Years ago, I tried reading Camus's The Fall and found it pretentious and heavy-handed. I don't think I finished it before I donated it.
I only got through the first 100 pages of Ulysees--slightly surprised I didn't like it more, as I truly enjoyed Tristram Shandy, which has a somewhat similar technique (still own that one, but haven't yet reread it).
I wound up with Sherlock Holmes: The Complete Collection (originally a Christmas gift to my brother, but he left it behind when he moved out). I had already read The Speckled Band (in school) and The Hound of the Baskervilles and just felt "meh" about them, so I had no urge to read further.
As my Ulysees copy and Sherlock Holmes were hardcovers, I slipped them into my Company's Library Lounge (which has a surprisingly impressive collection--lots of art/architecture books, biographies, etc.).
A book I definitely shouldn't have read,aged 11, was The Pan Book of Horror Stories. It came between me and sleep for months, if not years. I avoid the genre to this day.
At age 11 I read a story called The Marble Finger which gave me the horrors in a similar way. I have always assumed it was by Edgar Allan Poe, but googling now reveals that it is based on a something by E. Nesbit whose children's books I loved, so maybe that's how it came my way.
In answer to the OP - I think I found the sequels to 'The little world of Don Camillo' a bit handle-turn-ey, compared to the first which I really liked
What does "handle-turney" mean? Something like contrived or formulaic?
If so, I might agree. I browsed through the first book some time in the mid-2000s, and was amused by the story in which Don Camillo is replaced by another priest, and the Communists, who ostensibly hate Camillo, show up at the church to protest the new priest's alterations to Camillo's routine.
Then I saw there was another story about the Communist chief being replaced, and I thought to myself "Hey, I bet this is just the same story in reverse, the Catholics get mad because the new Communist boss is changing the local party's way of doing things."
I didn't continue reading to see if I was right(I have a short attention-span for fiction), but I'd bet dollars to donuts I was.
I guess I can see how the books would be good as children's literature, if kids aren't put off by the politics.
A book I definitely shouldn't have read,aged 11, was The Pan Book of Horror Stories. It came between me and sleep for months, if not years. I avoid the genre to this day.
The Silmarillion - Of course I enjoyed it, possibly more.I enjoyed the entire 12 book History of Middle Eath as well. The only books I have ever had needing 3 bookmarks.
I have read half of Maquis de Sade "Julliette". All I can say is - don't bother. 50 shades has nothing on it in terms of subject matter, and Brown has nothing on him in terms of paupicy of writing talent.
On my degree foundation module I had to read Dickens’ Hard Times. It was relentlessly depressing and I resorted to reading the Cliff Notes instead. Our summer school revue had a skit of it where the actors stared at the fireplace discussed how awful assignments were.
On descriptive prose versus information, I recently bought Ian Mortimer’s The Dying and the Doctors. History, medicine and death are my favourite subjects; what’s not to like? It turned out the book was actually his research on medical payments in seventeenth century wills, and was very detailed and read like a telephone directory. I loved it. (I often casually read telephone directories as a child…)
A book I definitely shouldn't have read,aged 11, was The Pan Book of Horror Stories. It came between me and sleep for months, if not years. I avoid the genre to this day.
That was circulating in my school too when I was around that age! Definitely nightmarish. I still remember one story about a girl who was abducted and her legs amputated.
Just to clarify, The Pan Book Of Horror Stories was a series, right? That's what wikipedia says, but some of the posts here make it sound like a single, stand-alone book.
On descriptive prose versus information, I recently bought Ian Mortimer’s The Dying and the Doctors. History, medicine and death are my favourite subjects; what’s not to like? It turned out the book was actually his research on medical payments in seventeenth century wills, and was very detailed and read like a telephone directory. I loved it. (I often casually read telephone directories as a child…)
That sounds like exactly the sort of obtuse thing I'd read! Did you ever see my Local Historian article? That might appeal to you - if you are interested PM me and I'll see if it's still free to view.
Just to clarify, The Pan Book Of Horror Stories was a series, right? That's what wikipedia says, but some of the posts here make it sound like a single, stand-alone book.
I dislike Hard Times too, but because it's a caricature of Dickens--the stock melodrama and didacticism are turned up to 11.
ETA: On second thought, the melodrama isn't more excessive per se but definitely more glaring in the context of the novel.
Not quite sure about Hard Times - it's OK, inasmuch as it's far less prolix than most of Dickens' novels (I think it's the shortest), but his attempt to convey Stephen Blackpool's strong accent is rather laboured, to say the least.
I read, "Forever Amber," at 14 or 15. Found it in the family library. It was a historical romance. I remember being turned on by all of the sexiness. I think it might be interesting to read again. I think I will look it up and see how a read at 80 compares.
