Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

[TAN]: A List

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 3, 2003, 9:43:43 PM12/3/03
to
I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
listlessness.

(Cross-posted from my LiveJournal, which has review links:
<http://www.livejournal.com/users/kate_nepveu/32182.html>.)

Last Wednesday, in the car on the way to Thanksgiving, Chad was
telling me about his blog post on different kinds of "'favorite' book
lists"
<http://www.steelypips.org/principles/2003_11_23_principlearchive.php#106988339888174200>.
I had a rotten headache and, without realizing it, was well on my way
to an excellent case of car-sickness, so I was only listening with
half my brain. Across the other half, book titles quietly floated
past. When I noticed this, I realized that my backbrain had come up
with its own definition of "favorite" and was tossing up titles.

So, two things resulted from this. One, of course, was a list of book
titles. The other was a question: when confronted with the question,
"What are your favorite books?", is there any definition of "favorite"
that comes first to your mind? Or is it solely dependent on the
context?

I'm putting my definition and list under a pagebreak, to (maybe) avoid
prejudicing any instinctive reactions on readers' parts.

My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
(somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
describe fully or accurately. (Often I can verbalize what's good about
the books; it's my reaction that's hard.) It's not co-extensive with
quality or favorite authors; notice that there's no Bujold here. It's
not a desert island list; notice that The Lord of the Rings isn't
here, either (it only gives me that feeling in parts). How do you
describe love? I've never been any good at it.

The list, vaguely in the order they occurred to me that night:

* _Freedom and Necessity_, Steven Brust and Emma Bull
* _The Last Hot Time_, John M. Ford
* _When the King Comes Home_, Caroline Stevermer
* _Spindle's End_, Robin McKinley
* _Gaudy Night_, Dorothy Sayers
* The Sarantine Mosaic, Guy Gavriel Kay
* _Pride and Prejudice_, Jane Austen
* _Element of Fire_, Martha Wells
* Sandman, Neil Gaiman
* _Look to Windward_, Iain M. Banks
* _Bridge of Birds_, Barry Hughart
* _Deep Secret_, Diana Wynne Jones
* _The Innkeeper's Song_, Peter Beagle
* _Good Omens_, Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett
* _Last Call_, Tim Powers
* _The Lady's Not for Burning_, Christopher Fry
* _Possession_, A.S. Byatt

Interestingly, I just went upstairs and perused the bookshelves, and
didn't come up with any additional entries than what I'd come up with
in the car--not what I expected with my memory like a whatchamacallit.

So, comments?

--
Kate Nepveu
E-mail: kne...@steelypips.org
Home: http://www.steelypips.org/
Book log: http://www.steelypips.org/weblog/

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 3, 2003, 10:08:18 PM12/3/03
to
In article <ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>,

Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:
>I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
>listlessness.

Oh, I so totally thought you were kidding with that...


[Fav'rite books]

For what it's worth, my definition is probably "books that stick with
me in an important way," or something of that nature. It's weird,
because it means that, for instance, Duncan and Bujold don't show up
on the list at all, when I enormously like their books.

My own list includes only three from yours:

>* The Sarantine Mosaic, Guy Gavriel Kay

>* Sandman, Neil Gaiman

>* _Bridge of Birds_, Barry Hughart

(And really, if I could legitimately say "just Lord of Emperors", I
would. Oh what the hell, I will, even though nobody can possibly read
just that book.)

I'd add:

The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe
The Dying Earth, Jack Vance
The Khaavren Romances, Steven Brust
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon
Cryptonomicon and Quicksilver, Neal Stephenson
Illusion, Paula Volsky
Discworld, Terry Pratchett
The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien
A History of Western Philosophy, Bertrand Russell

Hmm. I think that's it, although there are probably a half-dozen
books I could make a case for. Vernor Vinge, Kij Johnson, Dan
Simmons, Douglas Adams, Rosemary Kirstein, probably some others I'm
totally spacing on. But that list will do.

--
Mike Kozlowski
http://www.klio.org/mlk/

Ridge Runner

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 12:01:40 AM12/4/03
to

"Mike Kozlowski" <m...@klio.org> wrote in message
news:bqm8f2$9ve$1...@reader2.panix.com...

You this one listed, but not "The Wheel of Time Series"?? Now that is one
of my favorites... and there are many more.

dana

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 10:22:54 AM12/4/03
to
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message news:<ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>...

> I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
> listlessness.
>
> (Cross-posted from my LiveJournal, which has review links:
> <http://www.livejournal.com/users/kate_nepveu/32182.html>.)
>
> Last Wednesday, in the car on the way to Thanksgiving, Chad was
> telling me about his blog post on different kinds of "'favorite' book
> lists"
<snip>

> The list, vaguely in the order they occurred to me that night:
>
> * _Freedom and Necessity_, Steven Brust and Emma Bull
> * _The Last Hot Time_, John M. Ford
> * _When the King Comes Home_, Caroline Stevermer
> * _Spindle's End_, Robin McKinley
> * _Gaudy Night_, Dorothy Sayers
> * The Sarantine Mosaic, Guy Gavriel Kay
> * _Pride and Prejudice_, Jane Austen
> * _Element of Fire_, Martha Wells
> * Sandman, Neil Gaiman
> * _Look to Windward_, Iain M. Banks
> * _Bridge of Birds_, Barry Hughart
> * _Deep Secret_, Diana Wynne Jones
> * _The Innkeeper's Song_, Peter Beagle
> * _Good Omens_, Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett
> * _Last Call_, Tim Powers
> * _The Lady's Not for Burning_, Christopher Fry
> * _Possession_, A.S. Byatt
>
> Interestingly, I just went upstairs and perused the bookshelves, and
> didn't come up with any additional entries than what I'd come up with
> in the car--not what I expected with my memory like a whatchamacallit.

Interesting that you liked Look to Windward, but don't list any of his
other books, which I thought were much better. Consider Phleabas I
thought was the best one, but Use of Weapons was also very enjoyable.

I'd add:

Beowulf
The Glass Bead Game - Herman Hesse
Siddhartha - Herman Hesse
Sherlock Holmes - Sir A.C. Doyle
Narnia - CS Lewis
Elric - Michael Moorcock
Valis...Transmigration of Timothy Archer - Phillip Dick
Hyperion - Dan Simmons
Ender's Game - OS Card
Foundation Trilogy - Isaac Asimov

Lots of other books in the list, but I'd have to say those are must
reads.

With the exception of Phillip Dick, Speaker for the Dead (ender
sequel), and the first three authors (haven't read any), the other
books in the same series by the same other don't hold a candle to the
original works.

cheers,
D

Chris Hammock

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 10:54:34 AM12/4/03
to
Ridge Runner <pinerid...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> "Mike Kozlowski" <m...@klio.org> wrote in message
> news:bqm8f2$9ve$1...@reader2.panix.com...

>> The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe

Pausing to add that this was really cool, and I ought to read it again.

[snip]

>> The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien
>
> You this one listed, but not "The Wheel of Time Series"?? Now that is one
> of my favorites... and there are many more.

This one, I've never heard of. Is it any good?

--
Chris Hammock zal...@nocturne.org

Karl-Johan Noren

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 11:02:07 AM12/4/03
to
Chris Hammock <zal...@nocturne.org> writes:

> Ridge Runner <pinerid...@earthlink.net> wrote:


> > "Mike Kozlowski" <m...@klio.org> wrote:
> >> The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien
> > You this one listed, but not "The Wheel of Time Series"?? Now
> > that is one of my favorites... and there are many more.
>
> This one, I've never heard of. Is it any good?

Nah. It's just a ripoff of Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth
series.

--
Karl-Johan Norén -- k...@postladan.se <-- New e-mail!
The snuggliest man on the net -- http://hem.passagen.se/kjnoren/
- To believe people are as stupid as one
believes is stupider than one can believe

G J

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 1:35:26 PM12/4/03
to
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message news:<ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>...

Hmm. No non-fiction?

Michael Bruce

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 2:34:58 PM12/4/03
to
In <ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>, Kate Nepveu wrote:
> I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
> listlessness.

[...]

> My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
> passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
> (somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
> describe fully or accurately. (Often I can verbalize what's good about
> the books; it's my reaction that's hard.) It's not co-extensive with
> quality or favorite authors; notice that there's no Bujold here. It's
> not a desert island list; notice that The Lord of the Rings isn't
> here, either (it only gives me that feeling in parts). How do you
> describe love? I've never been any good at it.

[...]

> So, comments?

A worthwhile exercise. I attempt a list:

- _Infinite Jest_, David Foster Wallace
- The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe
- The Belgariad, David Eddings (yes, really)
- TEotW-LoC, Jordan
- _Small Gods_, Terry Pratchett
- _Magician_, Raymond Feist
- _Teckla_, _Issola_, _The Sun, the Moon and the Stars_, Steven Brust
- The Malazan books, Steven Erikson
- _White Noise_, Don DeLillo
- _Last Call_, Tim Powers
- _Feersum Endjinn_, Iain Banks

I feel like I'm missing a few big ones, but that's a decent start.

--
Michael Bruce
http://log.ibruce.org/

Leigh Butler

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 3:25:41 PM12/4/03
to
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 02:43:43 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
wrote:

>I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
>listlessness.

Heh.

>"What are your favorite books?", is there any definition of "favorite"
>that comes first to your mind? Or is it solely dependent on the
>context?

>My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless


>passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
>(somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
>describe fully or accurately. (Often I can verbalize what's good about
>the books; it's my reaction that's hard.) It's not co-extensive with
>quality or favorite authors; notice that there's no Bujold here. It's
>not a desert island list; notice that The Lord of the Rings isn't
>here, either (it only gives me that feeling in parts). How do you
>describe love? I've never been any good at it.

I pretty much agree with your definition, especially about how the
books you love are not necessarily the best ones you've ever read,

I would add, personally, that a "favorite" book is one you can read
over and over again and never get bored of it; every reread is like
visiting an old friend. (As a result a lot of mine tend to be books I
read as a young'un.)

>* Sandman, Neil Gaiman

I'll keep this one from Kate's list, because hell yeah. And also:

***

_Watership Down_, by Richard Adams

If I _had_ to choose one favorite book of all time, this would likely
be it.

***

_The Handmaid's Tale_, by Margaret Atwood

The prose is so beautifully evocative of sorrow and pain, it aches on
the page, even while scaring you silly about how easily the future it
paints could come about.

***

_The Hiding Place_, by Corrie Ten Boom

I don't know if I believe a word of it, but damn if it isn't one of
the most uplifting things I've ever read.

***

_The Adventures of Tom Sawyer_, by Mark Twain

I know _Huckleberry Finn_ is supposed to be the better book, but Tom
Sawyer always made me happy.

***

_It_, by Stephen King

Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
SCARY.

***

_Shogun_, by James Clavell

The literary equivalent of an exquisitely prepared, perfectly medium
rare 32oz. porterhouse steak, with a loaded baked potato and all the
fixings. It's not something you want every day, but when you do, damn.

***

_Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_, by J.K. Rowling

I love them all, but this is the one I reread and enjoy the most (so
far, anyway).

***

_To Kill A Mockingbird_, by Harper Lee

One of the greatest novels ever written, IMAO, for a host of reasons
that anyone not living under a rock their whole lives should already
know. If you haven't read this yet, smack yourself in the head several
times and then get thee to Amazon post haste. Then rent the movie,
which is almost as good.

***

The Narnia books, by C.S. Lewis

Yes, insultingly obvious religious allegory, etc., etc., but that
doesn't change the fact that I received them for Christmas when I was
eight or so, and by the time I was eleven I had to go buy them again
because the first set had literally fallen apart from rereading.

***

_The Witching Hour_, by Anne Rice

A Gothic ghost story skillfully masquerading as a historical novel as
an excuse to pay homage to my hometown? How could I _not_ adore it?

***

_Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There_, by Lewis
Carroll

Don't know why I like this one so much better than the first Alice
book, but there you are. Chess imagery is cool.

***

_The Scarlet Pimpernel_, by Baroness Emmuska Orczy

So cheesy, so over-the-top, so obviously slanted, and yet I love it.
Romance and intrigue and derring-do, oh my.

***

_The Phantom Tollbooth_, by Norton Juster

My first introduction to what you could really do with words and
literary devices, and still just a really cool story.

***

The Elijah Baley trilogy (_Caves of Steel_, _The Naked Sun_, and _The
Robots of Dawn_), by Isaac Asimov

*shrug*

***

_Jane Eyre_, by Charlotte Bronte

Still one of the best character studies ever. There are few
protagonists I've identified with more strongly than with Jane (which
makes it a damn good thing it ended the way it did, because otherwise
I would have been depressed for _weeks_).

***

Books 1-7 of The Wheel of Time, by Robert Jordan

No, seriously.

Johan Gustafsson

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 4:17:09 PM12/4/03
to
Leigh Butler wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 02:43:43 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
> wrote:

[favorite books, Kate-and-Leigh-style]

> >* Sandman, Neil Gaiman
>
> I'll keep this one from Kate's list, because hell yeah. And also:

*I'm* not going to remove it...

> _Watership Down_, by Richard Adams
>
> If I _had_ to choose one favorite book of all time, this would likely
> be it.

I was surprised when I caved in and read it (Laura's sig does wear one
down after a while). It's easy book to to lose oneself in, that's for
sure.

[keeping those of Leigh's books I agree with]

> _The Handmaid's Tale_, by Margaret Atwood

> _Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_, by J.K. Rowling

> The Narnia books, by C.S. Lewis

> _Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There_, by Lewis
> Carroll

> Books 1-7 of The Wheel of Time, by Robert Jordan
>
> No, seriously.

I don't have a problem with this. After all, there's a reason I'm
reading this group, and it's not everyone's charming personalities.

...wait a minute. Yes, it is! Huh.

But seriously, EotW to CoS is in my opinion a fine piece of fantasy
epic. Good plot, nice characterizations and some great scenes that'll
stay with me long after Elayne emerges from her bath sometime in 2017.


Myself, I read "Agnes Cecilia" by Maria Gripe once every year. It struck
a chord with me a dozen or so years ago. It's a very low-key story that
manages to capture the feeling just between fear and fascination. I love
it unashamedly.

I don't read any book by Astrid Lindgren annually, but if I did, it
would be her forays into fantasy: "Mio min Mio", "Bröderna Lejonhjärta"
and "Ronja Rövardotter". All of the fairy-tale variety rather than
gritty realism. Doesn't hurt that two of them have been turned into
great movies either (and the third one did get Christopher Lee and
Christian Bale for the movie, so it's fun, if not very good...)

