2226 replies to this topic

[DaveBond21]

I recently finished 2 autobiographies:-


John Motson - the legendary British football commentator

and

Sir Terry Wogan - the Irish broadcaster (BBC)

[RedKelly]

Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck. A quick read with lots of symbolism and leaves you questioning. If you haven't read it you must.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

Age Of Extremes - Eric Hobsbawm

[Vauxhall]

Age Of Extremes - Eric Hobsbawm

Ahh, university history! Compulsory or by choice? Hobsbawm was never very rewarding for me. He mostly came across as a self-righteous know-it-all.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

Age Of Extremes - Eric Hobsbawm

Ahh, university history! Compulsory or by choice? Hobsbawm was never very rewarding for me. He mostly came across as a self-righteous know-it-all.

Indeed

By choice, but the tutors advised that it was a good general read for the course. It's OK I guess, but I agree with you about his very obvious horn tooting!

[The Ghost Who Walks]

The Shining by Stephen King. The word "brilliant" seems like a major understatement.

[elizabeth]

Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck. A quick read with lots of symbolism and leaves you questioning. If you haven't read it you must.

read that my freshman year. great book.

[Tybre]

I tried reading At the Mountains of Madness today. Tried being the operative word. My primary reaction is thus:

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

I was told it's a good place to start reading H.P. Lovecraft, something I've been wanting to do for a while, mainly because it kind of helps set up the whole Cthulu mythos before you move on to stories like The Call of Cthulu. But my God it's dull. I'm willing to bet if I can get far enough in it'll be good, but Lovecraft's prose is...dry. I don't know how many pages I made it as it was an online transcription which failed to mark page numbers (which is generally I prefer etext.virginia when reading online, but I was given a link to this numberless site, which contains all of Lovecraft's works, and thus I shall continue to use it) but I was still in the first chapter, probably no more than two, three pages in. I know there are a few Lovecraft fans around here, so permit me two things:

1. Please tell me all of Lovecraft isn't this boring
2. Is my friend right and Madness is a good place to start reading Lovecraft? Or is he more right in a "if you intend to read Cthulu" sort of way? Or what? Because what I read is snoresville and then some.

[Kilroy6644]

1. Please tell me all of Lovecraft isn't this boring
2. Is my friend right and Madness is a good place to start reading Lovecraft? Or is he more right in a "if you intend to read Cthulu" sort of way? Or what? Because what I read is snoresville and then some.

1. I never found him boring myself, but his other work is similar in style, so if you find this boring, chances are....

2. It's as good a place as any to start. But you don't gain much. You could've started with Cthulhu. The whole idea of the "Cthulhu Mythos" is way overblown.

Reading The Phantom of the Opera, by Gaston Leroux.

[Tybre]

1. Please tell me all of Lovecraft isn't this boring
2. Is my friend right and Madness is a good place to start reading Lovecraft? Or is he more right in a "if you intend to read Cthulu" sort of way? Or what? Because what I read is snoresville and then some.

1. I never found him boring myself, but his other work is similar in style, so if you find this boring, chances are....

2. It's as good a place as any to start. But you don't gain much. You could've started with Cthulhu. The whole idea of the "Cthulhu Mythos" is way overblown.

1. A part could also be I was reading in the hot, stuffy school library (which in hindsight makes me question why I used the site I had in a text and didn't see if the library has a hard copy; considering they have six copies of Mein Kampf in the original German I'd say it's fair to assume they have Lovecraft) functioning on little sleep, but a part of it was definitely that his opening did nothing for me. I don't expect a story to hook me from the beginning - a lot of my favorite books start out very slow indeed - but I dunno, the beginning of Madness just did nothing for me. Going to pull it back up later tonight and pick up where I left off. See if I can't read all the way through the end.
2. Right then. Well since I've already started the story, going to finish it before I move on to anything else, but I take it then that it really doesn't much matter if I read the rest of his stuff in order?

