Demon by Andrew Solomon. I would only recommend it to my enemies, it is that severe a read, lets say. I got it at a free book givaway since I would never buy such a penetrating and fierce book. It is a challenge.
I love Henry James but thought The Turn of the Screw paltry, and James himself labelled it a potboiler. A much better introduction to James might be the novella The Aspern Papers, the moving, early novel Washington Square or, for humour, What Maisie Knew.
"Love does not alter the beloved, it alters itself"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
