Official Book Thread

[Creepy-bg]

im about halfway to 3/4 through the 3rd book of Dune now.

[Emmym]

Right now I'm reading House on the Strand by Daphne du Maurier and I'm really struck by how similar her style is to mine in a way I've never seen, lol. Not sure if that's good or bad.

[ashlesha]

Just finished 'keep the aspidistra flying' by George Orwell. I liked it and was debating between 3 and 4 stars on goodreads but went with 3 because it felt like beating a dead horse sometimes and the ending was a little too easy and neat (i could see that being part of the satire though). It's about a guy who wages war against the 'money god' by quitting his good job and refusing to be successful and then is completely miserable and blames lack of money for all of his problems. I may have sympathized with him more than i was intended to, I'm not sure, even though i thought his choices were clearly foolish...he would blame money for things like being obnoxious with his friends or having writers block and id think 'i can see that' (when perhaps i was supposed to think it was stupid). But this was my favorite excerpt from the book:

"He wondered about the people in houses like those. They would be, for example, small clerks, shop-assistants, commercial travellers, insurance touts, tram conductors. Did they know that they were only puppets dancing when money pulled the strings? You bet they didn’t. And if they did, what would they care? They were too busy being born, being married, begetting, working, dying. It mightn’t be a bad thing, if you could manage it, to feel yourself one of them, one of the ruck of men. Our civilization is founded on greed and fear, but in the lives of common men the greed and fear are mysteriously transmuted into something nobler. The lower-middle-class people in there, behind their lace curtains, with their children and their scraps of furniture and their aspidistras — they lived by the money-code, sure enough, and yet they contrived to keep their decency. The money-code as they interpreted it was not merely cynical and hoggish. They had their standards, their inviolable points of honour. They ‘kept themselves respectable’— kept the aspidistra flying. Besides, they were alive. They were bound up in the bundle of life. They begot children, which is what the saints and the soul-savers never by any chance do.

The aspidistra is the tree of life, he thought suddenly."

http://www.amazon.com/Keep-Aspidistr.../dp/150289159X

[Mega]

Presently reading "The Cuckoo's Calling" by Robert Galbraith (J. K. Rowling alias). It's good. The main character seems LIE/SLE, he makes me think of Adam a lot. Overall I'd say the characters are Ni/Se and maybe more Gamma as, IMO, the main character has strong Te, low Fi, more in an Te lead way. I could be wrong.
What type is J. K. Rowling? I think I had seen ESI some places on this forum. Anyway, overall, do you think writers often create characters of their quadra or characters they could fancy IRL? I think so.

[Moonbeaux Rainfox]

Finished ‚The Art of Loving‘ by Erich Fromm. I think what draw me to it, was the question of your capability to love. I think, I felt a resonance with loving as something active, as a expression of will, a decision. I mean ... I sometimes wondered. I never really felt open when it came to ... you know ... love as feeling, this whole goey goey whatever. I think deep down, I guess, I never understood. But I understand to decide. When I read it, the parts about producing, about giving, about making this your decision and owning your decision, I think maybe .. yeah I felt more a connection to it. I mean, I can never help with these books/these kind of things. Is it juts some nice ideal, that nobody can ever reach, all just nice theory and talk?

I think that was, why I just can’t connect with ... some of the fuzzy-fuzzy talking. Idk, these kind of things, when I just think people are just rambling or whatever. It’s always this feeling of getting irritated. I mean I just don't like it when I get the feeling it's too romanticized. It doesn' feel real/realistic to me. I can understand the content, but it leaves me cold. I feel no connection to it. I feel, I can understand somebody who shows things through his actions, through his decisions, because that’s the testing stone and all the talk in the world means nothing, if yeah... there is nothing really giving, producing. It's difficult to put into words for me. It's more like you just feel it when sth. strikes a chord with you. I think some parts did and and they were interesting for me therefore:

I shall become a master in this art only after a great deal of practice, until eventually the results of my theoretical knowledge and the results of my practice are blended into one—my intuition, the essence of the mastery of any art. But, aside from learning the theory and practice, there is a third factor necessary to becoming a master in any art—the mastery of the art must be a matter of ultimate concern; there must be nothing else in the world more important than the art.