[Kilroy6644]

1. A part could also be I was reading in the hot, stuffy school library (which in hindsight makes me question why I used the site I had in a text and didn't see if the library has a hard copy; considering they have six copies of Mein Kampf in the original German I'd say it's fair to assume they have Lovecraft) functioning on little sleep, but a part of it was definitely that his opening did nothing for me. I don't expect a story to hook me from the beginning - a lot of my favorite books start out very slow indeed - but I dunno, the beginning of Madness just did nothing for me. Going to pull it back up later tonight and pick up where I left off. See if I can't read all the way through the end.
2. Right then. Well since I've already started the story, going to finish it before I move on to anything else, but I take it then that it really doesn't much matter if I read the rest of his stuff in order?

I would definitely look for a hard copy, but that's just my personal preference. I can't stand reading things on a screen.

Nope, it doesn't matter what order you read him in. His stories are all pretty much independent of each other. The "mythos" Lovecraft helped create was just a very loose collection of ideas that could be used to provide a bit of background to his stories. Most of the more elaborate features were established by other writers after he died.

[Tybre]

I would definitely look for a hard copy, but that's just my personal preference. I can't stand reading things on a screen.

I generally go for hard copies as well, but things such as this, I generally read something online first, and then go out and pick up hard copies. Not everything, mind. But authors I'm more tentative of. And never having read Lovecraft before now my knowledge of him consisted of the terms "Cthulu" "science fiction" "horror" and "weird fiction". Scifi I was all on board for, but I've never been the biggest fan of horror. Frighten very easily, I admit. But this at least isn't really that horror-y. Don't know about his other works. Perhaps it's a mis-label. But, y'know, I'm not going to rush out and buy a book by an author whose work has been described as horror when I frighten easily and I've never read the bloke before. Already got far too many untouched and unfinished books in my collection, which I am proud to say now stands at around 360, about to gain at least 9 more, as I'm finally going to go out and pick up hard copies of the Holmes stories (mother got rid of them back in third grade, before I started keeping all of my books) and quite possibly more as I'll very likely pick up more Agatha Christie and whatever else tickles my fancy. Always have loved a good mystery. Nothing quite beats the processes the brain staggers through as it pieces every possible option together and weeds through them, and the sheer joy when one is correct or the odd giddiness when one is wrong. And speaking of my collection with unfinished things, I really need to get on top of that. Step one: The been meaning to start but can never make it past the first chapter since ninth grade, Eldest. But first: to finish At the Mountains of Madness. And my god I really digressed here. Ah, rambling. I do so love it when I do that.

[Roebuck]

I tried reading At the Mountains of Madness today. Tried being the operative word. My primary reaction is thus:

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

I very much concur. I’ve got a friend who’s a big Lovecraft fan and keeps urging me to give it one more try, but I’ve never been bothered to finish Mountains of Madness. Instead I got the very good audio adaptation from the H.P Lovecraft Historical Society.

http://www.cthulhuli...a...uct&2=33163

You could try 'The Dunwich Horror' as that’s written in a less ponderous style. It’s also more of a straight horror than AtMM.

[danslittlefinger]

Having seen Flash Forward on satellite, (people falling asleep at an assigned time) it prompted me to reread the 1957 sci-fi novel - "The Midwich Cuckoos" by John Wyndham.

It was made into "The Village of the Damned" in 1960 w/George Sanders (yes The original Saint himself).

Much more chilling than the film or anything that has followed.
If you have a chance, take a read of it.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

The Shining, by Stephen King. The word "brilliant" is a major understatement. Easily the man's best work that I have read so far. Afterwards, I'll dig up my copy of The Stand and finally start reading that one.

[Tybre]

The Shining, by Stephen King. The word "brilliant" is a major understatement. Easily the man's best work that I have read so far. Afterwards, I'll dig up my copy of The Stand and finally start reading that one.

If it's the "The Complete & Uncut" edition, good luck. I tried. I really tried.

[Kilroy6644]

Just starting James Michener's The Covenant. And by "just starting," I mean I haven't actually opened it yet.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

The Shining, by Stephen King. The word "brilliant" is a major understatement. Easily the man's best work that I have read so far. Afterwards, I'll dig up my copy of The Stand and finally start reading that one.

If it's the "The Complete & Uncut" edition, good luck. I tried. I really tried.

It is, actually, and I expect it to be bloated. However, it was somehow far cheaper to buy than the "short" edition.

I think King is a great writer, one of my favourites (though he has written some complete bull[censored] in his time), but there are times he doesn't know when to end his novels.

