The Emporer has no clothes!!

I read Catch 22 many, I repeat, many years ago. Damned if I remember anything past the meaning of the term "Catch 22" and the part were the guy gets cut in half by the propeller. Ugh!

I haven't read Catch 22 (yet), as I prefer Scientific (Fiction or Fact) to real literature - but my other half felt moved to say this;

Heh! I've got two computers networked side by side, so we surf simultaneously!

Sometimes Katherine (my little one) joins in the fun...

g d mi c,z o9x8e3 vx mu cz b blorseg

this is a dangerous thread for a contentious ba**ard like me

"Finnegan's Wake" is an amazing book with almost unlimited levels of interpretation; it's tougher to penetrate than "Ulysses" but also easier to read. When I was an undergrad, I looked forward for two years to taking the 400-level course on Joyce's work that was being offered...by the time I had the requirements to take the class, it had been replaced by a course on Toni Morrison (who is a capable writer on gender and race, but by no means comparable to Joyce). I don't love FW as much as some of my other favorite books, but if I could take one work with me to a desert island, it would certainly be in the final four. If you're a fan of Nabokov's word games or W. S. Burroughs' stream-of-consciousness, FW takes it all much deeper and adds enough historical and literary reference to keep annotators busy for decades. You don't have to like it, but it's one of the finest works ever written. Period.

danbo: I'm not sure what the lyrics do mean, but I'm pretty sure David Byrne wasn't talking about an actual fire (or even a fraternity party).  I'd have to guess that he was familiar with the book (or film), and probably could have used 451 instead of 365- the syllables are the same, so it wouldn't have changed the rhythm one bit.

On the other hand, "Catch-22" I could take or leave. Heller is a pretty decent writer but there have been better works on similar themes. Coincidentally (since I started by talking about Joyce), my favorite Heller piece is "Portrait of the Artist as an Old Man" in which he does a bit of self-criticism on "Catch-22" as well as poignantly portraying the shadow it cast over the rest of his life.

Now for my entry: why are so many people reading Robert Jordan? I'm a slightly sheepish fantasy fan; my feeling about fantasy fiction is similar to my feeling about prog...there's a lot of great stuff that doesn't deserve all the kneejerk criticism it usually gets, but also plenty of works that the fans like to praise inordinately. And just about every person I've talk to about fantasy fiction over the past ten years has praised Jordan...despite the fact that he's barely capable of writing his endorsement on the checks publishers send him, let alone a multi-volume work of fiction. I had the same feeling reading "Wheel of Time" that I had the first time I picked up an L. Ron Hubbard 'book'- basically, the feeling that I was being scammed.

ever read "The Last Days of Christ the Vampire" by J. G. Eccarius ?

how about LeFanu's "Carmilla"?

next to Stoker, they're my favorite vampire books

Wizard of ID is my sort of humour Dude, excellent stuff. "The peasants are revolting", "they sure are" and all that.

There was a great one where one of the subjects was about to be hanged. "Mercy, mercy!" he pleaded to the king.

The king sent him off to the gallows saying, "They don't usually thank me!"

Also love Hagar the horrible, BC etc.

Maybe just as well the film didn't materialise, these cartoons usually lose something when they are animated. ("Garfield" "Dilbert" etc.)

Reply to James

Just wanted to add my own views on Finnegans Wake other than my dismissive 'junk' of before  

I haven't previously met many defenders of this book!  I took my degree in English literature and studied Joyce as one of my authors.  Only one of my tutors at Oxford loved it; a die-hard Joyce fan.  While I would never contest that Joyce is an amazing author I think Finnegan's Wake is a classic case of experimentalism being taken too far.  I've seen it with the very best of writers and, I may add, the best of bands. 

While I think it is possible to defend Finnegan's Wake for the very reasons James has, I personally find that it's lost its raison d'etre.  Is this novel really a joy to read?  It's a novel for which most people have to check the annonations twenty times every page before they can even understand what's being said!  I find this rather destroys its readability.  Let's face it, there aren't many about now who are educated to the same standard as Joyce and have the luxury of being able to understand his allusions without such aid.

Sorry for the hijack, as this isn't my board:  I'm force fed prog by Certified  

Verity

Certif1ed wrote: g d mi c,z o9x8e3 vx mu cz b blorseg

Tell Katherine that James Joyce couldn't have said it better

emdiar wrote: As a offshoot  from Cert's "what are you reading" thread, this.... There are certain books which are considered essential reading. Books about which a degree of knowledge is required in order not to embarrass one's self in educated company.  What self-respecting literate person would openly admit, for instance, to not having read "To Kill a Mocking Bird"? Who amongst us would be comfortable saying, "what's that "Catcher in the Rye" all about?"

Hi, Emdiar! Good topic!

 Well, I'm "self-respecting" and "literate" (English Specialist's degree, U of T), but I will openly and unabashedly admit that I have never read To Kill a Mockingbird or Catcher in the Rye. I don't think that any single literary classic is "essential" or "required" reading in order to qualify as "well read." (Though a working knowledge of the Bible, Greek mythology, and some Shakespeare might qualify as a "necessary" foundation for getting all one can from Western literature.) 

I concentrated heavily on British literature in getting my degree, and while I've read some classic American fiction from the "canon," one cannot be expected to have read every novel that is regarded as "canonical."

Perhaps a minor, quibbling point, but there you have it. My humble opinion.

Now (critical acclaim and literary merit or "importance" aside), I believe that taste (whether in music, beauty, art, food, film, or books, etc.) is highly individual, and this applies to classic literature fully as much as it does to newer works. I certainly did not equally enjoy everything that I was required to read at university  -- far from it! Upon perusing Joyce, I was immediately put off, and when in my 20s, I tried to read War and Peace, but couldn't get into it. I also find Moby Dick to be daunting -- maybe one day!

Love that Tom Jones, Don Quixote, Vanity Fair, Barchester Towers, Jane Austen and Dickens, though!

There's a big difference in credibility and validity between "I really don't like this" and "This is crap that never should have been regarded as great, or important! What were they thinking when they put this on the course list?" 

In closing, nice to "talk" to you, keep reading, and there's no shame in not having enjoyed -- or even read -- every work that is widely hailed as a "classic." 

Take it easy,

Peter

When you read, outside educational requirements, what do you PREFER? To be cerebrally stimulated or entertained? Even both... I've found some text books to be thought provoking and entertaining. A rare phenomenon?

What books do both? I really wanna know.