In all types of creative work the worker and his object become one, man unites himself with the world in the process of creation. This, however, holds true only for productive work, for work in which I plan, produce, see the result of my work

The most important sphere of giving, however, is not that of material things, but lies in the specifically human realm. What does one person give to another? He gives of himself, of the most precious he has, he gives of his life. This does not necessarily mean that he sacrifices his life for the other—but that he gives him of that which is alive in him; he gives him of his joy, of his interest, of his understanding, of his knowledge, of his humor, of his sadness—of all expressions and manifestations of that which is alive in him. In thus giving of his life, he enriches the other person, he enhances the others sense of aliveness by enhancing his own sense of aliveness. He does not give in order to receive; giving is in itself exquisite joy. But in giving he cannot help bringing some thing to life in the other person, and this which is brought to life reflects back to him; in truly giving, he cannot help receiving that which is given back to him. Giving implies to make the other person a giver also and they both share in the joy of what they have brought to life. In the act of giving something is born, and both persons involved are grateful for the life that is born for both of them. Specifically with regard to love this means: love is a power which produces love; impotence is the inability to produce love.

To respect a person is not possible without knowing him; care and responsibility would be blind if they were not guided by knowledge. Knowledge would be empty if it were: not motivated by concern. There are many layers of knowledge; the knowledge which is an aspect of love is one which does not stay at the periphery, but penetrates to the core. It is possible only when I can transcend the concern for myself and see the other person in his own terms. I may know, for instance, that a person is angry, even if he does י not show it overtly; but I may know him more deeply than that; then I know that he is anxious, and worried; that he; feels lonely, that he feels guilty. Then I know that his anger is only the manifestation of something deeper, and I see him as anxious and embarrassed, that is, as the suffering person; rather than as the angry one.

Knowledge has one more, and a more fundamental, relation to the problem of love. The basic need to fuse with another person so as to transcend the prison of one's separateness is closely related to another specifically human desire, that to know the "secret of man." While life in its merely biological aspects is a miracle and a secret, man in his human aspects is an unfathomable secret to himself—and to his fellow man. We know ourselves, and yet even with all the efforts we may make, we do not know ourselves. We know our fellow man, and yet we do not know him, because we are not a thing, and our fellow man is not a thing. The further we reach into the depth of our being, or someone else's being, the more the goal of knowledge eludes us. Yet we cannot help desiring to penetrate into the secret of man's soul, into the innermost nucleus which is "he."

There is one way, a desperate one, to know the secret: it is that of complete power over another person; the power which makes him do what we want, feel what we want, think what we want; which transforms him into a thing, our thing, our possession. The ultimate degree of this attempt to know lies in the extremes of sadism, the desire and ability to make a human being suffer; to torture him, to force him to betray his secret in his suffering. In this craving for penetrating man's secret, his and hence our own, lies an essential motivation for the depth and intensity of cruelty and destructiveness. In a very succinct way this idea has been expressed by Isaac Babel. He quotes a fellow officer in the Russian civil war, who has just stamped his former master to death, as saying: "With shooting—I'll put it this way—with shooting you only get rid of a chap. . . . With shooting you'll never get at the soul, to where it is in a fellow and how it shows itself. But I don't spare myself, and I've more than once trampled an enemy for over an hour. You see, I want to get to know what life really is, what life's like down our way.

In children we often see this path to knowledge quite overtly. The child takes something apart, breaks it up in order to know it; or it takes an animal apart; cruelly tears off the wings of a butterfly in order to know it, to force its secret. The cruelty itself is motivated by something deeper: the wish to know the secret of things and of life.

The longing to know ourselves and to know our fellow man has been expressed in the Delphic motto "Know thy- self." It is the mainspring of all psychology. But in as much as the desire is to know all of man, his innermost secret, the desire can never be fulfilled in knowledge of the ordinary kind, in knowledge only by thought. Even if we knew a thousand times more of ourselves, we would never reach bottom. We would still remain an enigma to ourselves, as our fellow man would remain an enigma to us. The only way of full knowledge lies in the act of love: this act transcends thought, it transcends words. It is the daring plunge into the experience of union. However, knowledge in thought, that is psychological knowledge, is a necessary condition for full knowledge in the act of love. I have to know the other person and myself objectively, in order to be able to see his reality, or rather, to overcome the illusions, the irrationally distorted picture I have of him. Only if I know a human being objectively, can I know him in his ultimate essence, in the act of love.