Moving on to another age-group, I find "Hyperion" by Dan Simmons. I
have... issues with the Hyperion duology. The first is wonderful, one of
the best books I've read, but when I was at the end I was as confused as
could be. The sequel did the impossible and answered all my questions,
but it's a much weaker book. Maybe I should have taken K-J's advice, and
stopped after book one. Still, Hyperion rocks, and rocks hard.

Since Kate mentioned "Sandman", I get to mention "Nausicaa of the Valley
of Wind" by Hayao "Spirited Away" Miyazaki. My favorite messiah-story of
all time, and that includes the original. It's heart-breaking, tear-
jerking and awe-inspiring.


--
Johan Gustafsson *** j...@e-bostad.net

No, no Empire Trilogy today.

Karl-Johan Noren

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 4:54:49 PM12/4/03
to
Johan Gustafsson <j...@e-bostad.net> writes:

> Moving on to another age-group, I find "Hyperion" by Dan Simmons. I
> have... issues with the Hyperion duology. The first is wonderful, one of
> the best books I've read, but when I was at the end I was as confused as
> could be. The sequel did the impossible and answered all my questions,
> but it's a much weaker book. Maybe I should have taken K-J's advice, and
> stopped after book one. Still, Hyperion rocks, and rocks hard.

Heh.

Given that I'm considered insane 'cause I find the ending of
_Hyperion_ perfectly fitting, appropriate and with more than
enough closure, I'm not surprised you didn't take it.

Daniel Packman

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 4:30:38 PM12/4/03
to
[....lists...]

>"What are your favorite books?".....

The Witches of Karres by James Schmitz

--
Daniel Packman
NCAR/ACD
pa...@ucar.edu

Melissa Devnich

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 5:18:36 PM12/4/03
to

> * _The Lady's Not for Burning_, Christopher Fry

Kate, did you find this through its mention in Pamela Dean's _Tam Lin_?
I ask because that's how I found it. It's one of my favorite (no
definition given, I'll have to think about that) plays, along with
_Arcadia_. Tam Lin, OTOH, I find just so-so, but it is a wonderful
source for book recommendations.

FWIW, I would list a lot of the same books you did in my Favorites,
which is probably why I find your booklog one of the more useful for
recommendations. I would add one or 2 Lymond stories, as well. Oh,
why not the whole series.

--
Melissa Devnich
mdevnich at yahoo dot com

Ridge Runner

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 7:38:20 PM12/4/03
to

"Karl-Johan Noren" <k...@postladan.se> wrote in message
news:m2u14g4...@josefin.bahnhofbredband.se...

> Chris Hammock <zal...@nocturne.org> writes:
>
> > Ridge Runner <pinerid...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > "Mike Kozlowski" <m...@klio.org> wrote:
> > >> The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien
> > > You this one listed, but not "The Wheel of Time Series"?? Now
> > > that is one of my favorites... and there are many more.
> >
> > This one, I've never heard of. Is it any good?
>
> Nah. It's just a ripoff of Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth
> series.

I really liked the series. By the way, just in case you wanted to know the
author is Roberd Jordan. I do read Terry Goodkind, but have not read this
particular book.

How about the Shannara series written by Terry Brooks... These ones remind
me of the Hobbit and Lord of Rings though?

Then there is David Eddings' Belgariad series... those I really enjoyed
also.

Leigh Butler

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 8:23:14 PM12/4/03
to
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 00:38:20 GMT, "Ridge Runner"
<pinerid...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"Karl-Johan Noren" <k...@postladan.se> wrote in message
>news:m2u14g4...@josefin.bahnhofbredband.se...
>> Chris Hammock <zal...@nocturne.org> writes:
>> > Ridge Runner <pinerid...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>> > > You this one listed, but not "The Wheel of Time Series"?? Now
>> > > that is one of my favorites... and there are many more.
>> >
>> > This one, I've never heard of. Is it any good?
>>
>> Nah. It's just a ripoff of Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth
>> series.
>
>I really liked the series. By the way, just in case you wanted to know the
>author is Roberd Jordan.

Tell us of this Roberd Jordan, for we know him not.

Ridge Runner

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 8:43:52 PM12/4/03
to

"Leigh Butler" <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote in message
news:benvsv48862gmb740...@4ax.com...
OOOOOOPPPPPPSSSSSSS..... GOOODNESS>..... I did hit the wrong key.... tis
ROBERT JORDAN.......

Alinet2

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 8:45:40 PM12/4/03
to
Does it need to be SF & F?

One of my all time favorite books is
The Manchurian Candidate by Richard Condon.
Strangely the only other of his books I've managed to read was Winter Kill(s?)


Ridge Runner

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 8:57:04 PM12/4/03
to

"Michael Bruce" <br...@jhereg.net> wrote in message
news:slrnbsv57i...@mica.ibruce.org...

Since others have listed their fav's and I do plan on trying out several of
the books I have not read..

Some of my favorites, that I tend to read again and again are:

The Dragonbone Chair & Sone of Farewell by Tad Williams

Terry Brooks - Shannara Series..
The First King of Shannara
The Sword of Shannara
The Elfstones of Shannara
The Wishsong of Shannara
The Scions of Shannara
The Elf Queen of Shannara
The Tailsman of Shannara -- this being the last I read and really did not
like it very much...

David Eddings - Yes Really
The Belgariad
The Malloreon
The Elenium

Terry Goodkind
Wizard's First Rule
Stone of Tears
Bllod of the Fold...
Guess these are the "Sword of Truth Series"

Joanne Bertin - The Last Dragonlord

Robert Jordan - Wheel of Time Series --

J.R.R. Tolkien -- The Hobbit & Lord of the Rings - as redone by his son.

Madeleine L'engle -
The Wrinkle in Time & A Wind in the Door & A Swiftly Tilting Planet & Many
Waters & An Acceptable Time

Juliet Marillier - Daughter of the Forest..

There are many more I'm sure..... but these are the ones that come
immediately to mind.

Thanks for sharing your favorites... as I will try as many as I can find...

Terra


Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:07:39 PM12/4/03
to
Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:
>In article <ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>,
>Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:

>>I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
>>listlessness.

>Oh, I so totally thought you were kidding with that...

I try to be a woman of my word.

>For what it's worth, my definition is probably "books that stick with
>me in an important way," or something of that nature. It's weird,
>because it means that, for instance, Duncan and Bujold don't show up
>on the list at all, when I enormously like their books.

That's a perfectly valid and interesting definition too.

>My own list includes only three from yours:

>>* The Sarantine Mosaic, Guy Gavriel Kay
>>* Sandman, Neil Gaiman
>>* _Bridge of Birds_, Barry Hughart

>(And really, if I could legitimately say "just Lord of Emperors", I
>would. Oh what the hell, I will, even though nobody can possibly read
>just that book.)

Yes, that would be basically incomprehensible.

>I'd add:

Re-arranged to put the ones I haven't read together.

>The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe
>The Dying Earth, Jack Vance

>The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon
>Cryptonomicon and Quicksilver, Neal Stephenson

>A History of Western Philosophy, Bertrand Russell

>Illusion, Paula Volsky

I doubt I'll read any of these except maybe the Vance and the Volsky;
neither are high on my list, though.

>The Khaavren Romances, Steven Brust

>Discworld, Terry Pratchett

_Small Gods_ almost made it on, but not quite.

>The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien

Bits did and bits didn't, so I couldn't really put it on. Stick with
me in an important way, certainly, so it would definitely be on my
list if I were using your criteria.

Are you thinking that specific sections stick with you, or the entire
thing, or what?

>Hmm. I think that's it, although there are probably a half-dozen
>books I could make a case for. Vernor Vinge, Kij Johnson, Dan
>Simmons, Douglas Adams, Rosemary Kirstein, probably some others I'm
>totally spacing on. But that list will do.

I really need to read _The Fox Woman_. The Kirstein are patiently
awaiting their turn.

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:16:28 PM12/4/03
to
In article <t5pvsvksjubks855c...@news.verizon.net>,
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:
>Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:

>>The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien
>
>Bits did and bits didn't, so I couldn't really put it on. Stick with
>me in an important way, certainly, so it would definitely be on my
>list if I were using your criteria.
>
>Are you thinking that specific sections stick with you, or the entire
>thing, or what?

The whole thing, essentially. I realize, looking over my list, that I
strongly favor books with distinctive style and epic scope; LOTR has
both, very definitely.

>>Hmm. I think that's it, although there are probably a half-dozen
>>books I could make a case for. Vernor Vinge, Kij Johnson, Dan
>>Simmons, Douglas Adams, Rosemary Kirstein, probably some others I'm
>>totally spacing on. But that list will do.
>
>I really need to read _The Fox Woman_. The Kirstein are patiently
>awaiting their turn.

Trent didn't like the first Kirstein very much, apparently. I hate
raving about books.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:17:53 PM12/4/03
to
bigfo...@yahoo.com (G J) wrote:
>Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message news:<ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>...

>> I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
>> listlessness.

[snipped my entire post, including my list of favorite books--it would
help the readability of your posts if you could trim out unnecessary
text]

>Hmm. No non-fiction?

No, I rarely read non-fiction for pleasure.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:18:36 PM12/4/03
to
da...@teleflex.bc.ca (dana) wrote:

>Interesting that you liked Look to Windward, but don't list any of his
>other books, which I thought were much better. Consider Phleabas I
>thought was the best one, but Use of Weapons was also very enjoyable.

Ah, see, I wasn't much impressed by _CP_ at all--it's my
least-favorite. I thought _UoW_ was *impressive*, but "enjoyable"
isn't exactly the right word for my assessment of it.

Anyway, as I said, this is a list of books that I have a wordless
passion for. There are loads of books that I liked a lot and thought
were excellent that aren't on it.

>I'd add:

Using my definition or your own?

[snip all but one]

>Sherlock Holmes - Sir A.C. Doyle

Each individually, or the canon as a whole? I've recently read all of
the canon and I found some of the stories, especially the later ones,
pretty tired. _Hound of the Baskervilles_, OTOH, is excellent.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:19:38 PM12/4/03
to
br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:
>In <ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>, Kate Nepveu wrote:

>[...]
>> My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
>> passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
>> (somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
>> describe fully or accurately. (Often I can verbalize what's good about
>> the books; it's my reaction that's hard.) It's not co-extensive with
>> quality or favorite authors; notice that there's no Bujold here. It's
>> not a desert island list; notice that The Lord of the Rings isn't
>> here, either (it only gives me that feeling in parts). How do you
>> describe love? I've never been any good at it.

>[...]

>> So, comments?

>A worthwhile exercise. I attempt a list:

>- _Infinite Jest_, David Foster Wallace
>- The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe
>- The Belgariad, David Eddings (yes, really)

This is going to sound condescending, and I don't mean it to be, but--
anyway, are you able to articulate why, or are you using my
definition?

>- TEotW-LoC, Jordan
>- _Small Gods_, Terry Pratchett
>- _Magician_, Raymond Feist
>- _Teckla_, _Issola_, _The Sun, the Moon and the Stars_, Steven Brust

Wow. I think you must be the first person I know to say that _Teckla_
is a favorite Brust, let alone favorite book.

>- The Malazan books, Steven Erikson
>- _White Noise_, Don DeLillo
>- _Last Call_, Tim Powers
>- _Feersum Endjinn_, Iain Banks

>I feel like I'm missing a few big ones, but that's a decent start.

I deduce that you like really big sprawling complex books. =>

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:23:57 PM12/4/03
to
In article <cjqvsv4u47fahaeh9...@news.verizon.net>,
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:
>br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:

>>- _Teckla_, _Issola_, _The Sun, the Moon and the Stars_, Steven Brust
>
>Wow. I think you must be the first person I know to say that _Teckla_
>is a favorite Brust, let alone favorite book.

I just realized: TStMatS? I really wouldn't have figured you as a
fan of that book, Monsieur Bruce.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:32:05 PM12/4/03
to
Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 02:43:43 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
>wrote:

>>My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless


>>passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
>>(somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
>>describe fully or accurately. (Often I can verbalize what's good about
>>the books; it's my reaction that's hard.) It's not co-extensive with
>>quality or favorite authors; notice that there's no Bujold here. It's
>>not a desert island list; notice that The Lord of the Rings isn't
>>here, either (it only gives me that feeling in parts). How do you
>>describe love? I've never been any good at it.

>I pretty much agree with your definition, especially about how the
>books you love are not necessarily the best ones you've ever read,

>I would add, personally, that a "favorite" book is one you can read
>over and over again and never get bored of it; every reread is like
>visiting an old friend. (As a result a lot of mine tend to be books I
>read as a young'un.)

Perhaps it's because I re-read a lot, but there are books in heavy
re-read rotation that aren't on here--comfort books, mostly, Westlake
and Stout and Pratchett and Bujold. Certainly the books I listed are
extremely re-readable, too, and some have been favorites for long
enough that I've grown up with them and find something new in them
every time.

>_Watership Down_, by Richard Adams

>If I _had_ to choose one favorite book of all time, this would likely
>be it.

I know I really need to read this. I do.

>_The Hiding Place_, by Corrie Ten Boom

>I don't know if I believe a word of it, but damn if it isn't one of
>the most uplifting things I've ever read.

I've never heard of this. What's it about?

>_It_, by Stephen King

>Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
>characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
>SCARY.

I actually dipped in and out of this a while back, at work over
lunches and whatnot. Yeah, I really like them too. Did you notice that
**SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT** the final outcome depends, except for
one, on the creativity level of their jobs? **END SPOILERS**

>_The Scarlet Pimpernel_, by Baroness Emmuska Orczy

>So cheesy, so over-the-top, so obviously slanted, and yet I love it.
>Romance and intrigue and derring-do, oh my.

Have you read _The Prisoner of Zenda_?

>_Jane Eyre_, by Charlotte Bronte

>Still one of the best character studies ever. There are few
>protagonists I've identified with more strongly than with Jane (which
>makes it a damn good thing it ended the way it did, because otherwise
>I would have been depressed for _weeks_).

But Mr. Rochester is a jerk. No, seriously.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:35:35 PM12/4/03
to
Melissa Devnich <mdev...@earthlink.invalid> wrote:
>In article <ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>, Kate
>Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:

>> * _The Lady's Not for Burning_, Christopher Fry

>Kate, did you find this through its mention in Pamela Dean's _Tam Lin_?

Yup. I was fortunate that the rich-town-next-door had a copy, because
at the time it was out of print. I finally bought a copy in Oxford,
when I was studying in London and took the train down to see a
production (it was way cool, it was costumed post-WWII and worked
beautifully, and Thomas, mmm).

>I ask because that's how I found it. It's one of my favorite (no
>definition given, I'll have to think about that) plays, along with
>_Arcadia_. Tam Lin, OTOH, I find just so-so, but it is a wonderful
>source for book recommendations.