[DAN LIGHTER]

The Shining, by Stephen King. The word "brilliant" is a major understatement. Easily the man's best work that I have read so far. Afterwards, I'll dig up my copy of The Stand and finally start reading that one.

If it's the "The Complete & Uncut" edition, good luck. I tried. I really tried.

It is, actually, and I expect it to be bloated. However, it was somehow far cheaper to buy than the "short" edition.

I think King is a great writer, one of my favourites (though he has written some complete bull[censored] in his time), but there are times he doesn't know when to end his novels.

Now that is scary! I two have just started reading The Shining on Monday!

It's brilliant so far, and my first King book. It seems quite a differnet beast compared to the film. Fills in all the gaps. How do I know if its the short or long one? It has an introduction in it by Stephen King in 2001.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

Actually, the long, "Director's Cut" edition was for The Stand, not The Shining.

I have the one with an intro by King too (paperback edition), where he hints that The Shining is one of his proudest achievements. I can understand he was dissapointed with the Kubrick movie. That one is easily among my ten favourite movies, but it leaves out a lot of great stuff from the book.

I know King produced and possibly scripted a TV-mini based on the book, anybody seen this one? I'd be interested in picking up a DVD copy if I can find one.

[Tybre]

I started Murder on the Links today. Got through the first eight chapters. As usual, positively delightful. Always preferred Poirot to Marple and the incidental detectives (although I must admit The Man in the Brown Suit is one of my favorites by Christie) and Hastings is tied with Ms Oliver for my favorite of his partners, so for me, this is a bit of a treat indeed. After this, it's on to The A.B.C. Murders and then I'll be off to Borders at some point to buy more manga and Agatha Christie, I'm sure.

@Ghost
I saw the mini-series when scifi channel ran it a few years back. twas okay. Kubrick's film is fairly big a deviation but much better, imo.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

I'll give it a try then when I finish the book. I don't envy the fella who has to play Jack Torrance after Nicholson did it so brilliantly.

[Trident]

Actually, the long, "Director's Cut" edition was for The Stand, not The Shining.

I have the one with an intro by King too (paperback edition), where he hints that The Shining is one of his proudest achievements. I can understand he was dissapointed with the Kubrick movie. That one is easily among my ten favourite movies, but it leaves out a lot of great stuff from the book.

I know King produced and possibly scripted a TV-mini based on the book, anybody seen this one? I'd be interested in picking up a DVD copy if I can find one.

IIRC King was particularly put off by the casting of Nicholson, his point being that the plot mainly depended upon readers not being aware of his protagonist gradually losing his marbles. King argued, Nicholson, famous for his role in 'One Flew Over The Coockoo's Nest', would be immediately spotted as the mad hatter of the piece, giving away most of the surprise that comes three quarters into the novel without any real reason right at the start of the film.

Spoiler

I have to say, while I liked the film tremendously, King certainly has a point there. The book keeps the protagonist for most of the plot in a kind of semi-crazy state, with readers not sure about the outcome until the last but one chapter. The film leaves little doubt from the beginning that Nicholson is beyond salvage.

[General G.]

The collected works of H.P. Lovecraft.

Yes, he was a weirdo (and a racist), but his horror/sci-fi tales are some of the creepiest ever written in the English language.

Yog-Sothoth!

Edited by General G., 11 November 2009 - 02:35 PM.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

Actually, the long, "Director's Cut" edition was for The Stand, not The Shining.

I have the one with an intro by King too (paperback edition), where he hints that The Shining is one of his proudest achievements. I can understand he was dissapointed with the Kubrick movie. That one is easily among my ten favourite movies, but it leaves out a lot of great stuff from the book.

I know King produced and possibly scripted a TV-mini based on the book, anybody seen this one? I'd be interested in picking up a DVD copy if I can find one.

IIRC King was particularly put off by the casting of Nicholson, his point being that the plot mainly depended upon readers not being aware of his protagonist gradually losing his marbles. King argued, Nicholson, famous for his role in 'One Flew Over The Coockoo's Nest', would be immediately spotted as the mad hatter of the piece, giving away most of the surprise that comes three quarters into the novel without any real reason right at the start of the film.

Spoiler

I have to say, while I liked the film tremendously, King certainly has a point there. The book keeps the protagonist for most of the plot in a kind of semi-crazy state, with readers not sure about the outcome until the last but one chapter. The film leaves little doubt from the beginning that Nicholson is beyond salvage.

