Books Read in '09 and Goals for 2010

[kangarau]

This entry is inspired by Monkey's, and includes my recommendations  (Monkey:  I'll bring along the good ones among these the next time I visit or see you at a tourney - whichever comes first, so don't waste your money buying them. . . )

In 2009, I generally read more, but enjoyed less than I usually do.  The main reason is that I spent over half of

Comments

[wrongradical]

2009 was my year of fiction. I rarely read fiction, yet I decided to read fiction this year in order to free up some bookshelf space. This is now moot since I have two new bookcases and, for the first time in my new house I have more bookshelf space than books to put on them. However at the beginning of 2009 I looked at all of the unread books in my library and realized that most of them were fiction. I decided to read them, then discard them. The books I read last year (trash as well as classics, fiction as well as nonfiction) included

[tolarjev]

What is this 1176 page book?

[wrongradical]

A superstition of mine is never to reveal what I am reading until I finish reading it. Notice all the crap I read in 2009; I am a reader who will not put a book down once I open its cover.

When I kept a daily diary from 1977-1994, and wrote about my day, if I read for the most part of it, I would simply write "I read more of my book"--and didn't elaborate or give my diary a book review until after I had finished.

2010 is time to break with tradition. I am reading, and very much enjoying "...And Ladies of the Club" by Helen Hooven Santmyer.

[sophonax]

I think I need to get better at giving up on books that aren't giving me any pleasure. Once I start a book, I'll read it to the end even if I HATE it. the worst book I read last year, The Holy City by Patrick McCabe made me so angry that I would rant nightly to xpmorgan about how bad it was until I finished with it. He kept saying, "SO JUST STOP READING IT!" and I was like "I CAN'T! I have to know how bad it's going to get!"

Try my 30-page rule

[kangarau]

Ha! I used to be the same way - but now I have a strict 30-page rule. If the book doesn't vaguely interest me within its first 30 pages, I drop it - no matter how famous, how acclaimed the book; no matter how much I paid for it. Life is just too damn short to waste reading crap.

One of these that comes to mind is Paradise by Morrison. Oprah made it sound as though it was THE BEST BOOK EVER WRITTEN (and yes, I know she has recommended a bunch of utter junk over the years), but I'd always wanted to read Morrison, so I bought the sales pitch. Horrible!!

The only other Oprah recommendation I bought was She's Come Undone by Wally Lamb - a huge bestseller, if I recall. I finished it, but I was so angry I'd wasted the time - it was utter crap. I mean, the worst creative writing student could've done better. That's why Oprah has no credibility in my book.

Re: Try my 30-page rule

[sophonax]

Oprah's hit-or-miss with me--she's picked out some great books (and I do love Morrison), but I wouldn't dream of choosing a book solely on an Oprah recommendation. I wonder how many people there are out there who read *only* the books Oprah recommends and nothing else?

And yes, She's Come Undone was a terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad book.

[wrongradical]

In spite of the glowing accolades I loathed reading The Satanic Verses, The English Patient, and By Grand Central Station I Sat Down and Wept (the last one easily the winner of one of the best titles). At least Elizabeth Smart's BGCSISD&W was barely two hundred pages long. Still, I suffered through it. I am just like sophonax, that once I open a book, I must finish it, no matter how much I think I am wasting valuable life time.

[aphis99]

Last year I thoroughly enjoyed Rabbit, Run and Rabbit Redux (moving on to the next one soon). Superb, evocative writing and meaty subjects. Then again, I really liked Saturday, even if it was hard to believe that a thug could be unmanned by a piece of poetry.