Love is not primarily a relationship to a specific person; it is an attitude, an orientation of character which determines the relatedness of a person to the world as a whole, not toward one "object" of love. If a person loves only one other person and is indifferent to the rest of his fellow men, his love is not love but a symbiotic attachment, or an enlarged egotism. Yet, most people believe that love is constituted by the object, not by the faculty. In fact, they even believe that it is a proof of the intensity of their love when they do not love anybody except the "loved" person. This is the same fallacy which we have already mentioned above. Because one does not see that love is an activity, a power of the soul, one believes that all that is necessary to find is the right object—and that everything goes by itself afterward. This attitude can be compared to that of a man who wants to paint but who, instead of learning the art, claims that he has just to wait for the right object, and that he will paint beautifully when he finds it. If I truly love one person I love all persons, I love the world, I love life. If I can say to somebody else, "I love you," I must be able to say, "I love in you everybody, I love through you the world, I love in you also myself.

we are not always "equal"; in as much as we are human, we are all in need of help. Today I, tomorrow you. But this need of help does not mean that the one is helpless, the other powerful. Helplessness is a transitory condition; the ability to stand and walk on one's own feet is the permanent and common one.

One neglects to see an important factor in erotic love, that of will. To love somebody is not just a strong feeling—it is a decision, it is a judgment, it is a promise.

The difficulty of the problem is enhanced by the fact that most people today, hence many readers of this book, expect to be given prescriptions of "how to do it yourself," and that means in our case to be taught how to love. I am afraid that anyone who approaches this last chapter in this spirit will be gravely disappointed. To love is a personal experience which everyone can only have by and for himself;

Yet, he is not thinking about all these factors; his mind is in a state of relaxed alertness, open to all relevant changes in the situation on which he is concentrated

[suedehead]

Wrapping up Troubled Sleep (Jean Paul Sartre) soon. Recently started Eichmann in Jerusalem (Hannah Arendt) and Herculine Barbin (Michel Foucault).

[Creepy-bg]

dune done. not sure what's next, but i'm thinking either The Dark Tower or The Stand again. (leaning towards The Stand)

[ashlesha]

Lol @ dumbass @suedehead reading such difficult authors like foucalt and arendt, i think i made it about five pages into one of her books once.

Probably the best books I've read recently were the autobiography of malcolm x and the god of small things by arundhati roy.

I'm currently reading shampoo planet by Douglas coupland and confused about why he's such a popular author because i think it's all so contrived and second rate..but its an easy breezy read and I'm not far enough in to write it off.

[mu4]

The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt

Great book!

I tried reading God of Small things, couldn't read it, I could appreciate it as something different but couldn't do it... teach me how!

[Creepy-bg]

I started reading Slaughterhouse 5. I never read it and somebody said a character in it reminds them of me.

[suedehead]

Finished The Trial (Kafka). Recently started these:

The History of Sexuality (Michel Foucault)
Pulp (Charles Bukowski)
The First Man (Albert Camus)

[Creepy-bg]

[Pa3s]

Finishing Thomas Hobbes' "Leviathan" turned out to be a chore, but I did it. Now reading Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead". I'm five chapters in and, contrary to my expectations (and personal opinion of Rand's philosophy), it is quite enjoyable.

[suedehead]

Finished recently:

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (Hunter S. Thompson)
Pulp (Charles Bukowski)
Herculine Barbin [as far as I'm concerned] (Michel Foucault)
The First Man (Albert Camus)

Currently reading:

Caligula and Three Other Plays (Albert Camus)
Justine (Marquis de Sade)
Frankenstein: or the Modern Prometheus (Mary Shelley) - just finished the prologue, which is probably the most resonant piece of prose I've ever read.

[Aylen]

Finished recently:

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (Hunter S. Thompson)
Pulp (Charles Bukowski)
Herculine Barbin [as far as I'm concerned] (Michel Foucault)
The First Man (Albert Camus)

Currently reading:

Caligula and Three Other Plays (Albert Camus)
Justine (Marquis de Sade)
Frankenstein; or the Modern Prometheus (Mary Shelley) - just finished the prologue, which was probably the most resonant piece of prose I've ever read.

Justine was a very interesting read. At times too much for me.

[Creepy-bg]

thinking about reading Neal Stephensons books next (at least his cyberpunk stuff), for some reason i never tried him.

[Adam Strange]

thinking about reading Neal Stephensons books next (at least his cyberpunk stuff), for some reason i never tried him.

I liked "Snow Crash" and its follow-up "the Diamond Age" the best. After that, he became famous and his editors stopped editing his stuff for brevity and plot direction, which his stories sorely need.
If you want to see what he did when his unbounded imagination was teamed with a disciplined author who believed in plot, read Interface, by Stephen Bury (more recently attributed to Stephenson and George). Stephenson wrote it with his uncle, and it reads like a novel, rather than a drug-crazed party.