I understand his point, but Jack in the movie seems to be a man who has quietly gone insane for a long time, throughout years and years of alcohol problems, a wife he seems to partly despise, and jobs that are beneath him. King had all the time in the world to spend inside Jack's head, but a movie just can't do that in such a detailed way.

I do think Nicholson's Torrance is one of the finest performances I've ever seen.

[DaveBond21]

I've just finished Ramsay Campbell's Ancient Images.

I've been a fan of his for about 15 years now, but had never been able to pick this one up until now.

Here's a synopsis:-

A colleague's violent death and its apparent cause--a stolen copy of an old, never-released Karloff/Lugosi 1930's horror film--set film editor Sandy Allan on the trail of the film's origins and history. Mystery surrounds the movie, and as Sandy learns of the tragedies which haunted its production, she finds herself threatened by an ancient force protecting secrets deeper than the suppression of a 50-year-old movie.

[Trident]

Actually, the long, "Director's Cut" edition was for The Stand, not The Shining.

I have the one with an intro by King too (paperback edition), where he hints that The Shining is one of his proudest achievements. I can understand he was dissapointed with the Kubrick movie. That one is easily among my ten favourite movies, but it leaves out a lot of great stuff from the book.

I know King produced and possibly scripted a TV-mini based on the book, anybody seen this one? I'd be interested in picking up a DVD copy if I can find one.

IIRC King was particularly put off by the casting of Nicholson, his point being that the plot mainly depended upon readers not being aware of his protagonist gradually losing his marbles. King argued, Nicholson, famous for his role in 'One Flew Over The Coockoo's Nest', would be immediately spotted as the mad hatter of the piece, giving away most of the surprise that comes three quarters into the novel without any real reason right at the start of the film.

Spoiler

I have to say, while I liked the film tremendously, King certainly has a point there. The book keeps the protagonist for most of the plot in a kind of semi-crazy state, with readers not sure about the outcome until the last but one chapter. The film leaves little doubt from the beginning that Nicholson is beyond salvage.

I understand his point, but Jack in the movie seems to be a man who has quietly gone insane for a long time, throughout years and years of alcohol problems, a wife he seems to partly despise, and jobs that are beneath him. King had all the time in the world to spend inside Jack's head, but a movie just can't do that in such a detailed way.

I do think Nicholson's Torrance is one of the finest performances I've ever seen.

Nicholson is truly brilliant in this one. But King's intention obviously was to keep Torrance's mental state uncertain for the reader until SHINING's key scene, the moment when Torrance's wife finds out what he writes for hours on end on his typewriter.

That is a surprise that is entirely lost with Nicholson (and of course also with the film's poster, showing Nicholson's maddest grin through the axed gap in the shattered door).

The irony is, King hints in 'On Writing' that he had quite a similar revelatory experience when he was confronted with his own alcohol problem. Maybe he subconsciosly wanted to keep this side of his protagonist as long as possible in the dark as he shared the same problem with Torrance?

Ah, endless room for speculation with King...

[DAN LIGHTER]

Actually, the long, "Director's Cut" edition was for The Stand, not The Shining.

I have the one with an intro by King too (paperback edition), where he hints that The Shining is one of his proudest achievements. I can understand he was dissapointed with the Kubrick movie. That one is easily among my ten favourite movies, but it leaves out a lot of great stuff from the book.

I know King produced and possibly scripted a TV-mini based on the book, anybody seen this one? I'd be interested in picking up a DVD copy if I can find one.

IIRC King was particularly put off by the casting of Nicholson, his point being that the plot mainly depended upon readers not being aware of his protagonist gradually losing his marbles. King argued, Nicholson, famous for his role in 'One Flew Over The Coockoo's Nest', would be immediately spotted as the mad hatter of the piece, giving away most of the surprise that comes three quarters into the novel without any real reason right at the start of the film.

Spoiler

I have to say, while I liked the film tremendously, King certainly has a point there. The book keeps the protagonist for most of the plot in a kind of semi-crazy state, with readers not sure about the outcome until the last but one chapter. The film leaves little doubt from the beginning that Nicholson is beyond salvage.