My opinion also on _Tam Lin_, and I really need to read _Arcadia_, as
this is about the sixth time I've heard glowing things about it in
three months.

>FWIW, I would list a lot of the same books you did in my Favorites,
>which is probably why I find your booklog one of the more useful for
>recommendations. I would add one or 2 Lymond stories, as well. Oh,
>why not the whole series.

I don't know if the Lymond books give me that feeling because I've
only read them the once and when I finished them then, I was just too
stunned to thin, really. They'd be good candidates, certainly.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:41:08 PM12/4/03
to
Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:
>In article <t5pvsvksjubks855c...@news.verizon.net>,
>Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:
>>Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:

>>>The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien

>>Bits did and bits didn't, so I couldn't really put it on. Stick with
>>me in an important way, certainly, so it would definitely be on my
>>list if I were using your criteria.

>>Are you thinking that specific sections stick with you, or the entire
>>thing, or what?

>The whole thing, essentially. I realize, looking over my list, that I
>strongly favor books with distinctive style and epic scope; LOTR has
>both, very definitely.

You really need to read Dorothy Dunnett.

>Trent didn't like the first Kirstein very much, apparently. I hate
>raving about books.

Oh, it won't be your fault; lots of people have said approving things
about it.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:43:23 PM12/4/03
to
ali...@aol.com (Alinet2) wrote:

>Does it need to be SF & F?

Of course not. It's your list.

>One of my all time favorite books is
>The Manchurian Candidate by Richard Condon.
>Strangely the only other of his books I've managed to read was Winter Kill(s?)

I assume this was the source of the movie of the same title? Do you
think the movie was a good adaptation?

Allyson Robinson

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:44:36 PM12/4/03
to

Here, here.


<snip some of Leigh's picks>


>
>***
>
>_It_, by Stephen King
>
>Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
>characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
>SCARY.

I read this book every Spring Break from 7th to 12th grade while I baked
my skin in the sun. It was my ritual. (Although, eventually I started
skipping the adult chapters, and only ended up reading the 11 year old
points of view.)
>
>***

>
>_Shogun_, by James Clavell
>
>The literary equivalent of an exquisitely prepared, perfectly medium
>rare 32oz. porterhouse steak, with a loaded baked potato and all the
>fixings. It's not something you want every day, but when you do, damn.
>
>***
>
>_Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_, by J.K. Rowling
>
>I love them all, but this is the one I reread and enjoy the most (so
>far, anyway).
>

Well, if we're picking one, my would have to be _Prisoner of Azkaban_.
I loved the introduction of Lupin and Sirius. Also, I'm a sucker for
time travel.

>***
>
>_To Kill A Mockingbird_, by Harper Lee
>
>One of the greatest novels ever written, IMAO, for a host of reasons
>that anyone not living under a rock their whole lives should already
>know. If you haven't read this yet, smack yourself in the head several
>times and then get thee to Amazon post haste. Then rent the movie,
>which is almost as good.
>

Definitely. Also applies, IMO, to the LOTR.

>***
>
>The Narnia books, by C.S. Lewis
>
>Yes, insultingly obvious religious allegory, etc., etc., but that
>doesn't change the fact that I received them for Christmas when I was
>eight or so, and by the time I was eleven I had to go buy them again
>because the first set had literally fallen apart from rereading.

This too. Although I staunchly believe they should be read in the order
they were originally published (non-chronologically)
>
>***

<snip a few others>


>***
>
>_The Phantom Tollbooth_, by Norton Juster
>
>My first introduction to what you could really do with words and
>literary devices, and still just a really cool story.
>

You know, I hadn't thought of this book in years until I read the Amber
series a while back. The scene where Random is driving Corwin to Amber
for the first time (in the car), for some reason, reminded me of Milo
driving to Dictionopolis.

Weird, I know.

>***
>
>The Elijah Baley trilogy (_Caves of Steel_, _The Naked Sun_, and _The
>Robots of Dawn_), by Isaac Asimov
>
>*shrug*
>
>***
>
>_Jane Eyre_, by Charlotte Bronte
>
>Still one of the best character studies ever. There are few
>protagonists I've identified with more strongly than with Jane (which
>makes it a damn good thing it ended the way it did, because otherwise
>I would have been depressed for _weeks_).

It's a toss up for me between this and _Wuthering Heights_ (Emily
Bronte, of course). Although, I will never forget the first time I read
who was really up in the attic. Shocked, I tell you.


>
>***
>
>Books 1-7 of The Wheel of Time, by Robert Jordan
>
>No, seriously.

I have to add another book I read as a child-

_The Dark is Rising_ by Susan Cooper

Not the Sequence, just this book. Again, another time- travely type
book, but I liked the old-world feel to it.

Much more recent-

_Perdido Street Station_ by China Mieville (or _The Scar_, I'm not
picky).

The imagination this guy has just blows me away. He also has an amazing
was to relate the reader to characters who would normally be considered
alien.


Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 10:01:41 PM12/4/03
to
In article <1trvsvkn852352h75...@news.verizon.net>,

Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:
>Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:

>>The whole thing, essentially. I realize, looking over my list, that I
>>strongly favor books with distinctive style and epic scope; LOTR has
>>both, very definitely.
>
>You really need to read Dorothy Dunnett.

Ha! The previous message, where you were talking about Lymond, I was
thinking, "Hmm, those books are distinctively styled and big -- so why
don't I like them more?"

Maybe if I keep reading, I'd like them more, but so far, they hit me
in the same way O'Brian does -- I enjoy them, and respect them as good
books, but they don't really grab me.

>>Trent didn't like the first Kirstein very much, apparently. I hate
>>raving about books.
>
>Oh, it won't be your fault; lots of people have said approving things
>about it.

Well, that's good. For what it's worth, I think the series gets
better as it goes along. (But don't tell Trent, because I don't want
him getting his hopes up again.)

Aaron Bergman

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 10:25:03 PM12/4/03
to
In article <slrnbsv57i...@mica.ibruce.org>,
br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:

> In <ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>, Kate Nepveu wrote:

> > So, comments?
>
> A worthwhile exercise. I attempt a list:

Why not?

Sticking with sf, and limiting to one book per author for no partiular
reason:

Michael Swanwick, _The Iron Dragon's Daughter_
GGH, _The Lions of Al-Rassan_ (minus the epilogue)
Patricia McKillip, _The Changeling Sea_
Barry Hughart, _The Bridge of Birds_
Walter Jon Williams, _City on Fire_
John Barnes, _The Merchants of Souls_
Daniel Keys Moran, _The Long Run_
David Zindell, _Neverness_
Vernor Vinge, _A Deepness in the Sky_
Philip Pullman, _The Amber Spyglass_


I think I'll stop here, but I could argue for half a dozen more or so.
I'm not really sure about the Barnes, either, really -- it might go
second tier.

Aaron

Thor

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 11:04:39 PM12/4/03
to
Chris Hammock <zal...@nocturne.org> wrote in message news:<bqnlbq$247so0$1...@ID-59100.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> Ridge Runner <pinerid...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > "Mike Kozlowski" <m...@klio.org> wrote in message
> > news:bqm8f2$9ve$1...@reader2.panix.com...

>
> >> The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe
>
> Pausing to add that this was really cool, and I ought to read it again.
>
> [snip]

>
> >> The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien
> >
> > You this one listed, but not "The Wheel of Time Series"?? Now that is one
> > of my favorites... and there are many more.
>
> This one, I've never heard of. Is it any good?

It's not one of Terry Goodkin's best works.

--Thor

Christopher Tong

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 11:53:25 PM12/4/03
to
Leigh Butler wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 02:43:43 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
> wrote:

>>I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
>>listlessness.

> Heh.

>>"What are your favorite books?", is there any definition of "favorite"
>>that comes first to your mind? Or is it solely dependent on the
>>context?

>>My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
>>passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
>>(somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
>>describe fully or accurately. (Often I can verbalize what's good about
>>the books; it's my reaction that's hard.) It's not co-extensive with
>>quality or favorite authors; notice that there's no Bujold here. It's
>>not a desert island list; notice that The Lord of the Rings isn't
>>here, either (it only gives me that feeling in parts). How do you
>>describe love? I've never been any good at it.

> I pretty much agree with your definition, especially about how the
> books you love are not necessarily the best ones you've ever read,
>
> I would add, personally, that a "favorite" book is one you can read
> over and over again and never get bored of it; every reread is like
> visiting an old friend. (As a result a lot of mine tend to be books I
> read as a young'un.)

A wordless passion? What an odd definition. What an odd thread. I
seem to be missing half the posts. I agree that my favourite books
aren't the best crafted I've read (otherwise, I'd probably love _Cyteen_
a lot more), but a wordless passion... I find it rally hard to relate
to that.

Anyway, your post leads, so I'll put my comments here.

> _Watership Down_, by Richard Adams

> If I _had_ to choose one favorite book of all time, this would likely
> be it.

I've noticed that there's an old movie adaptation of this book. Is the
movie any good? The book I agree was well done. Very evocative.

> _It_, by Stephen King

> Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
> characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
> SCARY.

I felt for the characters in Pet Sematary quite a bit more for some
reason. Which made it all the more traumatic when the shit fell out the
way it did in the end.

> _Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_, by J.K. Rowling

> I love them all, but this is the one I reread and enjoy the most (so
> far, anyway).

For some reason, I'm having trouble getting up the gumption for a reread
of _Order of the Phoenix_. I think I saw it quoted somewhere on rasfw
that OoTP was the _Teckla_ of the Harry Potter series and was therefore,
very difficult to like, not to mention reread. Then again, Mike Bruce
likes _Teckla_, so what can I say. IMS that I found OoTP to be the best
written of the Harry Potter books, though. I found GoF a little
contrived...

> The Narnia books, by C.S. Lewis

> Yes, insultingly obvious religious allegory, etc., etc., but that
> doesn't change the fact that I received them for Christmas when I was
> eight or so, and by the time I was eleven I had to go buy them again
> because the first set had literally fallen apart from rereading.

I've never gotten into C.S. Lewis. I got _Prince Caspian_ pressed into
my hand by one of those Campus Crusade for Christ folk who said, "You're
an agnostic? Read this book and follow it. It will save your soul."
To which I mentally said, "Well, fuck this author for the rest of my
life". Don't make me admit that those CCC goons were actually right
about something.

As for favourite books (not going by any real definition here):

The Sandman series. Great visual work. Brilliant ideas. Flawless prose.

The Earthsea trilogy.

_The Wind Up Bird Chronicle_ by Haruki Murakami. I need to read more of
this guy. A real change in style from western writing. Unfortunately,
the quality of the translation matters a great deal. Very strange
stuff, but moving in an odd, undescribable way.

_Tigana_ by Guy Gavriel Kay.

_The Dark is Rising_ by Susan Cooper. A good example of the tale being
in the telling. I reread it after several years just recently. I
recall that the rest of the Cycle tainted my enjoyment of this book, so
I probably shouldn't reread the rest of the Cycle.

_The Element of Fire_ by Martha Wells. I really like this book. I like
it so much that I bought a second copy of it so I could lend to friends.
Alas, they didn't like it anywhere near as much as I did. So I still
have two copies of the book. Oh, woe is me.

It occurs to me that to have a whole lot of favourites, one has to
reread a great deal, which is something I don't do often with novels. I
prefer short stories for that (Ted Chiang's collection and Kelly Link's
are especially well thumbed. Stephen King wrote some great short stuff
too. And there are the Starlight collections, the horror omnibuses
(omnibi?), a couple of Wild Cards collections, some more LeGuin...). I
really don't like rereading books or series that much, unless the book
is really a comfort novel. And there's a big difference between comfort
novels (Eddings, Dragonlance) and favourite books.

Chris

Aaron Bergman

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 11:57:23 PM12/4/03
to
In article <bqp2lq$35i$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca>,
Christopher Tong <ct...@polbox.com> wrote:

> _The Element of Fire_ by Martha Wells. I really like this book. I like
> it so much that I bought a second copy of it so I could lend to friends.
> Alas, they didn't like it anywhere near as much as I did. So I still
> have two copies of the book. Oh, woe is me.


Oooo! Oooo!

I'll trade you for my extra copy of _The Long Run_. I wouldn't mind a
copy of _The Luck of the Wheels_ if anyone happens to have one, either.

Aaron

Michael Bruce

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 11:53:24 PM12/4/03
to
In <cjqvsv4u47fahaeh9...@news.verizon.net>, Kate Nepveu wrote:
> br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:
>>In <ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>, Kate Nepveu wrote:
>
>>[...]
>>> My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
>>> passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
>>> (somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
>>> describe fully or accurately. (Often I can verbalize what's good about
>>> the books; it's my reaction that's hard.) It's not co-extensive with
>>> quality or favorite authors; notice that there's no Bujold here. It's
>>> not a desert island list; notice that The Lord of the Rings isn't
>>> here, either (it only gives me that feeling in parts). How do you
>>> describe love? I've never been any good at it.
>
>>[...]
>
>>> So, comments?
>
>>A worthwhile exercise. I attempt a list:
>
>>- _Infinite Jest_, David Foster Wallace
>>- The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe
>>- The Belgariad, David Eddings (yes, really)
>
> This is going to sound condescending, and I don't mean it to be, but--
> anyway, are you able to articulate why, or are you using my
> definition?

I'm more or less using your definition. More exactly, I'm just listing
what pops into my head when I think "favorite books", without attempting
to analyze things too much.

The Belgariad will always be in because when I was between about 11 and
16, I loved them like no other books. Unlike a lot of other things
that I once liked, I find that I still love them when I read them
today.

Some combination of the characters, the tone and my memories just
makes it work for me. I still like the Malloreon, too. Sometimes,
things like this are inexplicable.

>>- TEotW-LoC, Jordan
>>- _Small Gods_, Terry Pratchett
>>- _Magician_, Raymond Feist
>>- _Teckla_, _Issola_, _The Sun, the Moon and the Stars_, Steven Brust
>
> Wow. I think you must be the first person I know to say that _Teckla_
> is a favorite Brust, let alone favorite book.

Heh. Another one that's hard to explain, really. More than anything,
it felt more immediate than the others, less sure of how cool it was.
And for whatever reason, I found that to have more of an impact
than the slicker installments.

(Of course, I could have put the bulk of what Brust has written on
this list, but I wanted to stick to the highlights. Same with DFW,
actually.)

>>- The Malazan books, Steven Erikson
>>- _White Noise_, Don DeLillo
>>- _Last Call_, Tim Powers
>>- _Feersum Endjinn_, Iain Banks
>
>>I feel like I'm missing a few big ones, but that's a decent start.
>
> I deduce that you like really big sprawling complex books. =>

Indeed I do. I like other things, too, but my natural inclination
is towards things I can really sink my teeth into. I also tend
to enjoy re-reading things, which works better with bigger books
or series of books.