[Creepy-bg]

I liked "Snow Crash" and its follow-up "the Diamond Age" the best. After that, he became famous and his editors stopped editing his stuff for brevity and plot direction, which his stories sorely need.
If you want to see what he did when his unbounded imagination was teamed with a disciplined author who believed in plot, read Interface, by Stephen Bury (more recently attributed to Stephenson and George). Stephenson wrote it with his uncle, and it reads like a novel, rather than a drug-crazed party.

i should just start reading them to find out, but how does he compare to Gibson and Sterling? They have always been my main cyberpunk staples/favorites besides some more one off authors in the genre.

I'm a fan of PKD so drug-crazed writing doesn't really bother me as long as it has good dialogue, cool themes, and something that sinks into your backbrain to simmer away after you're done

[Neon]

I just finished reading Nicholson Baker's The Mezzanine.
Otherwise known as, "Introverted Sensing: The Book".

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

JP Sears said it is an essential reading http://www.creativegrowth.com/bradshaw_shame%201.pdf

[Pole]

Anything by Robert Greene. The book Ronda Rousey wrote.

[ashlesha]

I just started reading this: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8...ackwash-of-war
kind of trauma porn. but very engrossing. i was thinking of ashton when i started it this morning.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Last book I was reading was Francis Bacon's Novum Organum. It is rather tedious in places, but a significant work.

[Tonatiuh]

Just finished Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Still digesting it.

[ashlesha]

I'm a bit into reading Lolita now. I felt nervous about reading it, afraid that I would empathize too much with the main character and it would fuck with me, but that hasn't been an issue so far. the way he describes his internal struggles and desires is human and sympathetic independent of the subject matter but I don't see him as fatalistically compelled by nature to make the decisions that he does, so it hasn't impacted me in any moral crisis sort of way. he expresses more clarity about the source/nature/psychology of his desire than I expected, and the passages reflecting that are pretty interesting. the prose is sparkly, musical, engaging, I really like it.

I'm only about 90 pages in atm so maybe there's still a shitstorm coming for me.

[Kim]

I'm a bit into reading Lolita now. I felt nervous about reading it, afraid that I would empathize too much with the main character and it would fuck with me, but that hasn't been an issue so far. the way he describes his internal struggles and desires is human and sympathetic independent of the subject matter but I don't see him as fatalistically compelled by nature to make the decisions that he does, so it hasn't impacted me in any moral crisis sort of way. he expresses more clarity about the source/nature/psychology of his desire than I expected, and the passages reflecting that are pretty interesting. the prose is sparkly, musical, engaging, I really like it.

I'm only about 90 pages in atm so maybe there's still a shitstorm coming for me.

This is interesting. I have been wanting to read it, but have had similar reservations. I would be curious to hear how you feel about after you finish. I recently heard a paper about it at a conference and the discussion afterwards was pretty contentious...

[Not A Communist Shill]

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child is a very good book (albeit in script form). It has some surprising characters appearing in it, which gives extra depth to the other seven. I cannot say anything else without it being a spoiler.

[Not A Communist Shill]

A Splendid Exchange: How Trade Shaped The World by William Bernstein is a splendid book.

[ashlesha]

Started reading a thousand splendid suns by khaled hosseini last night and its hard to put down. On da verge of tears every other page ;_;

[Moonbeaux Rainfox]

Currently reading: Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder
By Nassim Nicholas Taleb

I had 2 books in the last week, that really really resonated with me. I’m not reading much, because it really has to really catch me, otherwise I cannot finish a book.
(I’m also not reading a lot of what people would consider ‘high quality’ literature. I love other books much more. Honestly I gained more things from them.)

Also I’m not really a sucker for stuff, coming from this angle… omg do this for growth and development etc. I have a deep seated hatred for this narrative.
Like with these articles, things 'developed people' do or you have to do to tick of more boxes or to fit into a mold (10 things you should do to… whatever).

An impression you might get at first, with this antifragile stuff. But that was not really what catched my curiosity, because good ol’ robustness is fine with me.
I actually really liked the parts about randomness, about ‘predicitions’, about complexity (the first 1/4 of the book) and later parts about not quantifiable knowledge.

Or parts about simplicity (parts that striked me about a more natural way of going about making decisions). Also funny parts about procrastination, 'flaneur'. Like how
he could articulate, how I feel about some things. I really resonated with that. But later on there were parts, were I thought… idk… things became a bit too 'high' for me.

