-
Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .
What Are You Reading, Again?
- Thread starter cgannon64
- Start date
- Status
tomsnowman123
Simple Liver
puglover said:
Nightwatch was pretty good. Not a masterpiece, but enjoyable.
Quinzy said:
I found Le Guin to be overrated.
personally i like le guin, but she seemed to have little sense of timescale. the first book covered most of the main charaters life, and the second one covered only a few years..
still, not too bad. i liked the idea behind the way magic was handeled.
still, not too bad. i liked the idea behind the way magic was handeled.
Screwtape is really good. In my opinion it is a useful read for anyone Christian or not. But have you really read everything by Lewis? If so I would think Screwtape would be one of the first you read.
Eran of Arcadia said:
I haven't read everything, but I've read a lot of his work. When I was younger I read the Narnia series three times over. I then graduated to the Space Trilogy and greatly enjoyed them. I read the Great Divorce and Mere Christianity next, both of which I found very enlightening. Lastly, I read Screwtape.
Would you know of any other particularly good works of C.S. Lewis I could read? I tried Problem of Pain but found it a difficult read, and already understood his conclusion before reading.
Till We Have Faces is a fictional illustration of The Four Loves - an interesting retelling of the Cupid and Psyche myth.
jalapeno_dude
AKA Panda Judo Eel
I also recommend Nightwatch.puglover said:
And if you're into big epics, I recommend George R.R. Martin. He's by far the most original and interesting of the "popular" fantasy authors.
tomsnowman123
Simple Liver
Atlas14 said:
That's excellent reading. Thoreau is one of my all-time favorite authors. In fact, he may be.
Aye, he's one of my favorite as well. The parts of Walden I read were interesting as well. Essentially everyone in my college English class hated the essay, but I simply loved it. His style and clarity was great, and his message was even better. I guess they aren't as interested in political theory as I am.
puglover said:
Did you ever get around to reading Raymond Feist? He's pretty good. The Chaos Wars by L.E. Modesitt, Jr. was okay, until I figured out that I was reading the same book over and over again. But it wasn't bad at first. Robin Hobb has an interesting series, that starts out with Assassin's Apprentice. She has nine volumes in all, three seperate trilogies.
jalapeno_dude
AKA Panda Judo Eel
At first, I liked Raymond E. Feist. His plots are certainly decent. But his writing isn't the greatest. Example: EVERY CHAPTER IN EVERY ONE OF HIS BOOKS STARTS WITH THE SAME SENTENCE, essentially.Turner said:
The [noun] [verb]ed.
It drove me insane.
amadeus
burning out his fuse out here alone
I'm now reading In North Korea by Nanchu and Xing Hang.
I'm thinking about posting a thread about some of the stuff that's in there; it's worse than you could ever imagine.
I'm thinking about posting a thread about some of the stuff that's in there; it's worse than you could ever imagine.
tomsnowman123
Simple Liver
Atlas14 said:
That was basically the view of my Honors English 10 class I was in. They just wanted to get him over with (there were a few people that did enjoy him though).
I'm reading A Feast for Crows by George R R Martin.
puglover, what kind of fantasy do you want?
Lots of intrigue and backstabbings in a medievalish setting, with the sense of impending doom, due to human fallibility, and not seeing the real threat? Try George R R Martin.
The sense of a vast and complicated history, spanning over continents and ages? Try Steven Erikson.
Some cool noir-like (private dicks and that stuff) human assassin living in a elven society, and associating with gods, sorcerers and magicians? Try Steven Brust.
High fantasy with dwarfs, elves and the usual D&D cast? Try Raymond E Feist. (That's not a diss of him, btw, I like him, it's just that he's not exactly pushing the boundaries of the genre.)
puglover, what kind of fantasy do you want?
Lots of intrigue and backstabbings in a medievalish setting, with the sense of impending doom, due to human fallibility, and not seeing the real threat? Try George R R Martin.
The sense of a vast and complicated history, spanning over continents and ages? Try Steven Erikson.
Some cool noir-like (private dicks and that stuff) human assassin living in a elven society, and associating with gods, sorcerers and magicians? Try Steven Brust.
High fantasy with dwarfs, elves and the usual D&D cast? Try Raymond E Feist. (That's not a diss of him, btw, I like him, it's just that he's not exactly pushing the boundaries of the genre.)
jalapeno_dude said:At first, I liked Raymond E. Feist. His plots are certainly decent. But his writing isn't the greatest. Example: EVERY CHAPTER IN EVERY ONE OF HIS BOOKS STARTS WITH THE SAME SENTENCE, essentially.
The [noun] [verb]ed.
It drove me insane.
Well, if that's all that bothered you...
And believe it or not, not every chapter starts out that way. There was a couple of chapters recently that didn't. Can't recall which ones, but it was enough to make me wonder why he didn't use his trademark opening sentence.
Turner said:Great book!A favorite of mine. The movie, I feel, didn't do it justice. But it was pretty good. And I know that CS had a large hand in it, and it went with his approval. So that's good enough for me.
Yeah, but thought Sagan, every now and then, would get too technical needlessly, specially in the beggining (when stablishing Ellie's caracther) just to show what he got. Anyway, some movie decisions were good - a "one person" machine can, maybe, not make much sense aftera movie when the reasoned manner though which contact happened was the theme of the entire movie, but it certainly reinforces the development of people not believing in the trip. Also, uniting in the caracther of Father Joss the agent which had an affair with Ellie is wise on-screen decision (even though a bit forced), for it leaves more time for the text development. Overall, I think that the movie turned out as good as it could possibly be for such a limited midia to communicate the complex debate Sagan proposed.
Which does not mean that the movie is as good as the book, just that it was pretty good anyway, and I feel no one could realistically expect it to be any better.
Regards
.- Status
