Fittingly I'm reading The Worm Ouroboros. At this point I've probably read most of the old fantasy classics. This one might take me a while though. 445 pages, written with dense descriptions and in Jacobean style. Enjoying it for the most part, but it's certainly a strange book.
I finished Light, loved the ending. Absolutely loved the ending. The rest wasn't bad, just some things I felt put me off the story being told. I have around 200 pages left of The Dragon Reborn and I think I can get that finished this week. Then I can start the next Wheel of Time book or read the next Dune book. Or something non-fiction! The shelves are endless.
Dune Messiah. One of my best friends told me that I really only need to read the first three books and I'll still get the full effect. So, I have the first three and we'll see if I stop there.
Working my way through the Dresden Files again since there's been a couple new books added that I haven't read yet. Currently on #6, Blood Rites.
Just finished reading the novel Solar Rift: 2120 by our own forum member Steve Rivers. I enjoyed it so much I read it twice. It's definitely techy sci-fi, but realistically futuristic, with grounding in earth as we know it. What really gets it rolling, in my estimation, is the quality of his characters. He's wisely not introduced too many of them, but the ones he's created are believeable and entertaining and mulitlayered. I highly recommend this book. Good job, @Steve Rivers .
My partner and I are reading Dracula by Bram Stoker for the first time ever - my fifth reading book of this year!
First chapter of this didn't turn out too great. Not what I was expecting. I knew it was written in the mid 60s but the language is so dated. It's full of people using phrases like "Cats" and "Hey, dig that car, man!" The author also censors his own use of bad language, so when one kid throws an insult it's "Eff-off!" That smacks of a writer who doesn't have the courage of his own convictions.
I have found my way to the third of the First Law trilogy, but while I do I thought I'd try a Neil Stephenson book. For some reason I went for Reamde. It's a long novel, about a computer game, set back in 2011. He does go into great detail often about the game itself, which is sometimes difficult to read if you aren't especially into MMOG's, which I'm not. Perhaps I should have gone for something else but the reviews were good and it is well written; so, I'll try to finish it. In-between that I finished off my re-read of the Hobbit, something I started some time ago. After all these years reading it again you see it in the light of the films, understand now how simply it is told, and how old fashioned the text is. The story is well told despite that and I found myself enjoying it, again.
I enjoyed The Hobbit, although I didn't expect to after all I'd heard about Tolkien's style. As you say, though, it's a very easy read and simply written. I have the first two LotR books somewhere but I've never felt brave enough to take them on.
The Hobbit is his best book, simply taken as a novel. LOTR is great, but...it's really boring sometimes.
I've just dug the first two books out but I'm a tad confused. It says Part 1 and Part 2 respectively on the covers, but then the first chapter of the second one starts 'Book Three' ??
The division of the LOTR into three volumes was merely one of publishing convenience. In reality, the "trilogy" is divided into multiple books.
So think of the three volumes that we all know and love as each being internally subdivided into two more "books," for a total of six books in the LOTR. It's like the Bible: 66 books, two testaments; except in this case there are 6 books and 3 testaments.
Technically, LOTR is one long book. It's divided into three by the publishers, for easy handling and reading size. But if you just start with The Fellowship of the Ring, move to The Two Towers, then finish with The Return of the King, you'll be fine. None of these are stand-alone books. Just pretend they're all glued together. (My husband has an early paperback edition where they ARE all 'glued together.' Print is tiny....) Back when I first encountered Tolkien, I started with The Hobbit. I loved it. It was whimsical and very fairy-tale-like—essentially a children's story. I really enjoyed it. Then I started The Fellowship of the Ring, and was startled by how serious the tone quickly became, after the opening birthday party shenanigans were over. I realised quite early on that this was going to be a different reading experience from The Hobbit. While the two stories were set in the same world, and contained some of the same characters, the books themselves were very different. I think that's why many lovers of LOTR find The Hobbit a bit silly and twee, if they read it AFTER they'd read LOTR. It really does carry a totally different tone.
It certainly read better than I remembered, although it's been so many years I can't really recall when, just a vague 'back then'. My last memories of LOTR are few, some vague recollections of it being dry. You're right, the Hobbit was whimsical, that's true, innocent I think as well, a snapshot of a different time. I'm glad I read it again. Not sure if I will give LOTR another shot at the moment, even though I also have a three-in-one novel somewhere in a box.
Yes, but I didn't get very far. It's basically Tolkien's notes for a book he never wrote, souped up a bit by his son. It was published after Tolkien's death and after the LOTR became famous and a bestseller, and I don't think it should have been, really. I was really disappointed in it, and never finished it.
