Just saw this little project - 100 books locked in basically a time capsule and published in 2114 thought maybe you folks might find it interesting. http://europe.newsweek.com/margaret-atwood-be-first-contributor-100-year-literary-art-project-327439 Who do you think would contribute or you'd like to see contribute to such a project? How do you think the books are gonna be received in 100 years? Just kinda wish I'd still be around to see the results though...
Margaret Atwood is so cool. She's always doing interesting stuff, writing interesting stuff... being interesting stuff! This project? I don't know. It feels a bit manufactured - is there any reason the people of the future need to read a previously unpublished book, rather than one that was published in our time? But still, it's interesting!
I hope Cormac McCarthy doesn't agree to do this. The thought of never getting to read something written by him makes me sad.
It's true that it would be no different to when we read Shakespeare today, in a way - you know, the concept of reading books written in the past, set in a completely different time with different philosophies to ours. But then again, this time it'd be published in the year 2114 which might mean they're less likely to get lost in history and have some measure of the guarantee of being read by somebody 100 years from now. That's kinda cool. But, but... it's a time capsule! As a kid, I always thought that'd be so cool to make Didn't you want one? If you contributed, what would you write for it?? I have still never read The Handmaid's Tale - we had to study it for A-Levels but I sorta skipped reading the book lol. Been meaning to actually finally read it!
Handmaid's Tale rocks - get thee to a library! I think time capsules are cool, but this isn't quite a time capsule... like, it's not encapsulating what people are thinking about in 2015, b/c we aren't going to get the chance to read whatever it is! They could make a time capsule with the year's best sellers or something...
Ugh, the year's bestsellers, for people to read in 100 years' time? Well, it would accurately reflect our mindset today and what people today were interested in. To be honest, that might actually be more interesting - popular, commercial literature is generally not preserved through time. The mundane probably reveals more about the society/people of the day more so than classics might. But... but... Tom Clancy and Lee Child, to be read in 100 years? Seriously!? And gosh... no... DAN BROWN!! I'm trying to read everything I want to before the baby comes, so that shall be next on my list!! (Handmaid's Tale, that is) I remember as a teen the detail of things put me off. I remember reading a paragraph of Offred describing the surface of an egg and thinking to myself: why am I reading this? lol Oh no, do you know what'd be worse than Dan Brown? Twilight. No. 50 Shades...
Ooh oooh Harry Potter! Potter preserved and to be read in 100 years' time! @Lemex would roll in his grave
Handmaid's Tale might not be great pregnancy reading... although, maybe it'd be fantastic, making you feel like you're part of a great, noble societal program...
It'll be still in print. Hailed as good literature, that would make me so mad I'd come back to life to bitch and moan at everyone. World, you have been warned! A copy of Mason & Dixon needs to go into that book capsule. On the off chance the human race let's me down and forgets about that masterwork.
But it said the books will remain unpublished until 2114... There is a chance those books will fail to represent the best of our contemporary literature. However, I see the whole excitement in this. In a hundred years from now they might not treat those books as we treat classics today. Again, there will still be Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings and other books as such still in print. But the time capsule idea could make those books super valuable. Although it's really hard to say, given it's a hundred years from now...
Imagine something, though, from 1915 that was being published today. No one would give a flying fuck because we've already read the best 1915 has to offer - the BEST. We don't need to read something unpublished from that same era that's subpar. What a waste. Just seems like some dumb marketing thing.
I was wondering what other works of hers are good, coming from someone who's probably in my age bracket. As a Canadian, I must finish one -- already gave up on Davies.
She's really prolific and diverse, so it's hard to say what would be best for any individual reader... Handmaid's Tale is great if you're into political dystopia type books; Cat's Eye gets a lot of love, and might be better if you're looking for a reflection on how our childhood experiences impact who we are as adults; Alias Grace is a historical mystery with a less-than-reliable narrator; Oryx & Crake didn't do much for me, but it's another dystopia that got a lot of love. Pick your poison! Be prepared to read her a little more slowly than you'd read popular fiction. The stories are there, and they're good, but they're not quite as easy to find as some stuff you might be reading.
Lool Reminds me of my husband's joke, "Will you be my baby factory?" (my response, "If we can swap and you're the one going through pregnancy and labour, then sure!" ) It's true that I'm not too sure I wanna be reminded of corpses hanging on the wall with their smiles drawn in blood across their hoods, nor the person - man? woman? - beaten to vegetable pulp near the end of the book. For a book that I honestly did not read, I remember a surprising number of scenes. Probably testament to the quality of her writing Anyway from your description of some of Atwood's work, it seems I might enjoy Cat's Eye. Maybe I'll read that first
