or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › What are you reading?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What are you reading? - Page 358

post #5356 of 5637
Same here I have read all of Houellebecq's work started with Atomised and I am proud to be a (literary) pervert.
post #5357 of 5637
Curious...
post #5358 of 5637
Five Star Billionaire by Tash Aw
post #5359 of 5637
Rereading Titus Groan by Mervyn Peake. I had forgotten how obtuse the language was. Not really a criticism, it's a good book, but kind of tough at times
post #5360 of 5637
I've read the Groan trilogy once, but I have tried and failed to reread Gormenghast several times. I've read most of his other work as well, but none of it is quite up to the same level as the Groan books, although Mr. Pye may come close. On the other hand, his illustrations for Alice in Wonderland are excellent:

post #5361 of 5637
I recall liking Titus Groan a lot, and the two successive books in the trilogy progressively less.
post #5362 of 5637
g

Finally I read some complete fiction books again. Unimaginable refreshing compared to the average scientific journal article.

Dracula and Frankenstein is next on my list smile.gif
post #5363 of 5637
This is great. What popular history should be.

post #5364 of 5637
Thanks for the rec, Conne. But the term "popular history" makes me want to move it to the "pissing me off" thread.
post #5365 of 5637
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

Thanks for the rec, Conne. But the term "popular history" makes me want to move it to the "pissing me off" thread.

It bugs me too.
post #5366 of 5637
Why does the term "popular history" put you into a certain mood of PO'd?
post #5367 of 5637
Quote:
Originally Posted by L'Incandescent View Post

Why does the term "popular history" put you into a certain mood of PO'd?
Mostly likely because I did not sleep well last night.
But to the extent there's a substantive component (semi-rational reason for PO'ness), it would be the implication that history must be refined or packaged somehow -- by dumbing it down or embedding a story of time-traveling stoners (pot-smoking dudes).
And while I don't think this is what is generally meant by the term "popular history", to my mind it has a suggestion of history presented in a fashion calculated to conform to what people want to hear.
post #5368 of 5637
I just take the term to mean that the text was not written with other professional historians as the intended audience, but rather the wider public. (In philosophy, we have books of "popular philosophy," and the term means basically the same thing: the audience is not other professionals.)
post #5369 of 5637
Quote:
Originally Posted by L'Incandescent View Post

I just take the term to mean that the text was not written with other professional historians as the intended audience, but rather the wider public. (In philosophy, we have books of "popular philosophy," and the term means basically the same thing: the audience is not other professionals.)

That is a fair point (you are probably right), but I am like Humpty Dumpty (not really fat but like to pretend words mean what I think they mean).
post #5370 of 5637
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

That is a fair point (you are probably right), but I am like Humpty Dumpty (not really fat but like to pretend words mean what I think they mean).

I made a reference to Humpty Dumpty's theory of meaning in class the other day!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › What are you reading?