Michael Bruce

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 12:02:56 AM12/5/03
to

Another one that's hard to really explain.

But I do go for the arty stuff, every once in a while. I really liked
the way the book played out, and what is was talking about, even though
it isn't something I can directly sympathize with.

(Also I think the book earns its place by being memorable enough for
me to even remember enough to comment; I read it probably five or
six years ago.)

Lara Beaton

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 1:29:31 AM12/5/03
to
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 00:38:20 GMT, "Ridge Runner"
<pinerid...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>"Karl-Johan Noren" <k...@postladan.se> wrote in message
>news:m2u14g4...@josefin.bahnhofbredband.se...
>> Chris Hammock <zal...@nocturne.org> writes:
>>
>> > Ridge Runner <pinerid...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> > > "Mike Kozlowski" <m...@klio.org> wrote:
>> > >> The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien
>> > > You this one listed, but not "The Wheel of Time Series"?? Now
>> > > that is one of my favorites... and there are many more.
>> >
>> > This one, I've never heard of. Is it any good?
>>
>> Nah. It's just a ripoff of Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth
>> series.
>
>I really liked the series. By the way, just in case you wanted to know the
>author is Roberd Jordan. I do read Terry Goodkind, but have not read this
>particular book.

If only I had heeded the "Danger! Troll Crossing Sign"

If only I had seen the troll coming!

If only I had stopped before it was too late.

If only I had noted the name of the newsgroup, this all could have
been avoided.

Oh well, I guess I'll just have a nice day then.


--
Lara Beaton
"You look like hell. And not the good one where they
just burn you with hot pokers for all eternity. The
bad one with Britney Spears and Richard Nixon."

Katherine Inskip

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 4:16:38 AM12/5/03
to
Christopher Tong <ct...@polbox.com> writes:

Christopher> Leigh Butler wrote:

>> _Watership Down_, by Richard Adams

>> If I _had_ to choose one favorite book of all time, this would
>> likely be it.

> I've noticed that there's an old movie adaptation of
> this book. Is the movie any good? The book I agree
> was well done. Very evocative.

Re: Movie
Yes, it's pretty good. Obviously, it can't include everything in the
book, but it's a damn fine adaption. Still can't listen to _Bright
Eyes_ without crying though...

--
Katherine I.

Daniel

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 4:27:08 AM12/5/03
to
Leigh Butler leigh_...@paramount.com on 04 Dec 2003 17:23:14 -0800 wrote the
following:

>Tell us of this Roberd Jordan, for we know him not.

He's very like Robert Jordan but with a cold and hence cranky.

Aha - and thus CoT is EXPLAINED.

Daniel Wright


dana

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 10:03:12 AM12/5/03
to
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message news:<nkqvsvc50ra4edd7n...@news.verizon.net>...

> da...@teleflex.bc.ca (dana) wrote:
>
> >Interesting that you liked Look to Windward, but don't list any of his
> >other books, which I thought were much better. Consider Phleabas I
> >thought was the best one, but Use of Weapons was also very enjoyable.
>
> Ah, see, I wasn't much impressed by _CP_ at all--it's my
> least-favorite. I thought _UoW_ was *impressive*, but "enjoyable"
> isn't exactly the right word for my assessment of it.
>

Could be that CP was the first I read, and LtW the last - by then, it
seemed that Bank's world had become a little stale. The ending of CP
was so refreshing - I had been through a couple where the endings were
fairly predictable.

But a great futuristic vision, which is why I'd place CP or UoW on the
list.

> Anyway, as I said, this is a list of books that I have a wordless
> passion for. There are loads of books that I liked a lot and thought
> were excellent that aren't on it.
>
> >I'd add:
>
> Using my definition or your own?
>

No, I'd say the same definition. Those are books that I will pick up
and read from time to time. As you said, there are many others that
are enjoyable, but one-timers.

Dick I find hard to read - the man was way out there. But as for
setting down the book and saying, whoah, he's got it on. Of course,
with him, I'm just as likely to say, WTF, but some of his works are
really good.

There are others - the Crysalids, the piano player, a brave new world,
GRR Martin's a Fire and Ice, Steven Erikson's series (althought the
virdict is still out on the last two, as they aren't finished), and so
forth, that I could probably add to the list - books that completely
draw me away, that I will read time and again, or that conjure vast
vistas of thought.

Try Hyperion, if you haven't already. Great book. And The Glass Bead
Game (aka Magister Ludi), is simply a tremendous piece of literature.
If there was one book on the list I'd say read, that would be it.

> [snip all but one]
>
> >Sherlock Holmes - Sir A.C. Doyle
>
> Each individually, or the canon as a whole? I've recently read all of
> the canon and I found some of the stories, especially the later ones,
> pretty tired. _Hound of the Baskervilles_, OTOH, is excellent.

If I read the canon cover to cover, yeah, some of the stories are kind
of stale. But to pick up a story and read through it when I haven't
read any in a while, it's great. Agreed, some are not that good, but
the mood that Doyle creates can be enthralling.

Cheers,
D

Schrodinger's Cat

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 10:34:42 AM12/5/03
to
Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote in message news:<rduusv4e2b846d1gp...@4ax.com>...

> On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 02:43:43 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
> wrote:
>
> >I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
> >listlessness.
>
> Heh.
>
> >"What are your favorite books?", is there any definition of "favorite"
> >that comes first to your mind? Or is it solely dependent on the
> >context?
>
> >My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
> >passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
> >(somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
> >describe fully or accurately. (Often I can verbalize what's good about
> >the books; it's my reaction that's hard.) It's not co-extensive with
> >quality or favorite authors; notice that there's no Bujold here. It's
> >not a desert island list; notice that The Lord of the Rings isn't
> >here, either (it only gives me that feeling in parts). How do you
> >describe love? I've never been any good at it.
>
> I pretty much agree with your definition, especially about how the
> books you love are not necessarily the best ones you've ever read,

<snip some selections>

>
> > _Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_, by J.K. Rowling
>

I liked the fifth a little better. They were both good however.
Dumbledore in the fifth book tips the scales though.

> I love them all, but this is the one I reread and enjoy the most (so
> far, anyway).
>

<snip some more selections, mostly of books I've never read>


>
> _Jane Eyre_, by Charlotte Bronte
>
> Still one of the best character studies ever. There are few
> protagonists I've identified with more strongly than with Jane (which
> makes it a damn good thing it ended the way it did, because otherwise
> I would have been depressed for _weeks_).
>

> ***

I think i would have liked this book a lot better if I didn't read it
in a first year university class, with a prof I didn't particularly
get along with.

>
> Books 1-7 of The Wheel of Time, by Robert Jordan
>
> No, seriously.

You've been around here a lot longer then I, and should know that
praising Robert Jordan around here is a good way of getting hurt in
the dark alleys.

Steve Craig

Alinet2

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 10:40:35 AM12/5/03
to
>From: Kate Nepveu

>ali...@aol.com (Alinet2) wrote:
>
>>Does it need to be SF & F?
>
>Of course not. It's your list.
>
>>One of my all time favorite books is
>>The Manchurian Candidate by Richard Condon.
>>Strangely the only other of his books I've managed to read was Winter
>Kill(s?)
>
>I assume this was the source of the movie of the same title? Do you
>think the movie was a good adaptation?


The movie was a marvelous adaptation. I've read the book about six times. It
was my choice for a long airplane flight.
When I first saw the movie it was paired with To Kill a Mockingbird, another of
my favorite books. I went with fear and trembling and came out enthralled.

Incidentally Last Call by Tim Powers is another book I can reread again and
again. I have a little trouble with the third of the series, Earthquake
Weather, but I did like Expiration Date.

I've only read Declare a couple of times but most of Tim's work is very
rereadable.

==

>
>
>
>
>
>


Women and cats will do as they please, men and dogs should relax and get
used to it." Robert Heinlein.

Jordan Weber-Flink

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 11:28:04 AM12/5/03
to
Kate wrote:
<snip explanation + list of books>
> So, comments?

I've always felt _Strange in a Strange Land_ was one of those books
you force your friends to read so you can see the gleam of excitement
in their eye when they finish it up and come running to you for a
3-hour discussion over hot chocolate.

Just my 2 yen.

JWF

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 11:30:43 AM12/5/03
to
In article <ce7bb2df.03120...@posting.google.com>,
Jordan Weber-Flink <j...@alum.bu.edu> wrote:

>I've always felt _Strange in a Strange Land_ was one of those books
>you force your friends to read so you can see the gleam of excitement
>in their eye when they finish it up and come running to you for a
>3-hour discussion over hot chocolate.

I've always thought it was one of those books you read because it's
allegedly a classic by a major author of the field, and you finish it
and go, "Er, so that was a big deal back in the 60s, was it?"

Other books in that category: Dune.

Leigh Butler

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 1:56:07 PM12/5/03
to
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 02:32:05 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>

wrote:
>Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 02:43:43 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
>>wrote:
>
>>>My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
>>>passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
>>>(somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
>>>describe fully or accurately.

>>I pretty much agree with your definition, especially about how the


>>books you love are not necessarily the best ones you've ever read,
>
>>I would add, personally, that a "favorite" book is one you can read
>>over and over again and never get bored of it; every reread is like
>>visiting an old friend. (As a result a lot of mine tend to be books I
>>read as a young'un.)
>
>Perhaps it's because I re-read a lot, but there are books in heavy
>re-read rotation that aren't on here--comfort books, mostly, Westlake
>and Stout and Pratchett and Bujold.

Oh, same here, but those are more "convenience" re-reads than anything
else - like I'm going to the doctor's office and don't have a new
book, so I snatch a Mercedes Lackey off the shelf.

The ones I listed, though, are the ones that make me smile when I
think of them. It's a lovely thing when you find a book or a movie or
whatever that is completely satisfying to you no matter how many times
you return to it.

>>_Watership Down_, by Richard Adams
>
>>If I _had_ to choose one favorite book of all time, this would likely
>>be it.
>
>I know I really need to read this. I do.

It's a deceptively simple book. It's only in retrospect that you
realize how perfectly it was put together.

>>_The Hiding Place_, by Corrie Ten Boom
>
>>I don't know if I believe a word of it, but damn if it isn't one of
>>the most uplifting things I've ever read.
>
>I've never heard of this. What's it about?

Corrie Ten Boom was a devoutly Christian clockmaker in Holland who (as
she says) was led by God into becoming the ringleader of the
underground resistance that smuggled Jews out of the Netherlands
during the Nazi occupation. She was eventually arrested and sent to a
concentration camp, which she barely survived. The book is her life
story, basically. (There was a TV movie adaptation made of it
recently, but it wasn't very good.)

It really is an amazing story even if you leave the God part out of
it, but Corrie recounts numerous miraculous incidents that she claims
happened to her while running the resistance and while in the death
camps. Like I said, I don't know how much of that is true - I
certainly don't think she _lied_, but stories have a way of growing in
the retelling, and she's not exactly what you would call an objective
observer. But still, it's a great story whether you believe it or not.

I can't even remember how I came across this book or why I read it,
because I rarely read non-fiction and _never_ read biographies, but
over the years I must have re-read this book about fifty times.

>>_It_, by Stephen King
>
>>Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
>>characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
>>SCARY.
>
>I actually dipped in and out of this a while back, at work over
>lunches and whatnot. Yeah, I really like them too. Did you notice that
>**SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT** the final outcome depends, except for
>one, on the creativity level of their jobs? **END SPOILERS**

*Thinks about the ones who died and who didn't* Egad.

That's so funny.

>>_The Scarlet Pimpernel_, by Baroness Emmuska Orczy
>
>>So cheesy, so over-the-top, so obviously slanted, and yet I love it.
>>Romance and intrigue and derring-do, oh my.
>
>Have you read _The Prisoner of Zenda_?

Nope. Should I?

>>_Jane Eyre_, by Charlotte Bronte
>
>>Still one of the best character studies ever. There are few
>>protagonists I've identified with more strongly than with Jane (which
>>makes it a damn good thing it ended the way it did, because otherwise
>>I would have been depressed for _weeks_).
>
>But Mr. Rochester is a jerk. No, seriously.

*waves this away* Of course he was. All men are jerks, going by the
genre. _Wuthering Heights_, _Rebecca_, that stupid book with "Melon"
in the title... jerks, the lot of them.

It was Jane I cared about. If she wanted to marry the jerk, I was
rooting for her. It's not like life offered her so many more appealing
options.

Leigh Butler

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 2:27:28 PM12/5/03
to
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 18:44:36 -0800, Allyson Robinson
<all...@allyangel.acomhosting.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 12:25:41 -0800, Leigh Butler
><leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:

<favorites>

><snip some of Leigh's picks>
>>
>>***
>>
>>_It_, by Stephen King
>>
>>Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
>>characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
>>SCARY.
>
>I read this book every Spring Break from 7th to 12th grade while I baked
>my skin in the sun. It was my ritual. (Although, eventually I started
>skipping the adult chapters, and only ended up reading the 11 year old
>points of view.)

The kid bits were definitely the best part of the book. King really
does a great job of capturing both the era the characters (and he)
grew up in, and what it was like to be a kid in general.

>>***
>>
>>_Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_, by J.K. Rowling
>>
>>I love them all, but this is the one I reread and enjoy the most (so
>>far, anyway).
>
>Well, if we're picking one, my would have to be _Prisoner of Azkaban_.
>I loved the introduction of Lupin and Sirius. Also, I'm a sucker for
>time travel.

Oh, _Azkaban_ was definitely the best-written of the first four books
(and I'm really looking forward to seeing if Cuaron can do the movie
version justice), but _Goblet_ had an epic scope to it that really
just hits the spot for me.

>>***
>>
>>The Narnia books, by C.S. Lewis
>>
>>Yes, insultingly obvious religious allegory, etc., etc., but that
>>doesn't change the fact that I received them for Christmas when I was
>>eight or so, and by the time I was eleven I had to go buy them again
>>because the first set had literally fallen apart from rereading.
>
>This too. Although I staunchly believe they should be read in the order
>they were originally published (non-chronologically)

Same here. _The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe_ should be first,
dammit.

>>***
>>
>>_The Phantom Tollbooth_, by Norton Juster
>>
>>My first introduction to what you could really do with words and
>>literary devices, and still just a really cool story.
>
>You know, I hadn't thought of this book in years until I read the Amber
>series a while back. The scene where Random is driving Corwin to Amber
>for the first time (in the car), for some reason, reminded me of Milo
>driving to Dictionopolis.
>
>Weird, I know.

Still haven't read the Amber books. I saw an omnibus edition of,
apparently, all of them (it was massive) in B&N a few weeks ago, but I
balked at shelling out that much cash for an entire series in one blow
that I didn't even know if I was going to like.

