What are you reading?

[dragon8]

Five Star Billionaire by Tash Aw

 

[munchausen]

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

 

[imatlas]

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:

 

[lawyerdad]

I recall liking Titus Groan a lot, and the two successive books in the trilogy progressively less.

 

[legorogel]

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

 

[Connemara]

This is great. What popular history should be.

 

[lawyerdad]

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

 

[Connemara]



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.

 

[L'Incandescent]

Why does the term "popular history" put you into a certain mood of PO'd?

 

[lawyerdad]



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.

 

[L'Incandescent]

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.)

 

[lawyerdad]



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).

 

[L'Incandescent]



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!

 

[lawyerdad]



I made a reference to Humpty Dumpty's theory of meaning in class the other day!

Was the reference popular?

 

[L'Incandescent]

It should have been but it was not (popular).