I understand his point, but Jack in the movie seems to be a man who has quietly gone insane for a long time, throughout years and years of alcohol problems, a wife he seems to partly despise, and jobs that are beneath him. King had all the time in the world to spend inside Jack's head, but a movie just can't do that in such a detailed way.

I do think Nicholson's Torrance is one of the finest performances I've ever seen.

Nicholson is truly brilliant in this one. But King's intention obviously was to keep Torrance's mental state uncertain for the reader until SHINING's key scene, the moment when Torrance's wife finds out what he writes for hours on end on his typewriter.

That is a surprise that is entirely lost with Nicholson (and of course also with the film's poster, showing Nicholson's maddest grin through the axed gap in the shattered door).

The irony is, King hints in 'On Writing' that he had quite a similar revelatory experience when he was confronted with his own alcohol problem. Maybe he subconsciosly wanted to keep this side of his protagonist as long as possible in the dark as he shared the same problem with Torrance?

Ah, endless room for speculation with King...

Your posts have made intresting reading chaps, thank you. I am just at the chapter when Jack goes into room 217!

[The Ghost Who Walks]

Actually, the long, "Director's Cut" edition was for The Stand, not The Shining.

I have the one with an intro by King too (paperback edition), where he hints that The Shining is one of his proudest achievements. I can understand he was dissapointed with the Kubrick movie. That one is easily among my ten favourite movies, but it leaves out a lot of great stuff from the book.

I know King produced and possibly scripted a TV-mini based on the book, anybody seen this one? I'd be interested in picking up a DVD copy if I can find one.

IIRC King was particularly put off by the casting of Nicholson, his point being that the plot mainly depended upon readers not being aware of his protagonist gradually losing his marbles. King argued, Nicholson, famous for his role in 'One Flew Over The Coockoo's Nest', would be immediately spotted as the mad hatter of the piece, giving away most of the surprise that comes three quarters into the novel without any real reason right at the start of the film.

Spoiler

I have to say, while I liked the film tremendously, King certainly has a point there. The book keeps the protagonist for most of the plot in a kind of semi-crazy state, with readers not sure about the outcome until the last but one chapter. The film leaves little doubt from the beginning that Nicholson is beyond salvage.

I understand his point, but Jack in the movie seems to be a man who has quietly gone insane for a long time, throughout years and years of alcohol problems, a wife he seems to partly despise, and jobs that are beneath him. King had all the time in the world to spend inside Jack's head, but a movie just can't do that in such a detailed way.

I do think Nicholson's Torrance is one of the finest performances I've ever seen.

Nicholson is truly brilliant in this one. But King's intention obviously was to keep Torrance's mental state uncertain for the reader until SHINING's key scene, the moment when Torrance's wife finds out what he writes for hours on end on his typewriter.

That is a surprise that is entirely lost with Nicholson (and of course also with the film's poster, showing Nicholson's maddest grin through the axed gap in the shattered door).

The irony is, King hints in 'On Writing' that he had quite a similar revelatory experience when he was confronted with his own alcohol problem. Maybe he subconsciosly wanted to keep this side of his protagonist as long as possible in the dark as he shared the same problem with Torrance?

Ah, endless room for speculation with King...

I believe I read somewhere that King said, even though he had not been aware of it at the time of writing the book, Jack Torrance really was something of a reflection of himself. I don't think ol' Steve have chased Tabitha King and Joe Hill down a hotel corridor while waving an axe over his head, though.

Even though I knew Jack would go mad throughout the course of The Shining, I remember the kick I got when I saw what his "play" consisted of. Such a great moment!


And I can't blame the studio for using the iconic photo of Jack's wild grin on posters and DVD-covers. It's such an amazing picture that it is even worthy of having been the background image on my cell phone for the last five years or so.

Your posts have made intresting reading chaps, thank you. I am just at the chapter when Jack goes into room 217!

Ah, that's a really chilling part.

[Trident]

Even though I knew Jack would go mad throughout the course of The Shining, I remember the kick I got when I saw what his "play" consisted of. Such a great moment!


And I can't blame the studio for using the iconic photo of Jack's wild grin on posters and DVD-covers. It's such an amazing picture that it is even worthy of having been the background image on my cell phone for the last five years or so.

Ah, I already suspected you were a fan...