>>***
>>
>>_Jane Eyre_, by Charlotte Bronte
>>
>>Still one of the best character studies ever. There are few
>>protagonists I've identified with more strongly than with Jane (which
>>makes it a damn good thing it ended the way it did, because otherwise
>>I would have been depressed for _weeks_).
>
>It's a toss up for me between this and _Wuthering Heights_ (Emily
>Bronte, of course). Although, I will never forget the first time I read
>who was really up in the attic. Shocked, I tell you.

Everyone thinks I'm crazy, because I loved _Jane Eyre_ and _Rebecca_,
and hated _Wuthering Heights_.

I don't know why. I actually don't remember many of the details of the
book, because I only read it once years ago, but I remember being
profoundly annoyed by practically everything in it, especially all the
recursive geneology crap.

*shrug*


>_The Dark is Rising_ by Susan Cooper
>
>Not the Sequence, just this book. Again, another time- travely type
>book, but I liked the old-world feel to it.

There are a lot of Cooper fans round these parts. Never read her
myself.

>Much more recent-
>
>_Perdido Street Station_ by China Mieville (or _The Scar_, I'm not
>picky).
>
>The imagination this guy has just blows me away. He also has an amazing
>was to relate the reader to characters who would normally be considered
>alien.

I started reading PSS a few months ago, but I never finished it. Too
distracted these days. I'll have to try to come back to it at some
point.

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 2:51:26 PM12/5/03
to
In article <o0m1tvkkirklhv6u3...@4ax.com>,
Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:

>Still haven't read the Amber books. I saw an omnibus edition of,
>apparently, all of them (it was massive) in B&N a few weeks ago, but I
>balked at shelling out that much cash for an entire series in one blow
>that I didn't even know if I was going to like.

They're worth trying, at the very least. Besides, I think the omnibus
is only like $15 or so, which makes it less risky than an unknown
hardcover.

>>_The Dark is Rising_ by Susan Cooper
>

>There are a lot of Cooper fans round these parts. Never read her
>myself.

All the fans read her as kids. Even as kid-fantasy, Cooper is
inferior to Rowling, Lloyd Alexander, and LeGuin.

Goetz Von Berlichingen

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 5:45:49 PM12/5/03
to
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message news:<ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>...
...
> So, two things resulted from this. One, of course, was a list of book
> titles. The other was a question: when confronted with the question,

> "What are your favorite books?", is there any definition of "favorite"
> that comes first to your mind? Or is it solely dependent on the
> context?
...

> My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
> passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
> (somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
> describe fully or accurately.

My definition is the set of books I keep in my personal bookshelf
rather than lost among the tens of thousands of volumes in our
library. This says much about what I frequently reread and enjoy. I
find the contrast with the much more intellectual books of the the
other respondents very interesting.

Conan (Lancer Paperback series with Robert E. Howard stories and work
by L. Sprague de Camp, Lin Carter, and Bjorn Nyberg)

Horatio Hornblower series by C. S. Forester

Jeeves and Wooster novels, Blandings Castle novels, and a few
non-series novels by P. G. Wodehouse

_The_Steel_Bonnets_,
_The_Candlemass_Road_,
_The_General_Danced_at_Dawn_,
_MacAuslan_in_the_Rough_,
_The_Sheikh_and_the_Dustbin_,
_Quartered_Safe_Out_Here,
_The_Pyrates_ all by George MacDonald Fraser

_Red_Storm_Rising_ (I still like playing Harpoon),
_Hunt_for_Red_October_ (I first read this while working on the SeaWolf
specs),
_Patriot_Games_,
_The_Cardinal_of_the_Kremlin_,
_Without_Remorse_,
_Rainbow_Six_,
_Armored_Cav_,
_Fighter_Wing_ (reasonably accurate),
_Special_Forces_ (accurate with my limited experience), and if I have
to give the author you're out of touch with popular American culture,

_Games_of_the_Hangman_ and _Rules_of_the_Hunt_ by Victor O'Reilly

_The_Complete,_Annotated_Sherlock_Holmes_, A. C. Doyle

Several Cap'n Fatso books and other books by Daniel V. Gallery (you
gotta love the sense of humour that tells a British Knight of the Bath
that the honorific DDLM is equivalent to KOB when it really stands for
"Dan, Dan, the Lavatory Man")

The Amelia Peabody series by Elizabeth Peters (although my interest in
the later ones has kind of petered out)

and whichever Florence Kings and Laurell K. Hamiltons I've stolen out
of my wife's bookshelf.

Overall, I think my taste is much more plebian than the average
denizen of this group. I eschew philosophy, detest Gibbon, avoid the
paid-by-the-word Victorian classics, and generally amuse myself with
the humourous or my own interests.

Goetz

Goetz Von Berlichingen

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 6:14:20 PM12/5/03
to
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message news:<rmqvsvcdmeds4oh4m...@news.verizon.net>...

> Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 02:43:43 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
> >wrote:
...

> >_The Scarlet Pimpernel_, by Baroness Emmuska Orczy
>
> >So cheesy, so over-the-top, so obviously slanted, and yet I love it.
> >Romance and intrigue and derring-do, oh my.
>
> Have you read _The Prisoner of Zenda_?

Good choices that reminded me that _The_Three_Musketeers_,
_Ten_Years_After_, and _The_Man_in_The_Iron_Mask_ as well as you-all's
two transit through the personal bookshelf on a regular basis.

Goetz

P.S. And also _Rupert_of_Hentzau_

Leigh Butler

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 6:22:31 PM12/5/03
to
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:51:26 +0000 (UTC), Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org>
wrote:

>In article <o0m1tvkkirklhv6u3...@4ax.com>,
>Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>
>>Still haven't read the Amber books. I saw an omnibus edition of,
>>apparently, all of them (it was massive) in B&N a few weeks ago, but I
>>balked at shelling out that much cash for an entire series in one blow
>>that I didn't even know if I was going to like.
>
>They're worth trying, at the very least. Besides, I think the omnibus
>is only like $15 or so, which makes it less risky than an unknown
>hardcover.

Hrm. I think it must have been more than that - I would have bought it
if it was only fifteen bucks.

*amazons*

Yeah, it was 22 bucks - Amazon discounts it to 16. Maybe I'll get it
when I finally get up the courage to send my credit card numbers out
into the void and buy the last Sandman.

(Still really uncomfortable with buying things online.)

>>>_The Dark is Rising_ by Susan Cooper
>>
>>There are a lot of Cooper fans round these parts. Never read her
>>myself.
>
>All the fans read her as kids. Even as kid-fantasy, Cooper is
>inferior to Rowling, Lloyd Alexander, and LeGuin.

Ah. I never read LeGuin either. I liked Alexander, but as a kid (as
in, under 13) I was all about Madeleine L'Engle and Walter Farley and
Lois Duncan and Judy Blume and C.S. Lewis and a bunch more I'll
remember two minutes after posting this. Tolkien. The Nancy Drew and
Trixie Belden books. Meredith Ann Pierce. Stephen King. The Anne of
Green Gables books. There was even that mercifully brief yet still
terribly embarrassing fling with the Sweet Valley High oeuvre de
merde.

Oh, and those Choose Your Own Adventure books. I remember my favorite
had a story ending where you turned into a unicorn. I had a system all
worked out for keeping multiple places marked with various fingers so
I could flip back and forth quickly and get the story "right". I must
have looked spastic, reading those things.

Michael Bruce

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 7:12:24 PM12/5/03
to

No. Although I might give you Alexander, and I've never read LeGuin.
But not Rowling.

Jordan S. Weber-Flink

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 7:29:04 PM12/5/03
to
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:22:31 -0800, Leigh Butler
<leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:

<snip>

>Oh, and those Choose Your Own Adventure books. I remember my favorite
>had a story ending where you turned into a unicorn. I had a system all
>worked out for keeping multiple places marked with various fingers so
>I could flip back and forth quickly and get the story "right". I must
>have looked spastic, reading those things.

I loved those things too, and I did the same finger thing. My favorite
one had a kid travelling to the future and getting into some kind of
mechwarrior style battle armor, or something. Ever read the parody
about working in a cubicle? It looks something like this:

If you file the TPS report, turn to page 16.
If you surf the web for 3 hours, turn to page 63.
If you pick your nose, turn to page 28.


--

JWF

jwf[@]alum.bu.edu
http://weberflink.blogspot.com/

Leigh Butler

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 7:52:33 PM12/5/03
to
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 20:53:25 -0800, Christopher Tong
<ct...@polbox.com> wrote:
>Leigh Butler wrote:

>A wordless passion? What an odd definition. What an odd thread. I
>seem to be missing half the posts. I agree that my favourite books
>aren't the best crafted I've read (otherwise, I'd probably love _Cyteen_
>a lot more), but a wordless passion... I find it rally hard to relate
>to that.

Hey, there's a lot to be said for wordless passion.

So not to speak.

>Anyway, your post leads, so I'll put my comments here.
>
>> _Watership Down_, by Richard Adams
>
>> If I _had_ to choose one favorite book of all time, this would likely
>> be it.
>
>I've noticed that there's an old movie adaptation of this book. Is the
>movie any good? The book I agree was well done. Very evocative.

Haven't seen it. Refused to watch it.

>> _Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_, by J.K. Rowling
>
>> I love them all, but this is the one I reread and enjoy the most (so
>> far, anyway).
>
>For some reason, I'm having trouble getting up the gumption for a reread
>of _Order of the Phoenix_.

Same here.

>I think I saw it quoted somewhere on rasfw
>that OoTP was the _Teckla_ of the Harry Potter series and was therefore,
>very difficult to like, not to mention reread.

And this is the best explanation of why I've seen. It wasn't quite as
Teckla-ish as _Teckla_ was, but it was the same kind of thing. Which
makes it necessary for the story, but it's never fun to see a
character you really like hit so many low points.

>Then again, Mike Bruce
>likes _Teckla_, so what can I say.

Yes, but like most guys named "Mike", he's a little bit weird.

>> The Narnia books, by C.S. Lewis
>
>> Yes, insultingly obvious religious allegory, etc., etc., but that
>> doesn't change the fact that I received them for Christmas when I was
>> eight or so, and by the time I was eleven I had to go buy them again
>> because the first set had literally fallen apart from rereading.
>
>I've never gotten into C.S. Lewis. I got _Prince Caspian_ pressed into
>my hand by one of those Campus Crusade for Christ folk who said, "You're
>an agnostic? Read this book and follow it. It will save your soul."
>To which I mentally said, "Well, fuck this author for the rest of my
>life". Don't make me admit that those CCC goons were actually right
>about something.

It's possible to completely ignore the allegory if you want to. I
think. I don't know, I read them when I was very young, and other than
the most obvious references, most of the allegory went right over my
head. So to me, they were fantasy adventures first, and I still regard
them as such. But it might be too late for you.

>As for favourite books (not going by any real definition here):
>
>The Sandman series. Great visual work. Brilliant ideas. Flawless prose.

That was on my list too. Just stunning stuff.

>The Earthsea trilogy.

I was put off from trying this because the first thing I ever tried to
read by LeGuin was _The Dispossessed_, which has a muy cool title but
AFAICT has nothing else going for it.

>_The Wind Up Bird Chronicle_ by Haruki Murakami. I need to read more of
>this guy. A real change in style from western writing. Unfortunately,
>the quality of the translation matters a great deal. Very strange
>stuff, but moving in an odd, undescribable way.

_Hard Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World_ is completely
bizarre, yet very cool.

Actually that sums up my feeling about practically every aspect of
modern Japanese culture and art I've ever been exposed to.

>_Tigana_ by Guy Gavriel Kay.

This is an excellent book, and I always recommend it, but it just
isn't something that makes my favorite list in the sense Kate was
using the term.

>It occurs to me that to have a whole lot of favourites, one has to
>reread a great deal, which is something I don't do often with novels.

My mother used to get mad at me for re-reading the same things over
and over again. She claimed it was keeping me from new stuff. I think
she was overreacting - I may re-read a lot, but despite that I think
I've managed to get a respectable tonnage of reading material under my
belt.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 8:25:24 PM12/5/03
to
Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:
>In article <1trvsvkn852352h75...@news.verizon.net>,
>Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:
>>Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:

>>>The whole thing, essentially. I realize, looking over my list, that I
>>>strongly favor books with distinctive style and epic scope; LOTR has
>>>both, very definitely.

>>You really need to read Dorothy Dunnett.

>Ha! The previous message, where you were talking about Lymond, I was
>thinking, "Hmm, those books are distinctively styled and big -- so why
>don't I like them more?"

Well, there is the historical v. sf thing. And Dunnett's plotting can
be opaque. Do you like the *characters*, at least? And which of them
have you read?

--
Kate Nepveu
E-mail: kne...@steelypips.org
Home: http://www.steelypips.org/
Book log: http://www.steelypips.org/weblog/

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 8:44:13 PM12/5/03
to
br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:
>In <cjqvsv4u47fahaeh9...@news.verizon.net>, Kate Nepveu wrote:
>> br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:

>>>- The Belgariad, David Eddings (yes, really)

>> This is going to sound condescending, and I don't mean it to be, but--
>> anyway, are you able to articulate why, or are you using my
>> definition?

>I'm more or less using your definition. More exactly, I'm just listing
>what pops into my head when I think "favorite books", without attempting
>to analyze things too much.

>The Belgariad will always be in because when I was between about 11 and
>16, I loved them like no other books. Unlike a lot of other things
>that I once liked, I find that I still love them when I read them
>today.

>Some combination of the characters, the tone and my memories just
>makes it work for me. I still like the Malloreon, too. Sometimes,
>things like this are inexplicable.

Fair enough. It's nice when you're able to keep that feeling--it's
always sad to see a once-loved book change before your eyes into "how
did I like this?"

>>>- _Teckla_, _Issola_, _The Sun, the Moon and the Stars_, Steven Brust

>> Wow. I think you must be the first person I know to say that _Teckla_
>> is a favorite Brust, let alone favorite book.

>Heh. Another one that's hard to explain, really. More than anything,
>it felt more immediate than the others, less sure of how cool it was.
>And for whatever reason, I found that to have more of an impact
>than the slicker installments.

Oh, it has an *impact*, certainly, just a painful one for me. =>

Vlad can be a very distancing narrator, however.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 8:45:18 PM12/5/03
to
Aaron Bergman <aber...@physics.utexas.edu> wrote:
>In article <slrnbsv57i...@mica.ibruce.org>,
> br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:

>> A worthwhile exercise. I attempt a list:

>Why not?

>Sticking with sf, and limiting to one book per author for no partiular
>reason:

[...]


