What Are You Reading, Again?

[CartesianFart]

I have a list of thirty-nine articles to read just for one module. And I have to finish my dissertation and do the reading from the other module too, and there are several non-compulsary ones I'd like to read too. o_O
Example: A regulatory role for cAMP in phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/p70 ribosomal S6 kinase-mediated DNA synthesis in platelet-derived-growth-factor-stimulated bovine airway smooth-muscle cells. Scott et al Biochem. J. (1996) 318, p965-971

I bet u intimidate alot dudes with that,unless u only date nerds

 

[The Fjonis]

En trønder!

Anna Karenina. Read it ages ago. I don't remember much though...

Bergenser som studerer i Trondheim. Viktig forskjell!

But it is still a book written a long time ago. Writing became more dynamic since them, and the pace of the book is a bit too slow, Should you compare him with modern authors such as Garcia Marques, or Saramago, for example.

It's in that sense that I found it hard to keep reading - things take forever to happen. The Showdown between Lúdin and Raskolnichov, the side tale about the former employer of his sister, his love story with the prostitute, all these were lined out a little before the middle of the book, and all explode virtually at the same time, very close to the ending. This means half a book of waiting things to happen, what was a bit boring, even if very well written.

True. There's a lot of stuff going on that doesn't really matter for the main storyline, so if you removed that, the "condensed version" would be quite short and fast paced. However, I feel that nothing is redundant -- Dostojevski definitely had a lot on his mind which he wanted to include in the book. It can be argued that the stories aren't seamlessly integrated into each other (if I'm not mistaken, Dostojevski had to submit one new chapter every week or something for a newspaper), but that IMO doesn't reduce the greatness of the book.

If you want fast paced, easy-to-read books, go elsewhere. But that wasn't Dostojevski's intention, either - his emphasis was on the content, I'd argue.

I reckon I'll pick up a copy of Anna Karenina at my local library soon, then. Looking forward to it!

 

[FredLC]

Ah, I can appreciate well written slow-paced books (try Moby Dick for one).

But I have read C&P in right after my reading of "Gunslinger" and before "Drawing of the Three", from Stephen King Dark Tower series. Perhaps that emphasized the pace much more than it should...

Regards .

 

[thetrooper]

Bergenser som studerer i Trondheim. Viktig forskjell!

Certainly! How rude of me.

I reckon I'll pick up a copy of Anna Karenina at my local library soon, then. Looking forward to it!

I may pick it up again myself.

 

[Fifty]

Ok, lemme clear something here: C&P is a very good book, with a helluva history, great caracthers and a very strong and artistic writing. I liked the book very much, and I once even considered opening a thread here about Raskolnichov's "theory of great men", found in the book.

But it is still a book written a long time ago. Writing became more dynamic since them, and the pace of the book is a bit too slow, Should you compare him with modern authors such as Garcia Marques, or Saramago, for example.

You know I generally share the exact same sentiments with regard to the great literature of old, especially british literature, but for some wierd reason I have found Dostoevsky to be just as "page-turning" as any newer novel I've read.

Question for those who know more about this stuff then I:

Which came first, Dostoevsky's "extraordinary man" as exemplified in C & P, or Nietszche's Uebermensch?

 

[FredLC]

I doubt Dostoevsky did really believe that. The main caracther, after all, is a highly moral and intelligent man which falls victim of his own prejudices, and discovers in the end that he can't handle his own requirements for a great man - what he had spent quite a few time considering himself to be.

Sounds like a deconstruction of the thesis.

Anyway, I don't really recall which book was published first, but I know that the idea of extraordinary men is much older than Dostoevsky's writing - and that it does not compare with the innovative thoughts of Nietzsche. Because the "Extraordinary men" doctrine was stactic - either you are born one or you aren't - and personal, as in a few given human beings that are above the rest. Nietzsche was more conceptual and vague - the übbermensch was a humane goal, not a distinct individual, and anyone (and preferably all) could become one, as long as he/she could free from conventions and emancipate.

Regards .

 

[FredLC]

Oh, and of course, as far as I know, Nietzsche never suggested that his übbermensch would be above the law, what is very elementary in the theory Dostoevsky used in his book.

 

[Martacus]

Well, I saw a copy of Bambi on our bookshelves, and decided to give it a read.

And to think that some people complain about how the Disney movie gives small children nightmares. Obviously they are unfamiliar with the source material.

 

[cgannon64]

I just finished Ulysses, and I'm going to finally read my copy of Fear and Trembling by Kierkegaard if I can find it.

If not, I'm thinking of looking into The Imitation of Christ.

(Also, for school, I'm reading The Scarlet Letter.)

 

[MjM]

Gone With The Wind

I hear its pretty good...

 

[Martacus]

Gone With The Wind

I hear its pretty good...

Yeah, it's pretty good if you're into southern self-pity over the Civil War.

 

[Babbler]

Recent Acquisitions:

Seeing in the Dark : How Backyard Stargazers Are Probing Deep Space and Guarding Earth from Interplanetary Peril by Timothy Ferris
Entanglement by Amir Aczel
Lonely Planets : The Natural Philosophy of Alien Life by David Grinspoon
Mendeleyev's Dream : The Quest For the Elements by Paul Strathern

It going to be a busy Christmas break...

 

[thetrooper]

The Beach by Alex Garland.

 

[Che Guava]

not related to that horrible Leonardo Di Caprio movie, I hope....!

 

[thetrooper]

The novel came first, then the movie...

 

[Che Guava]

Then it's ok

I hadn't actually seen the movie, just heard the bad reviews

 

[thetrooper]

Who gives a flying duck about the movie?

IMO, the novel isn't great art... just killing some time.





And I actually watched the movie too.

 

[FredLC]

I just finished Ulysses (...)

Hmmm... James Joyce, isn't it?

Never read a single sentence from him. Is he good? What is Ulysses about?

(trivia: The name "Ulysses" (Ulisses in portuguese) comes from Odysseus, Homer's caracther in the classic poem "The Odissey"; hence, every time I read about this book, I think of spears being thrown at Troy and Storms in the sea route to Ithaca. Does Joyce's book have anything to do with Homer's tale? I honestly don't know.)

Regards .

 

[Rambuchan]

I just finished Ulysses,

Isn't this the one that he wrote in a 'new language' all of his own? I read "Portrait of an Artist" back in high school and enjoyed it but never got through Ulysses. How did you find the language? (If that's the one I'm thinking of and not some other)

 

[jonatas]

Isn't this the one that he wrote in a 'new language' all of his own? I read "Portrait of an Artist" back in high school and enjoyed it but never got through Ulysses. How did you find the language? (If that's the one I'm thinking of and not some other)

You're thinking of Finnegan's wake, which is like something written in a dream state, with puns and multilayered meanings in multiple languages. Absolutely brilliant, unreadable and insane