Fourteen US states banned the book as pornography. The first was Massachusetts, whose attorney general cited 70 references to sexual intercourse, 39 illegitimate pregnancies, 7 abortions, and "10 descriptions of women undressing in front of men" as reasons for banning the novel.
The book was condemned by the Catholic Church for indecency, which helped its popularity. One critic went so far as to number each of the passages to which he objected.
@Doublethink , Oh boy now I can hardly wait to find and reread it. I can hardly remember anything about it. It seems to me it was about some mistress who ends up marrying a member of the royal family.
I was a voracious reader with full access to my parents' library and magazines. I don't recall reading anything 'inappropriate' though it probably went over my head if it was. The magazine Mum read had the world's most boring problem page - anyone remember 'Mary Marryat Advises'? Anything remotely spicy was met with 'I have sent you a pamphlet'.
Being a vicarage kid, all the comics and magazines donated for jumble sales came into our house, which meant I read lots of the Readers Digest - OK, mainly the jokes and the 'human interest' stories, some of which were incredibly patronising looking back (lots of 'isn't she brave' stories about disabled children).
I remember reading 'Lace' when it was on TV as the book was passed around at school. Since then, I've never been able to walk past an aquarium without wincing.
(I can't remember whether the TV adaptation included the part where one of the girls was instructed in the 'arts of love' by being shown an unusual place to put a goldfish.)
To turn serious for a moment, there is a book I really wish I hadn't read, because it caused incredible psychological damage to me. It was 'The Act Of Marriage' by LaHaye and Wheat. I have never burned a book, but I did shred that one. I didn't want anyone else reading it.
Banned books? A group of us as teenagers under the beady but distracted eyes of the convent nuns would take turns reading out the dirty bits of DH Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover (with disgusting sound effects and gestures) interspersed with passages from the prescribed misogyny of Thomas Hardy's Jude the Obscure. "You're Sir Pestle and I'm Lady Mortar! "
To turn serious for a moment, there is a book I really wish I hadn't read, because it caused incredible psychological damage to me. It was 'The Act Of Marriage' by LaHaye and Wheat. I have never burned a book, but I did shred that one. I didn't want anyone else reading it.
Is there a place where you could safely say more about this?
To turn serious for a moment, there is a book I really wish I hadn't read, because it caused incredible psychological damage to me. It was 'The Act Of Marriage' by LaHaye and Wheat. I have never burned a book, but I did shred that one. I didn't want anyone else reading it.
I am sorry it had such an effect on you. I agree - I agree it's a ghastly book and I got rid of our copy too. Also on my shelf is two copies of "Marriage as God Intended" by Selwyn Hughes which our church elders advised Mr Nen and me to work through leading up to getting married ("Read this chapter and then talk about it together and with us" type of thing). I've kept them because of that family history interest, but parts of it horrify me now.
This reminds me that Laura Doyle's The Surrendered Wife is still taught in study groups in evangelical REACH churches here. Unquestioning acceptance of wifely obedience, that wives should submit to sex whenever their husbands wish, and should not demand satisfaction for themselves. They should also forgive indiscretions away from home.
And wasn't there one recommending the wife wear only an apron when opening the door to the husband returning from the office?
Alan Coren wrote a piece in Punch about the suburban husband with the perpetually seductive wife furtively sneaking off to spend time with a dowdy woman who knitted and droned on about the price of carrots while he dozed gratefully in an armchair.
Fourteen US states banned the book as pornography. The first was Massachusetts, whose attorney general cited 70 references to sexual intercourse, 39 illegitimate pregnancies, 7 abortions, and "10 descriptions of women undressing in front of men" as reasons for banning the novel.
The book was condemned by the Catholic Church for indecency, which helped its popularity. One critic went so far as to number each of the passages to which he objected.
By "39 illegitimate pregnancies" and "7 abortions", I assume the synopticist meant 39 mentions of illegitmate pregnancies, and 7 mentions of abortions, not 39 separate illegitimate pregnancies and 7 separate abortions. The latter interpretation would render the book rather repetitive.
Several years after seeing the rather wholesome movie Oh, God! with my parents, I read the book, which for some reason was in our junior-high library.
Let's just say that there is stuff in the book that did NOT make it into the film, and for pretty obvious reasons. At one point, the main character, now widely known as communicant with God, goes to the beach and gets accosted by some random young woman who begs him for sex, using explicity religious metaphors for his anatomy.
At another point, he describes having onanistic fantasies about Jennifer Jones in the movie Song Of Bernadette. I had never heard of either Jones or that movie, and even to this day, the only thing I know about either is from that book.
(And while I have a near dogmatic aversion to literary-cinematic comparisons, overall I'd say the book is the intellectually superior experience. It's more sardonic, more topical, and does a better job of portraying the religious and media milieu the man finds himself in as a result of his revelations.)