>GGH, _The Lions of Al-Rassan_ (minus the epilogue)

So far I think I've seen every Kay book listed as a favorite, except
Fionavar. And I'm sure someone out there likes Fionavar best, too.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 9:30:41 PM12/5/03
to
Christopher Tong <ct...@polbox.com> wrote:
>Leigh Butler wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 02:43:43 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
>> wrote:

>>>My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
>>>passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
>>>(somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
>>>describe fully or accurately.

[...]


>> I pretty much agree with your definition, especially about how the
>> books you love are not necessarily the best ones you've ever read,

>> I would add, personally, that a "favorite" book is one you can read
>> over and over again and never get bored of it; every reread is like
>> visiting an old friend. (As a result a lot of mine tend to be books I
>> read as a young'un.)

>A wordless passion? What an odd definition. What an odd thread. I
>seem to be missing half the posts. I agree that my favourite books
>aren't the best crafted I've read (otherwise, I'd probably love _Cyteen_
>a lot more), but a wordless passion... I find it rally hard to relate
>to that.

I'm not surprised, because it is very hard for me to describe. Anyway,
this whole line of thinking kicked off for me when talking about the
many _different_ meanings of "favorite."


I really need to re-read _Cyteen_; I found it fascinating on first
read but I know I missed huge swathes of meaning. And of course
there's the perpetual debate over who the murderer is.

>> _It_, by Stephen King

>> Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
>> characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
>> SCARY.

>I felt for the characters in Pet Sematary quite a bit more for some
>reason. Which made it all the more traumatic when the shit fell out the
>way it did in the end.

Somehow I never read that one. Since I've just become a dog owner, I
think I'll probably continue to skip it. =>

>> _Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_, by J.K. Rowling

>> I love them all, but this is the one I reread and enjoy the most (so
>> far, anyway).

>For some reason, I'm having trouble getting up the gumption for a reread
>of _Order of the Phoenix_. I think I saw it quoted somewhere on rasfw
>that OoTP was the _Teckla_ of the Harry Potter series and was therefore,
>very difficult to like, not to mention reread. Then again, Mike Bruce
>likes _Teckla_, so what can I say. IMS that I found OoTP to be the best
>written of the Harry Potter books, though. I found GoF a little
>contrived...

I've said that, though I don't know if I did so here. Bleak yet
necessary, yes indeed.

I admire both for their daring and their potential.

>_The Dark is Rising_ by Susan Cooper. A good example of the tale being
>in the telling. I reread it after several years just recently. I
>recall that the rest of the Cycle tainted my enjoyment of this book, so
>I probably shouldn't reread the rest of the Cycle.

Yes, I think it goes weird at the end.

>_The Element of Fire_ by Martha Wells. I really like this book. I like
>it so much that I bought a second copy of it so I could lend to friends.
> Alas, they didn't like it anywhere near as much as I did. So I still
>have two copies of the book. Oh, woe is me.

Lucky you--it took me a long time to find an affordable copy for
myself, and after that I've only found one to give away (Trent, did I
give it to you?). Fabulous book, love it to pieces, first chapter
rocks and is available at

http://www.marthawells.com/element.htm

People seem to like either _Element_ or the rest of her books, but not
both.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 9:31:07 PM12/5/03
to
Aaron Bergman <aber...@physics.utexas.edu> wrote:

>I wouldn't mind a
>copy of _The Luck of the Wheels_ if anyone happens to have one, either.

Yeah, we have one. Send me your address.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 9:35:24 PM12/5/03
to
ali...@aol.com (Alinet2) wrote:
>>From: Kate Nepveu
>>ali...@aol.com (Alinet2) wrote:

>>>One of my all time favorite books is
>>>The Manchurian Candidate by Richard Condon.
>>>Strangely the only other of his books I've managed to read was Winter
>>Kill(s?)

>>I assume this was the source of the movie of the same title? Do you
>>think the movie was a good adaptation?

>The movie was a marvelous adaptation. I've read the book about six times. It
>was my choice for a long airplane flight.

I'll have to give it a try sometime, thanks.

>Incidentally Last Call by Tim Powers is another book I can reread again and
>again. I have a little trouble with the third of the series, Earthquake
>Weather, but I did like Expiration Date.

>I've only read Declare a couple of times but most of Tim's work is very
>rereadable.

I was kind of disappointed in _Declare_, I think because the ending
was so short--in _Last Call_, when the characters figure out what they
need to do, it's still a struggle to get it down. The denouement of
_Declare_ is nearly anti-climatic.

It's very weird going to Las Vegas for the first time after reading
_Last Call_.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 9:41:11 PM12/5/03
to
Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 02:32:05 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
>wrote:
>>Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:

>>>_It_, by Stephen King

>>>Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
>>>characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
>>>SCARY.

>>I actually dipped in and out of this a while back, at work over
>>lunches and whatnot. Yeah, I really like them too. Did you notice that
>>**SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT** the final outcome depends, except for
>>one, on the creativity level of their jobs? **END SPOILERS**

>*Thinks about the ones who died and who didn't* Egad.

>That's so funny.

I was happier with the ending when I figured that out.

>>>_The Scarlet Pimpernel_, by Baroness Emmuska Orczy

>>>So cheesy, so over-the-top, so obviously slanted, and yet I love it.
>>>Romance and intrigue and derring-do, oh my.

>>Have you read _The Prisoner of Zenda_?

>Nope. Should I?

It's a classic of the genre, and rather fun.

>>>_Jane Eyre_, by Charlotte Bronte

[...]


>>But Mr. Rochester is a jerk. No, seriously.

>*waves this away* Of course he was. All men are jerks, going by the
>genre. _Wuthering Heights_, _Rebecca_, that stupid book with "Melon"
>in the title... jerks, the lot of them.

>It was Jane I cared about. If she wanted to marry the jerk, I was
>rooting for her. It's not like life offered her so many more appealing
>options.

Ah, if characters want to marry jerks, then I care less about them as
people.

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 9:47:37 PM12/5/03
to
goetzvonbe...@comcast.net (Goetz Von Berlichingen) wrote:
>Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message news:<ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>...

>> My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless


>> passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
>> (somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
>> describe fully or accurately.

> My definition is the set of books I keep in my personal bookshelf
>rather than lost among the tens of thousands of volumes in our
>library. This says much about what I frequently reread and enjoy. I
>find the contrast with the much more intellectual books of the the
>other respondents very interesting.

Oh, there are lots of things in heavy re-read rotation that aren't on
my list, some of which are pure guilty pleasures (J.D. Robb, anyone?).
There's no right answer to this, after all--I'm finding all the
answers very interesting.

>Horatio Hornblower series by C. S. Forester

I haven't read these. I probably really should. Is chronological or
publication order important?

>Jeeves and Wooster novels, Blandings Castle novels, and a few
>non-series novels by P. G. Wodehouse

Wodehouse is a master of the craft. Do you read Donald Westlake? I'd
recommend his comic caper novels to you--like _The Hot Rock_ or
_What's the Worst that Could Happen?_.

> Overall, I think my taste is much more plebian than the average
>denizen of this group. I eschew philosophy, detest Gibbon, avoid the
>paid-by-the-word Victorian classics, and generally amuse myself with
>the humourous or my own interests.

Like I said, it's all in the definitions you use. =>

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 11:36:59 PM12/5/03
to
In article <unb2tvk8r92minkfh...@news.verizon.net>,

Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:
>Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:

>>Ha! The previous message, where you were talking about Lymond, I was
>>thinking, "Hmm, those books are distinctively styled and big -- so why
>>don't I like them more?"
>
>Well, there is the historical v. sf thing. And Dunnett's plotting can
>be opaque. Do you like the *characters*, at least? And which of them
>have you read?

Just the first one. And I think I was mostly bothered by Dunnett's
irritating insistence on not telling you things that would be handy to
know (like, oh, what all the French translates to). I don't think I
had then a solid grasp on the plot, and by now, I've completely lost
it.

The overall effect was very distancing.

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 11:38:45 PM12/5/03
to
In article <pvc2tvcd1q2c8nehs...@news.verizon.net>,
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:

>So far I think I've seen every Kay book listed as a favorite, except
>Fionavar. And I'm sure someone out there likes Fionavar best, too.

I nearly put it, just because it's so... well, melodramatic or
intense, depending on whether you buy into it; but I'm too aware of
its flaws to hold it up that highly. I do like it, though.

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 11:41:31 PM12/5/03
to
In article <ck22tvc4nge00tshn...@4ax.com>,

Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:51:26 +0000 (UTC), Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org>

>Yeah, it was 22 bucks - Amazon discounts it to 16. Maybe I'll get it


>when I finally get up the courage to send my credit card numbers out
>into the void and buy the last Sandman.
>
>(Still really uncomfortable with buying things online.)

Weird.

>>All the fans read her as kids. Even as kid-fantasy, Cooper is
>>inferior to Rowling, Lloyd Alexander, and LeGuin.
>
>Ah. I never read LeGuin either. I liked Alexander, but as a kid (as
>in, under 13) I was all about Madeleine L'Engle and Walter Farley and
>Lois Duncan and Judy Blume and C.S. Lewis and a bunch more I'll
>remember two minutes after posting this. Tolkien. The Nancy Drew and
>Trixie Belden books. Meredith Ann Pierce. Stephen King. The Anne of
>Green Gables books. There was even that mercifully brief yet still
>terribly embarrassing fling with the Sweet Valley High oeuvre de
>merde.

What, no Babysitters' Club? I read a good dozen-plus of those, along
with just about all the other ones you mentioned (plus the Bobbsey
Twins, Tom Swift, the... jeez what were they, the Junkyard Gang?).

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 11:42:27 PM12/5/03
to
In article <slrnbt29k5...@mica.ibruce.org>,

I have more interest in Rowling's derivative mishmash of thirdhand
fantasy tropes than in Cooper's derivative mishmash of Celtic and
Arthurian legend.

Aaron Bergman

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 11:58:28 PM12/5/03
to
In article <mcc2tvs8rj13hh9ot...@news.verizon.net>,
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:

> br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:

> >Heh. Another one that's hard to explain, really. More than anything,
> >it felt more immediate than the others, less sure of how cool it was.
> >And for whatever reason, I found that to have more of an impact
> >than the slicker installments.
>
> Oh, it has an *impact*, certainly, just a painful one for me. =>
>
> Vlad can be a very distancing narrator, however.

What surprised me is that I thought I would have a Brust on my list, but
I couldn't come up with one. They're all very fun and good, but none of
them jumped out and forced itself to be on the list.

Aaron

Aaron Bergman

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 11:54:04 PM12/5/03
to
In article <pvc2tvcd1q2c8nehs...@news.verizon.net>,
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:

> Aaron Bergman <aber...@physics.utexas.edu> wrote:
> >In article <slrnbsv57i...@mica.ibruce.org>,
> > br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:
>
> >> A worthwhile exercise. I attempt a list:
>
> >Why not?
>
> >Sticking with sf, and limiting to one book per author for no partiular
> >reason:
>
> [...]
> >GGH, _The Lions of Al-Rassan_ (minus the epilogue)
>
> So far I think I've seen every Kay book listed as a favorite, except
> Fionavar.

Well, that's because Fionavar sucks.

> And I'm sure someone out there likes Fionavar best, too.

Yeah, but they'd be wrong.

I almost put _Tigana_ there, but it's just goes a tad overboard. If I
just close my eyes and pretend the atrocious epilogue didn't exist,
TLoAR just affected more than any of the other.

Aaron

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 12:42:35 AM12/6/03
to
In article <vag2tv4oo6bfen73o...@news.verizon.net>,
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:

>>Jeeves and Wooster novels, Blandings Castle novels, and a few
>>non-series novels by P. G. Wodehouse
>
>Wodehouse is a master of the craft. Do you read Donald Westlake? I'd
>recommend his comic caper novels to you--like _The Hot Rock_ or
>_What's the Worst that Could Happen?_.

While any person might enjoy any particular book, I don't think
there's anything much in common between Wodehouse and Westlake, other
than the alphabet.

Indigo Wombat

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 1:37:53 AM12/6/03
to

On that note, let me recommend an excellent new British-humour-scifi series
that a sf-reviewer friend turned me onto:

_The Eyre Affair_, _Lost in a Good Book_ & _The Well of Lost Plots_, by
Jasper Fforde.
(The "Thursday Next" adventures)

A very surreal alternative universe setting. The protagonist, Thursday
Next, is a "LiteraTec"... Special Ops detective dealing specifically with
literary crimes... her dad is a nameless rogue time traveller who's been
eradicated from the timeline but keeps showing up for visits anyway, and she
faces antagonists with names like Acheron Hades and Jack Schitt. The first
book deals with a villain who steals the technology to literally enter books
and interact with the characters in the storyline, and kidnaps Jane Eyre
from the pages of her own novel, holding her hostage. Excellent, excellent
stuff. I've heard Fforde referred to as "the next Douglas Adams", and I
believe I read a Pratchett quote that said he'd be "watching Fforde very
nervously."

Enjoy!

--
The Indigo Wombat
Marsupial of Might


Michael Bruce

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 2:02:48 AM12/6/03
to

Rowling's magic is too dumb and kiddish to be interesting. Given
the prominent role of magic in the books, this is something of a
problem.

And, actually, expand that to include all of the fantastical
elements in those books. It's all just too cutesy and...
I dunno. I don't have the right word for it. But things like
even the concept of the train platform, and the alley and
things like that just give me a sharp pain right between my
eyes. The wands, the spells, the names for things. It's like
custom designed to make me cringe. Then, even though the
later books start to mature in certain ways, they still have
to deal with that basically goofy foundation.

Cooper wasn't exactly staking out new territory, but it's cool enough
as long as you haven't been saturated with the Arthurian thing
already. And from a kid perspective, you could at least read it
semi-seriously.

Trent Goulding

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 3:34:30 AM12/6/03
to
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:

[favorite books]

>My backbrain's definition of "favorite": books that inspire a wordless
>passion, that's something like a feeling of completion or satisfaction
>(somewhere around my sternum, I think), but is incredibly hard to
>describe fully or accurately.

I think my definition is even more inchoate than yours, if that's
possible...I almost tend toward a Potter Stewart-ish definition ("I
know it when I see it").

I've been thinking about this off-and-on for the last several days,
and I'm not sure if I've got really high standards, or just a
paucity of imagination, but although I've thought of plenty of books
that I really like, or think highly of, or whatever, I've actually
come up with a very small list of books that I love enough to
christen "favorites". This may also have something to do with my
fading memory. Maybe I'll do better just commenting on other
peoples choices.

>The list, vaguely in the order they occurred to me that night:
>
>* _Freedom and Necessity_, Steven Brust and Emma Bull

Respect it, don't love it.