Like parts where it might came across to me as idk … too philosophical, technical and these were paragraphs were I kinda drifted. Were I would also see it differently.
That’s where I have to admit I read it as skipping some parts and stopping at some that interested me more. But just my opinion. It’s still one interesting book.

[The Exception]

I just picked up a couple of books from the LIIbrary.

I had to admit the titles themselves intrigued me:

Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Familiy and Culture in Crisis
The Hidden Life of Trees- What They Feel, How They Communicate

I haven't read them yet, I'll let you know if there is anything interesting in them.

[Tonatiuh]

Red Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle again. Equally if not more impressed this time around.

[epheme]

I just finished A Game of Thrones (A Song of Ice and Fire, Book 1) by George R. R. Martin and Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer.

I quite liked A Game of Thrones. I haven't seen the show and wasn't planning on reading it, but I was stuck at work with my husband one day and he had a copy lying on his desk. Now that I've read the first one I'll probably continue with the series at some point.

I enjoyed Into the Wild, but liked the movie more (LOVED the movie). The book did help to clarify Christopher McCandless's motivations and give more insight into the family dynamics, which were essential in the story.

Probably the best books I've read recently were the autobiography of malcolm x .....

One of my favorite books

[Not A Communist Shill]

A list of books I've been reading semi-recently, of those I give 10 out of 10. I decided to omit fiction books, which I don't tend to read so many of in any case.

Arts
David Dubal: The Essential Canon of Classical Music
Michael Schmidt: Lives of the Poets
Marilyn Stokstad: Art History

Economics
Charles Wheelan: Naked Economics: Undressing the Dismal Science

Economics & History
Thomas Piketty: Capital in the Twenty-First Century

Economics, History, Philosophy, Politics
Matt Ridley: The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves

History
David Abulafia: The Great Sea: A Human History of the Mediterranean
Juliet Barker: Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle That Made England
Robert Bartlett: The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change, 950-1350
Robert Bartlett: England Under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 1075-1225
Jacques Barzun: From Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life, 1500 to the Present
Susan Wise Bauer: The History of the Ancient World: From the Earliest Accounts to the Fall of Rome
Susan Wise Bauer: The History of the Renaissance World: From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Conquest of Constantinople
Susan Wise Bauer: The History of the Medieval World: From the Conversion of Constantine to the First Crusade
Piers Brendon: The Decline and Fall of the British Empire, 1781-1997
Norman Davies: Europe
Norman Davies: Vanished Kingdoms: The History of Half-Forgotten Europe
Norman Davies: The Isles: A History
Modris Eksteins: Rites of Spring: The Great War and the Birth of the Modern Age
Robin Lane Fox: The Classical World: An Epic History from Homer to Hadrian
Tom Holland: Forge of Christendom
Tom Holland: Persian Fire
Tony Judt: Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945
David Kennedy: Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945
Ian Kershaw: ******
Ian Mortimer: The Perfect King - The Life of Edward III
Michael Prestwich: Plantagenet England 1225-1360
David Reynolds: America, Empire of Liberty: A New History
Hew Strachan: The First World War
Jan Swafford: Beethoven
Barbara Tuchman: A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century
Barbara Tuchman: The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World Before the War, 1890-1914
Joyce Tyldesley: Hatchepsut: The Female Pharaoh
Odd Arne Westad: Restless Empire: China and the World Since 1750
Toby Wilkinson: The Rise and Fall of Ancient Egypt: The History of a Civilisation from 3000 BC to Cleopatra

History & Economics
William Bernstein: A Splendid Exchange: How Trade Shaped the World from Prehistory to Today
Ian Morris: Why the West Rules—for Now: The Patterns of History, and What They Reveal About the Future

History & Science
Cynthia Stokes Brown: Big History: From the Big Bang to the Present
Bill Bryson: A Short History of Nearly Everything
Richard Holmes: The Age of Wonder
Steven Johnson: Where Good Ideas Come From: The Natural History of Innovation

Philosophy
Simone de Beauvoir: The Second Sex
Carl von Clausewitz: On War
David Deutsch: The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations That Transform the World
Mark Twain: Letters from the Earth

Poetry
Lucretius: On the Nature of Things
Ovid: Metamorphoses
Shelley: The Complete Works

Psychology, Philosophy
Steven Pinker: The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature

Science
Theodore Brown: Chemistry: The Central Science
Neil Campbell: Biology
David Halliday: Fundamentals of Physics
Elaine Marieb: Human Anatomy & Physiology

Science, Astronomy, Philosophy
Carl Sagan: Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space

Sociology, Psychology, Philosophy
Steven Pinker: The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined

If I was to recommend just a few of these, I would suggest the "Philosophy" books, for being particularly mind-expanding. The Steven Johnson book (Where Good Ideas Come From) I felt I could have classed under "Philosophy", and would highly recommend it (although I would highly recommend any of these books - but most of them are fairly self-explanatory about their subject area, and thus you are likely to know if it is of any interest ). The books listed under the Arts and Science categories I found to be exceptional in their respective fields - most of them are textbooks (i.e. for university curricula) and appear in many editions, of varying cost. I would also recommend Ian Morris: Why the West Rules—for Now as a good general book about history and economics (and as a good companion, William Bernstein's A Splendid Exchange), and also Jacques Barzun's From Dawn to Decadence.

The Clausewitz book is ostensibly about military strategy, but I think it has wider interest. Similar perhaps to Machiavelli's The Art of War, but I think it is greater than that.
The Joyce Tyldesley book Hatchepsut: The Female Pharaoh is more than just a biography, it covers a whole period of Egyptian history.

The Norman Davies book "Europe" is quite an abrupt title, so I should mention it is an excellent history of Europe.

[Tonatiuh]

Caution: Personality may emerge somewhat changed (!)

House of Leaves
The Wasp Factory
Satan Burger
What Do You Care What Other People Think?
Nausea
The Metamorphosis
The Strange Library
The Book
Kafka on the shore
Infinte Jest

[ashlesha]

I just started memories, dreams, reflections by carl jung. I'm not sure how interested I am in his life and I'm nervous about his writing style but I wanna give it a shot and see what gleaming rocks of insight I can pluck out.

I just finished reading Stephen king's lisey's story. I hadn't read a Stephen king novel in years and didn't know if he'd still do it for me, but it was cool. even kind of romantic. I liked how the alternative universe (boo'ya moon) reminded me of the territories in my favorite novel of his - the talisman - and then he even referenced the territories once. (I want to re-read the talisman now.)

before that, it was the bell jar, which I was embarrassed to read because I thought it was for emo teenage girls but it was actually fantastic, whether it is or not (I wouldn't know - it spoke to me, but I am kind of an emo teenage girl.) I gave it 5 stars on goodreads, which I rarely do.

before the bell jar, it was the lord of the flies (sort of a short classics kick)- also solid. a little heavy on the environmental detail for my sensibilities but the last 1/3 had me riveted, and you know, thinking about the Depressing Take on the Human Condition.

i'll round it out w/ the one that I didn't like so much, and read before the lord of the flies. bookcase by john marshall tanner. it was a mehh (decent I guess) suspense story (the answer to the puzzle was a mystery to me but I'm not hard to mystify). but the main character and the 15 female characters who were there for no other reason than to show what a fuckin stud he was annoyed me. (15 might be exaggerating)

[Not A Communist Shill]

@lungs I thought The Bell Jar was fantastic when I read it many years ago - I also give it 5 stars on goodreads!

[Not A Communist Shill]

The decile ranges of goodreads ratings based on the average ratings for the 1000+ books in my Canon of Humanity ebooks thread (I actually have it at 1150 on one of my goodreads shelves but that will not exactly tally for various reasons):


10 stars >4.20
9 stars 4.20 (6 books out of 11), <4.21
8 stars 4.08 (actually 4.09, 3 of 14), <4.09
7 stars 4.00 (22 of 22), <4.01
6 stars 3.94 (actually 3.95, 1 of 13), <3.95
5 stars 3.87 (actually 3.88, 6 of 13), <3.88
4 stars 3.81 (actually 3.82, 6 of 24), <3.82
3 stars 3.74 (11 books of 12) <3.75
2 stars 3.66 (11 books of 21), <3.67
1 star 3.51 (3 books of 6), <3.52

(I worked from the bottom, so for example, there were 112 books with ratings <3.51, plus 6 books that had a rating of 3.51. I went with the score that was closest to the decile mark).

[Not A Communist Shill]

I recently read Nassim Nicholas Taleb's Fooled by Randomness, and give it a 10 out of 10. I think it is far better than his more well known book Black Swan.

[Tonatiuh]

Reading The Rabbit Hunter by the Lars Kepler duo. I have a man crush on the protagonist.