Of course, the surest way to induce children to read something is to tell them not to do so.
When I was a freshman, I bought a copy of "Sex and the College Girl" (cheap) and read it. I guess I wanted to know what the opposition was up to. I can't say I ever regretted reading it, though. The author, Gael Greene, later became a food critic, and she said that it was much less interesting to have people approach her and talk about food than to have them talk about sex.
I read, "Forever Amber," at 14 or 15. Found it in the family library. It was a historical romance. I remember being turned on by all of the sexiness. I think it might be interesting to read again. I think I will look it up and see how a read at 80 compares.
I read it when I was 11, to prove I was 'grown-up'. It didn't have a great effect on me because there was so much I didn't understand.
As I said, the author of "Sex and the College Girl" was Gael Greene. It was Helen Gurley Brown who wrote the self-help book "Sex and the Single Girl".
Ah, okay. Just saw that titled mentioned, minus a link, when I re-checked Greene's wikipedia page. Other than that, the internet seems utterly devoid of any evidence as to the book's existence. There is a film by that name, but it appears unconnected to the book.
"Atlas Shrugged" which I read in my teens when I heard that Billie Jean King identified herself with the heroine. Starting it I thought it was some kind of SF/alternative history which kept my interest for a while .. then ...
"Atlas Shrugged" which I read in my teens when I heard that Billie Jean King identified herself with the heroine. Starting it I thought it was some kind of SF/alternative history which kept my interest for a while .. then ...
I read the novella Anthem in junior high, and that along with a few sessions glancing through Ayn Rand's non-fiction at the bookstore gave me what I think is a pretty complete understanding of her philosopy, such as it is.
One of my high-school teachers was an Ayn Rand fan, and used to use her books as bait to get me into arguments about capitalism vs. socialism. He also told me that to really appreciate the alleged beauty of Anthem, you have to be a fan of ballet. Which I am not.
When I was in the fifth form at school I couldn't do PE so had to spend the lesson time in "free study" in the school library. Among the books there were a number on politics. Fascism and the Ethical State is one I remember reading, as was Obsolete Communism - the Left-wing Alternative. But the piece de resistance was a copy of a famous book that had been presented to the school in August 1939 by the German Ambassador: Mein Kampf.
I've also read Anthem--it was like a less-subtle Brave New World minus the satire.
Well, Brave New World is more of a technology-based dystopia, I think. If I recall correctly, in Anthem, they didn't even have the light-bulb, and that's what the protagonists were persecuted for inventing. (A re-working of Prometheus, I'd imagine).
True, but BNW also suppresses innovation as well. Still, if I'm going to lose my individuality and independent thought, it might as well be in an environment of luxury and pleasure.
Comments
I only got through the first 100 pages of Ulysees--slightly surprised I didn't like it more, as I truly enjoyed Tristram Shandy, which has a somewhat similar technique (still own that one, but haven't yet reread it).
I wound up with Sherlock Holmes: The Complete Collection (originally a Christmas gift to my brother, but he left it behind when he moved out). I had already read The Speckled Band (in school) and The Hound of the Baskervilles and just felt "meh" about them, so I had no urge to read further.
As my Ulysees copy and Sherlock Holmes were hardcovers, I slipped them into my Company's Library Lounge (which has a surprisingly impressive collection--lots of art/architecture books, biographies, etc.).
At age 11 I read a story called The Marble Finger which gave me the horrors in a similar way. I have always assumed it was by Edgar Allan Poe, but googling now reveals that it is based on a something by E. Nesbit whose children's books I loved, so maybe that's how it came my way.
What does "handle-turney" mean? Something like contrived or formulaic?
If so, I might agree. I browsed through the first book some time in the mid-2000s, and was amused by the story in which Don Camillo is replaced by another priest, and the Communists, who ostensibly hate Camillo, show up at the church to protest the new priest's alterations to Camillo's routine.
Then I saw there was another story about the Communist chief being replaced, and I thought to myself "Hey, I bet this is just the same story in reverse, the Catholics get mad because the new Communist boss is changing the local party's way of doing things."
I didn't continue reading to see if I was right(I have a short attention-span for fiction), but I'd bet dollars to donuts I was.
I guess I can see how the books would be good as children's literature, if kids aren't put off by the politics.
Being now in the mid-70's, I'd disagree - not enough time for that.
I have read half of Maquis de Sade "Julliette". All I can say is - don't bother. 50 shades has nothing on it in terms of subject matter, and Brown has nothing on him in terms of paupicy of writing talent.