>* The Sarantine Mosaic, Guy Gavriel Kay

Great stuff, but not my favorite Kay. Apropos of which, really,
really looking forward to next March and _Last Light of the Sun_.

>* _Pride and Prejudice_, Jane Austen

Okay, I think this makes my list, too. Great stuff.

>* _Element of Fire_, Martha Wells

Enjoyable, but not favorite material for me.

>* Sandman, Neil Gaiman

Hmm. Might make my list in years to come, but it hasn't grown on me
long enough yet, seeing as I just finished The Wake a few months
ago.

>* _Look to Windward_, Iain M. Banks

An interesting book, but I found Use of Weapons more impressive.

>* _Bridge of Birds_, Barry Hughart

I need to read this again, particularly now that I've gathered up
copies of the two sequels.

>* _Possession_, A.S. Byatt

Respected it, couldn't love it, or even really like it.

>So, comments?

Well, I know you asked, but it still seems vaguely mean-spirited to
comment on someone's favorite books.

So, turnabout's fair play and all, and for what it's worth, here's a
stab at my own pretty short list:

Lord of the Rings
The Lymond Chronicles (if we can count series, and since it's my
list, we can. If I had to choose one volume, it would probably be
Pawn in Frankincense)
The Aubrey-Maturin series (single volume, hard to say...probably
H.M.S. Surprise)
Pride and Prejudice
Cryptonomicon
Lions of Al Rassan (pace Aaron, with the epilogue)

Ah, crap, I'm terrible at this.


--
Trent Goulding trent.g...@mho.com
Booklog: http://home.mho.net/trent.goulding/books/blcurrent.html

Trent Goulding

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 3:34:32 AM12/6/03
to
Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:

>[Fav'rite books]
>
>I'd add:
>
>The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe

I *really* need to re-read this. So I can get to the Long Sun and
Short Sun, of course.

>The Dying Earth, Jack Vance

I really need to finish reading the sequels to this--I mean, the
omnibus, not just the novella.

>The Khaavren Romances, Steven Brust

I just finished The Paths of the Dead, and these are fun and all,
but not much more than that.

>The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon

I made it through the first volume of three once, and always had
good intentions about finishing the rest, but....

>Cryptonomicon and Quicksilver, Neal Stephenson

I'm on board for the first one, didn't like the second one quite as
much.

>Discworld, Terry Pratchett

Never been able to get into these.

>The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien

Definitely

Trent Goulding

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 3:34:34 AM12/6/03
to
Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:

>>You really need to read Dorothy Dunnett.
>

>Ha! The previous message, where you were talking about Lymond, I was
>thinking, "Hmm, those books are distinctively styled and big -- so why
>don't I like them more?"
>

>Maybe if I keep reading, I'd like them more, but so far, they hit me
>in the same way O'Brian does -- I enjoy them, and respect them as good
>books, but they don't really grab me.

I think both series require acclimitization...both get better after
the first reading. Alternatively, they may just not be your thing.

>>>Trent didn't like the first Kirstein very much, apparently. I hate
>>>raving about books.
>>
>>Oh, it won't be your fault; lots of people have said approving things
>>about it.
>
>Well, that's good. For what it's worth, I think the series gets
>better as it goes along. (But don't tell Trent, because I don't want
>him getting his hopes up again.)

I thought the second one was probably a little better than the first
one, but these just didn't grab me all that hard. I can't find the
third one in the library yet, and although I've seen it in the
bookstore, I don't feel like popping for a small press trade
paperback just yet.

Trent Goulding

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 3:34:36 AM12/6/03
to
Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:

>_Watership Down_, by Richard Adams
>
>If I _had_ to choose one favorite book of all time, this would likely
>be it.

Wow. I don't want to rain on your parade or anything, but,
well...bunnies?!

>_The Adventures of Tom Sawyer_, by Mark Twain
>
>I know _Huckleberry Finn_ is supposed to be the better book, but Tom
>Sawyer always made me happy.

I always really enjoyed _Huckleberry Fin_ when I was younger, more
than Tom Sawyer.

>_It_, by Stephen King
>
>Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
>characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
>SCARY.

I read a ton of Stephen King back in the day; this one was never my
favorite.

>_Shogun_, by James Clavell
>
>The literary equivalent of an exquisitely prepared, perfectly medium
>rare 32oz. porterhouse steak, with a loaded baked potato and all the
>fixings. It's not something you want every day, but when you do, damn.

Oh yeah. Loved this one to pieces.

>_Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_, by J.K. Rowling
>
>I love them all, but this is the one I reread and enjoy the most (so
>far, anyway).

I don't want to go all Kozlowski on you or anything, but these are
largely fluff.

>The Narnia books, by C.S. Lewis
>
>Yes, insultingly obvious religious allegory, etc., etc., but that
>doesn't change the fact that I received them for Christmas when I was
>eight or so, and by the time I was eleven I had to go buy them again
>because the first set had literally fallen apart from rereading.

I liked them a lot when I was younger; I should reread them to see
how they hold up.

>_The Witching Hour_, by Anne Rice
>
>A Gothic ghost story skillfully masquerading as a historical novel as
>an excuse to pay homage to my hometown? How could I _not_ adore it?

Hated this; started out with some potential but that whole demented
birth scene (it's been a decade since I've read this, so cut me some
slack on the details) near the end was so ludicrously over the top
that it destroyed any residual good will.

>_The Scarlet Pimpernel_, by Baroness Emmuska Orczy
>
>So cheesy, so over-the-top, so obviously slanted, and yet I love it.
>Romance and intrigue and derring-do, oh my.

This was tres fun back in the day.

Mike Kozlowski

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 3:50:04 AM12/6/03
to

In article <zorRPy91pe+HUf...@News.CIS.DFN.DE>,

Trent Goulding <trent.g...@mho.com> wrote:
>Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:

[Kirstein]

>>Well, that's good. For what it's worth, I think the series gets
>>better as it goes along. (But don't tell Trent, because I don't
>>want
>>him getting his hopes up again.)
>
>I thought the second one was probably a little better than the first
>one, but these just didn't grab me all that hard.

I blame you. I mean, I'm willing to take the heat for you not liking
_Expendable_, but on this one, I'm sticking to my guns.

> I can't find the
>third one in the library yet, and although I've seen it in the
>bookstore, I don't feel like popping for a small press trade
>paperback just yet.

Del Rey may not be what they used to be, but they're not yet a small
press...

David Chapman

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 7:14:57 AM12/6/03
to
Leigh Butler wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 20:53:25 -0800, Christopher Tong
> <ct...@polbox.com> wrote:
>> Leigh Butler wrote:

>>> _Watership Down_, by Richard Adams
>>
>>> If I _had_ to choose one favorite book of all time, this would
>>> likely be it.
>>
>> I've noticed that there's an old movie adaptation of this book. Is
>> the movie any good? The book I agree was well done. Very evocative.
>
> Haven't seen it. Refused to watch it.

Shame on you; it's very good and pretty true to the book.

>>> The Narnia books, by C.S. Lewis
>>
>>> Yes, insultingly obvious religious allegory, etc., etc.

> It's possible to completely ignore the allegory if you want to. I
> think.

Only if you don't read The Last Battle.

>> The Earthsea trilogy.
>
> I was put off from trying this because the first thing I ever tried to
> read by LeGuin was _The Dispossessed_, which has a muy cool title but
> AFAICT has nothing else going for it.

Unput yourself. It's good.


David Chapman

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 7:29:38 AM12/6/03
to

Indeed. I have more interest in well-written works of fantasy than in
Rowling's third-rate classist Enid Blyton.


David Chapman

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 7:25:51 AM12/6/03
to
Christopher Tong wrote:
> Leigh Butler wrote:

>> _It_, by Stephen King
>
>> Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
>> characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
>> SCARY.
>

> I felt for the characters in Pet Sematary quite a bit more for some
> reason. Which made it all the more traumatic when the shit fell out
> the way it did in the end.

King never wanted to publish Pet Sematary, because he thought it was so
horrible, grim, bleak and depressing. It only made print because the
writing on It took so long - he was contracted to publish four novels within
a certain time and couldn't make deadline on the last.

PS: Watch the Pet Sematary movie. It's surprisingly good.


David Chapman

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 7:27:43 AM12/6/03
to
Kate Nepveu wrote:
> Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 02:32:05 GMT, Kate Nepveu
>> <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote:
>>> Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>
>>>> _It_, by Stephen King

>> That's so funny.


>
> I was happier with the ending when I figured that out.

The ending ending, or the epilogue ending? Because I'll never be happy with
the epilogue; it's too sad.

Alinet2

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 10:41:45 AM12/6/03
to
>From: Kate Nepveu

>It's very weird going to Las Vegas for the first time after reading
>_Last Call_.

My daughter lives in LV and she says she finds herself watching the cigarette
smoke over certain areas.

--


Women and cats will do as they please, men and dogs should relax and get
used to it." Robert Heinlein.

Trent Goulding

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 11:49:55 AM12/6/03
to
Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:

>In article <ce7bb2df.03120...@posting.google.com>,
>Jordan Weber-Flink <j...@alum.bu.edu> wrote:
>
>>I've always felt _Strange in a Strange Land_ was one of those books
>>you force your friends to read so you can see the gleam of excitement
>>in their eye when they finish it up and come running to you for a
>>3-hour discussion over hot chocolate.
>
>I've always thought it was one of those books you read because it's
>allegedly a classic by a major author of the field, and you finish it
>and go, "Er, so that was a big deal back in the 60s, was it?"

I always had a real fondness for Stranger way back in the day, in
spite of, or maybe because of, its determined goofiness. I'm sure if
I were to reread it now, whatever fuzzily lingering residual
fondness is there would be summarily swept away, but still...

>Other books in that category: Dune.

Hell no. I almost put Dune on an alternates list last night when I
was writing my favorites out. We can kvetch about its flaws til the
cows come home (alternatively, we could supply a google link to any
of the many rasfw discussions doing exactly that), but this is a
very fine, absorbing, single-volume (i.e. the sequels are
unnecessary, and in some ways detracting) epic.

Trent Goulding

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 12:01:04 PM12/6/03
to
Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:
>Trent Goulding <trent.g...@mho.com> wrote:
>>Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:
>
>[Kirstein]

>>I thought the second one was probably a little better than the first


>>one, but these just didn't grab me all that hard.
>
>I blame you. I mean, I'm willing to take the heat for you not liking
>_Expendable_, but on this one, I'm sticking to my guns.

It's alright; sometimes a person's love for a book (or film, etc.)
can seem somewhat inexplicable.

>> I can't find the
>>third one in the library yet, and although I've seen it in the
>>bookstore, I don't feel like popping for a small press trade
>>paperback just yet.
>
>Del Rey may not be what they used to be, but they're not yet a small
>press...

Was it really by Del Rey? Wow, it so looked like a Meisha
Merlin-type cover package.

Jennifer Winters

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 12:11:00 PM12/6/03
to
"Kate Nepveu" <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message
news:60g2tvkaonj8h99ef...@news.verizon.net...

> Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
> >On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 02:32:05 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
> >wrote:
> >>Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>
> >>>_It_, by Stephen King
>
> >>>Not the best book ever, by any means, but I genuinely loved those
> >>>characters and cared about what happened to them. And clowns are
> >>>SCARY.
>
> >>I actually dipped in and out of this a while back, at work over
> >>lunches and whatnot. Yeah, I really like them too. Did you notice that
> >>**SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT** the final outcome depends, except for
> >>one, on the creativity level of their jobs? **END SPOILERS**
>
> >*Thinks about the ones who died and who didn't* Egad.
>
> >That's so funny.
>
> I was happier with the ending when I figured that out.
>
> >>>_The Scarlet Pimpernel_, by Baroness Emmuska Orczy
>
> >>>So cheesy, so over-the-top, so obviously slanted, and yet I love it.
> >>>Romance and intrigue and derring-do, oh my.

There are more Pimpernel novels, you know.

_The Elusive Pimpernel_
_I Will Repay_
_El Dorado_

All available at Project Gutenberg, if you're interested. And I like them
quite as much as the original, FWIW.

> >>Have you read _The Prisoner of Zenda_?
>
> >Nope. Should I?
>
> It's a classic of the genre, and rather fun.
>
> >>>_Jane Eyre_, by Charlotte Bronte
> [...]
> >>But Mr. Rochester is a jerk. No, seriously.
>
> >*waves this away* Of course he was. All men are jerks, going by the
> >genre. _Wuthering Heights_, _Rebecca_, that stupid book with "Melon"
> >in the title... jerks, the lot of them.
>
> >It was Jane I cared about. If she wanted to marry the jerk, I was
> >rooting for her. It's not like life offered her so many more appealing
> >options.
>
> Ah, if characters want to marry jerks, then I care less about them as
> people.

See, I don't see Rochester as a jerk, more as a guy stuck in a bad
situation. He couldn't divorce his wife because she was insane, he was too
decent to murder her, but he was totally disgusted and repelled by her, even
before she became insane. Sure, he was wrong in trying to marry Jane
without telling her, and he admits as much in the end. Which is the other
reason I like him because he admits he made a mistake.

--
Jennifer Winters
Nerd in babe's clothing


Jennifer Winters

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 12:21:12 PM12/6/03
to
"Kate Nepveu" <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message
news:pvc2tvcd1q2c8nehs...@news.verizon.net...

> Aaron Bergman <aber...@physics.utexas.edu> wrote:
> >In article <slrnbsv57i...@mica.ibruce.org>,
> > br...@jhereg.net (Michael Bruce) wrote:
>
> >> A worthwhile exercise. I attempt a list:
>
> >Why not?
>
> >Sticking with sf, and limiting to one book per author for no partiular
> >reason:
>
> [...]
> >GGH, _The Lions of Al-Rassan_ (minus the epilogue)
>
> So far I think I've seen every Kay book listed as a favorite, except
> Fionavar. And I'm sure someone out there likes Fionavar best, too.


*raises hand* Me! Me! Me! What do I win?

Debbi Chambers

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 1:46:35 PM12/6/03
to

"Mike Kozlowski" <m...@klio.org> wrote in message
news:bqrmlr$61b$1...@reader2.panix.com...
I still have a collection of Nancy Drew and Trixie Belden books that I
intend to bring home from my father's house. And I still enjoy Madeleine
L'Engle nearly as much now as I did when I was much (read 30 years!)
younger. A quicker read, perhaps, but still pretty cool.

Debbi


Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 2:52:50 PM12/6/03
to
ali...@aol.com (Alinet2) wrote:
>From: Kate Nepveu

>>It's very weird going to Las Vegas for the first time after reading
>>_Last Call_.

>My daughter lives in LV and she says she finds herself watching the cigarette
>smoke over certain areas.