On descriptive prose versus information, I recently bought Ian Mortimer’s The Dying and the Doctors. History, medicine and death are my favourite subjects; what’s not to like? It turned out the book was actually his research on medical payments in seventeenth century wills, and was very detailed and read like a telephone directory. I loved it. (I often casually read telephone directories as a child…)
That was circulating in my school too when I was around that age! Definitely nightmarish. I still remember one story about a girl who was abducted and her legs amputated.
I read it for the same reason and loved it!
That sounds like exactly the sort of obtuse thing I'd read! Did you ever see my Local Historian article? That might appeal to you - if you are interested PM me and I'll see if it's still free to view.
It was a standalone at the time(1965)
24 volumes in all, edited by Herbert van Thal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_van_Thal
ETA: On second thought, the melodrama isn't more excessive per se but definitely more glaring in the context of the novel.
Not quite sure about Hard Times - it's OK, inasmuch as it's far less prolix than most of Dickens' novels (I think it's the shortest), but his attempt to convey Stephen Blackpool's strong accent is rather laboured, to say the least.
Being a vicarage kid, all the comics and magazines donated for jumble sales came into our house, which meant I read lots of the Readers Digest - OK, mainly the jokes and the 'human interest' stories, some of which were incredibly patronising looking back (lots of 'isn't she brave' stories about disabled children).
I remember reading 'Lace' when it was on TV as the book was passed around at school. Since then, I've never been able to walk past an aquarium without wincing.
(I can't remember whether the TV adaptation included the part where one of the girls was instructed in the 'arts of love' by being shown an unusual place to put a goldfish.)
To turn serious for a moment, there is a book I really wish I hadn't read, because it caused incredible psychological damage to me. It was 'The Act Of Marriage' by LaHaye and Wheat. I have never burned a book, but I did shred that one. I didn't want anyone else reading it.
Alan Coren wrote a piece in Punch about the suburban husband with the perpetually seductive wife furtively sneaking off to spend time with a dowdy woman who knitted and droned on about the price of carrots while he dozed gratefully in an armchair.
By "39 illegitimate pregnancies" and "7 abortions", I assume the synopticist meant 39 mentions of illegitmate pregnancies, and 7 mentions of abortions, not 39 separate illegitimate pregnancies and 7 separate abortions. The latter interpretation would render the book rather repetitive.
Let's just say that there is stuff in the book that did NOT make it into the film, and for pretty obvious reasons. At one point, the main character, now widely known as communicant with God, goes to the beach and gets accosted by some random young woman who begs him for sex, using explicity religious metaphors for his anatomy.
At another point, he describes having onanistic fantasies about Jennifer Jones in the movie Song Of Bernadette. I had never heard of either Jones or that movie, and even to this day, the only thing I know about either is from that book.
(And while I have a near dogmatic aversion to literary-cinematic comparisons, overall I'd say the book is the intellectually superior experience. It's more sardonic, more topical, and does a better job of portraying the religious and media milieu the man finds himself in as a result of his revelations.)
When I was a freshman, I bought a copy of "Sex and the College Girl" (cheap) and read it. I guess I wanted to know what the opposition was up to. I can't say I ever regretted reading it, though. The author, Gael Greene, later became a food critic, and she said that it was much less interesting to have people approach her and talk about food than to have them talk about sex.
I read it when I was 11, to prove I was 'grown-up'. It didn't have a great effect on me because there was so much I didn't understand.
I can't find any evidence of a book with that name. I think you mean Sex And The Single Girl by Helen Gurley Brown?
I’ve enjoyed and happily reread The Silmarillion a number of times, but not nearly as many times as LOTR.
And I’m another who finds Dan Brown’s books very stupid and yet highly entertaining.
Totally agree with you both
As do I.
I said I was disappointed with The Silmarillion when it first appeared, but, taking it as a collection of myths, it improves with age and re-reading.
Ah, okay. Just saw that titled mentioned, minus a link, when I re-checked Greene's wikipedia page. Other than that, the internet seems utterly devoid of any evidence as to the book's existence. There is a film by that name, but it appears unconnected to the book.
I read the novella Anthem in junior high, and that along with a few sessions glancing through Ayn Rand's non-fiction at the bookstore gave me what I think is a pretty complete understanding of her philosopy, such as it is.
One of my high-school teachers was an Ayn Rand fan, and used to use her books as bait to get me into arguments about capitalism vs. socialism. He also told me that to really appreciate the alleged beauty of Anthem, you have to be a fan of ballet. Which I am not.
Badly written and like swimming in a cesspool.
That was equally unreadable, though I did try (having a leaning towards Communism at the time).
Well, Brave New World is more of a technology-based dystopia, I think. If I recall correctly, in Anthem, they didn't even have the light-bulb, and that's what the protagonists were persecuted for inventing. (A re-working of Prometheus, I'd imagine).