. . . and what has she seen? =>

Kate Nepveu

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 2:54:08 PM12/6/03
to

The people's ovation and fame forever--no, wait, wrong context.

Jennifer Winters

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 3:54:53 PM12/6/03
to
"Kate Nepveu" <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message
news:cpc4tvgm9trgia9hr...@news.verizon.net...

> "Jennifer Winters" <j...@wwco.com> wrote:
> >"Kate Nepveu" <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message
> >news:pvc2tvcd1q2c8nehs...@news.verizon.net...
> >> Aaron Bergman <aber...@physics.utexas.edu> wrote:
>
> >> [...]
> >> >GGH, _The Lions of Al-Rassan_ (minus the epilogue)
>
> >> So far I think I've seen every Kay book listed as a favorite, except
> >> Fionavar. And I'm sure someone out there likes Fionavar best, too.
>
> >*raises hand* Me! Me! Me! What do I win?
>
> The people's ovation and fame forever--no, wait, wrong context.


Don't I at least get to buy a vowel?

Roy G. Ovrebo

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 4:12:38 PM12/6/03
to
Goetz Von Berlichingen <goetzvonbe...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message news:<ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>...

[Favourite books]

> My definition is the set of books I keep in my personal bookshelf
> rather than lost among the tens of thousands of volumes in our
> library. This says much about what I frequently reread and enjoy. I
> find the contrast with the much more intellectual books of the the
> other respondents very interesting.

Thanks! I feel a bit less guilty about coming out of the closet with
some of my favourites now.

[snip]

> _Red_Storm_Rising_ (I still like playing Harpoon),
> _Hunt_for_Red_October_ (I first read this while working on the SeaWolf
> specs),

Aye. These two are brilliant. Can't say I care much for the later
Clancy books, except possibly _Without Remorse_ (perhaps because
it was like it was written to order - a book about John Clark's past.)

While talking thrillers, _Day of the Jackal_ should definitely be in
the collection. (Get hold of the film version too - the old one with
Edward Fox as the assassin. It's an excellent adaptation.)

> _The_Complete,_Annotated_Sherlock_Holmes_, A. C. Doyle

Huh. I've got a Holmes collection, but never got round to reading it.
I've read _The Hound of the Baskervilles_ in translation, but that's
pretty much it.

I used to read a lot of crime novels, but tired of them. There's
a limit to how interesting yet another murder can get, and I soured
on the disillusioned detectives that seem to fill every book.

Only a couple crime authors hold my attention - Jonathan Kellerman
is very near buy on sight and IIRC, Andrew Vachss is good too.

> Overall, I think my taste is much more plebian than the average
> denizen of this group.

Some that were mentioned by various people and I agree with:
LoTR I don't think I need to explain.
Terry Pratchett - _Good Omens_ (with Gaiman) and _Small Gods_ are superb.
Douglas Adams - the word 'trilogy' has never been the same since.
PG Wodehouse - absolutely brilliant

Some I haven't seen:
Jules Verne - a great visionary
HP Lovecraft - where would horror be without him?


> I eschew philosophy, detest Gibbon, avoid the
> paid-by-the-word Victorian classics, and generally amuse myself with
> the humourous or my own interests.

Aye. Some non-fiction should make my List:

_Stalingrad_ by Antony Beevor is absolutely great - reads like a thriller
and explains how Stalin got enough cred to take what he wanted of post-war
Europe. One million Germans went in, 5000 returned.

_The Dambusters_ by Paul Brickhill is also great. Barnes Wallis was
a brilliant inventor.

_Stalin - the court of the red tsar_ by Simon Sebag Montefiore.
The gangsters that made up the Soviet leadership made the nazis look
like a bunch of bumbling amateurs. Purges, mass starvation, assassinations,
torture and imprisonment - they had it all.


Yeah, I'm into WWII history. WWII was the only important event in the
20th century. (OK, granted, there was also a first world war that
caused the second.) Computers, jet engines, nuclear power and
nuclear weapons, the cold war and American hegemony - trace it back,
and you'll see the war was at the root of it.
--
Roy

Grant Anderson

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 6:47:09 PM12/6/03
to
"Jennifer Winters" <j...@wwco.com> wrote in message
news:ceoAb.402966$0v4.19...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

And me. But you can have the prize.

Grant


Michael Hoye

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 7:25:15 PM12/6/03
to
In article <ceoAb.402966$0v4.19...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,

Jennifer Winters <j...@wwco.nospam.com> wrote:
>"Kate Nepveu" <kne...@steelypips.org> wrote in message
>news:pvc2tvcd1q2c8nehs...@news.verizon.net...
>>
>> So far I think I've seen every Kay book listed as a favorite, except
>> Fionavar. And I'm sure someone out there likes Fionavar best, too.
>
>*raises hand* Me! Me! Me! What do I win?

A jacket with one sleeve.

--
Mike Hoye

Allyson Robinson

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 8:41:31 PM12/6/03
to
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 04:41:31 +0000 (UTC), Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org>
wrote:

>In article <ck22tvc4nge00tshn...@4ax.com>,
>Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:51:26 +0000 (UTC), Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org>
>
>>Yeah, it was 22 bucks - Amazon discounts it to 16. Maybe I'll get it
>>when I finally get up the courage to send my credit card numbers out
>>into the void and buy the last Sandman.
>>
>>(Still really uncomfortable with buying things online.)
>
>Weird.
>
>>>All the fans read her as kids. Even as kid-fantasy, Cooper is
>>>inferior to Rowling, Lloyd Alexander, and LeGuin.
>>

<snip other children's books authors>

>>merde.
>
>What, no Babysitters' Club? I read a good dozen-plus of those, along
>with just about all the other ones you mentioned (plus the Bobbsey
>Twins, Tom Swift, the... jeez what were they, the Junkyard Gang?).

The Boxcar Children? (Kids?)

Allyson Robinson

unread,
Dec 6, 2003, 9:06:17 PM12/6/03
to
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:22:31 -0800, Leigh Butler
<leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:51:26 +0000 (UTC), Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org>

>wrote:
>
>>In article <o0m1tvkkirklhv6u3...@4ax.com>,
>>Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Still haven't read the Amber books. I saw an omnibus edition of,
>>>apparently, all of them (it was massive) in B&N a few weeks ago, but I
>>>balked at shelling out that much cash for an entire series in one blow
>>>that I didn't even know if I was going to like.
>>
I found mine in a used bookstore for about $5, although it was just the
first 10 broken into 2 different books. I never bothered reading the
2nd 10, however.

<Snip _Amber_ monolith prices>
>
>>>>_The Dark is Rising_ by Susan Cooper
>>>
>>>There are a lot of Cooper fans round these parts. Never read her
>>>myself.


>>
>>All the fans read her as kids. Even as kid-fantasy, Cooper is
>>inferior to Rowling, Lloyd Alexander, and LeGuin.

>


>Ah. I never read LeGuin either. I liked Alexander, but as a kid (as
>in, under 13) I was all about Madeleine L'Engle and Walter Farley and
>Lois Duncan and Judy Blume and C.S. Lewis and a bunch more I'll
>remember two minutes after posting this. Tolkien. The Nancy Drew and
>Trixie Belden books. Meredith Ann Pierce. Stephen King. The Anne of
>Green Gables books. There was even that mercifully brief yet still
>terribly embarrassing fling with the Sweet Valley High oeuvre de
>merde.
>

I liked Alexander as a child, then tried to go back and reread it as an
adult. Not something I would recommend. The magic was gone, and
ruined my fond memories of it. I'm afraid to do the same with L'Engle.

I _loved_ the Trixie Belden books when I was in elementary school. I
think I had at least 50 of them. Same goes for the Nancy Drew books.

My embarrassing fling was with the angst-filled books that get thrown at
young girls. Such as, _Thirteen is too Young to Die_ or _A Summer to
Die_. *snerk*

>Oh, and those Choose Your Own Adventure books. I remember my favorite
>had a story ending where you turned into a unicorn. I had a system all
>worked out for keeping multiple places marked with various fingers so
>I could flip back and forth quickly and get the story "right". I must
>have looked spastic, reading those things.

Oh,yes. Do you want to stay and fight the dragon, hide in a closet, or
jump out the window?

John S. Novak, III

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 1:51:09 AM12/7/03
to
In article <ub7tsvscsk1i6sd1q...@news.verizon.net>,
Kate Nepveu wrote:

So, a little late, but I've been busy.

> I *said* I'd post the list I was working on here, to counter my recent
> listlessness.

And, thereby, transforming yourself to listfullness.

> So, two things resulted from this. One, of course, was a list of book
> titles. The other was a question: when confronted with the question,
> "What are your favorite books?", is there any definition of "favorite"
> that comes first to your mind? Or is it solely dependent on the
> context?

Mine is much more subjective.

Two common themes are whether or not the book is "just right," and
whether or not the book has touched off a series of ideas in my head
or in some other way substantially altered my point of view.

For the former, for fiction especially, that has to mean that the
book has to work for me on all (or almost all) levels, very well--
the prose, the plotting, the characterization, the symbolism, etc.
For non-fiction books, it helps to be well-written in its own right,
to give a reasonably complete treatment of its subject at whatever
level its aiming, and it helps to give a balanced perspective if
there's some controversy in the field.

For the latter, well. It means what it means.

In the fiction category, these come to mind, in no particular order:

_Deadhouse Gates_ by Steven Erikson. Really, the whole Malazan series
thus far has been brilliant, but the second was a special volume in a
special series. I love the series for its conjuration of a theme of
simple human dignity out of a story that almost revels in showing the
opposite. I love the second book becuase of the Chain of Dogs, and
the telling of Coltaine's final fate. Brilliance.

The Neverness Cycle, by David Zindell (_Neverness_, _The Broken God_,
_The Wild_, and _War in Heaven_.) I tried to narrow this down to
one, then to two, but just couldn't. The whole series succeeds like
very very few others, in my experience, at creating a society (human
based in this case) that is at once almost completely alien, but
somehow still comprehensible. It's also just absolutely crackling
with ideas and extrapolations and religious and mathematical
scenes... and I just like the writing style.

_Neverness_ is rough but still shines, like an uncut gem. _The Broken
God_ has one of the best protagonist-antagonist relationships I've
ever seen. And any book-- in this case, _The Wild_-- that can make me
appreciate the pacifist view, even for a split second, has something
going for it.

Alas, while I don't think Neverness is a love it or hate it series, I
do think it's a get it or don't get it series, and it probably doesn't
appeal to everyone. But it's no accident that my blog is named Shih.

_Tigana_ by Guy Gavriel Kay. Because I have pride of place, and
ambition for myself and my place of pride.

_The Cryptonomicon_ by Neal Stephenson. This is probably the best
thing Stephenson has written (with the caveat that I haven't finished
_Quicksilver_ and the additional caveat that I've bogged down badly in
the second section of it.) It's big, it's fast, it's larger than
life, and Stephenson has a way of writing that has you laughing at the
same time he's putting characters you care about through sheer
torture. His books are often humorous, but not really funny if you think
about them.

(Woo! Here we see Randy Waterhouse crowbar himself out of a doomed
relationship with a woman who has nothing but contempt for him and
eventually get sent to prison by shady forces trying to exploit his
family knowledge! Ho ho! Here we see Goto Dengo get his ass kicked
across the South Pacific, get his ass captured by headhunters and
then shit on when he's rescued by his countrymen! And get this!
We see Bobby Shaftoe abandon the woman he loves and the child he doesn't
know about, get *his* ass kicked around the South Pacific, and deal
with it all by developping a morphine addiction! What fun! _The Big U_
is like that, too.)

It's also just plain well written. I don't care when people say the
book is bloated and neeed editting. No, it didn't. Nor was the
purpose of it just to enjoy the scenery. A lot of those extraneous
scenes tended to loop back into the plot, one way or another.

_A Deepness in the Sky_ by Vernor Vinge. I really like Vinge's
fiction. I've read just about every piece of fiction he's written
(possibly I've tracked all of them down by now, but I haven't finished
_Tatja Grimm's World_) and very few of them are bad. As a rule, he
just gets better and better as a writer-- read his short stories in
chronological order, and you can actually see the skill accumulating.

Deepness is probably the most complex work he's written thus far, and
the most satisfying. This is not surprising, since, with the
exception of a efw much shorter pieces, it is his most recent as well.

The first five of _The Amber Chronicales_, by Roger Zelazny. Happily,
the second five and the subsequent short stories did not ruin the
whole thing for me. Zelazny was just a hell of a writer. I've been
through those books so very often that I know each wart and blemish in
them by heart, but the fun of it all still comes through.

_All of an Instant_ by Richard Garfinkle, shares with Zindell a really
wonderful portrayal of an absolutely alien situation which is
nevertheless comprehensible. I cou;dn't possibly even begin to
explain the actual book, except to exhort people to go read it.

_Foucault's Pendulum_ by Umberto Eco. Heh. Heh heh. Any book that
still has me chuckling at the scholarly in-jokes and general silliness
of it all has something gong for it.

In non-fiction:

_Groups: A Pathway to Geometry_ by R. P. Burn. Yes, yes, it's a book
on a group theory approach to modern geometry. Ho hum. But if you
like math, this and every other math book by Burn is wonderful,
because it's pure Socratic method-- it will ask very bite-sized
guided questions which a reasonable student can answer with some
effort, and which magically lead up to complete proofs of some
sophisticated mathematical ideas.

_The First American_ by H. W. Brands. I like historical biographies.
I like early American history. A biography of Ben Franklin is a
must-read, therefore, and Brands is one of the most engaging
biographers I've had the pleasure of reading. I cam away with not
just a better understanding of Franklin (beyond the lightning and the
kite thing) but of the whole background of the pre-revolutionary and
revolutionary periods.

I am looking forward to his biographies of Wilson and Roosevelt,
comma, Teddy, if I ever get around to them.

_Models of Computation and Formal Languages_ by R. Gregory Taylor.
This is one of computer science pedagogy's undiscovered gems, in my
opinion. Every CS theorist must (and in my opinion, every CS
non-theorist certainly *should!*) master certain basic concepts.
Formal languages, and their mapping to various classes of automata,
are in the must-know category. Taylor takes a weird, almost backward
approach to it, but his explanations are some of the clearest I have
ever read, yes, including even the legendary Papadimitriou, and the
newly made classic, Sipser. Papadimitriou and Sipser cover more
advanced material, though.

On that subject, _Goedel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid_, by
Douglas Hofstadter is just a perfect (and perfectly readable)
development of one of the seminal developments in 20th century
mathematics: Goedel's Incompleteness Theorem. And a whole lot of
other stuff. And it's fun. When I was a young man idly kicking
through a used bookstore, years and years before I had any ambition of
pursuing computer science at any level much less an eventual PhD, the
owner pressed this book on me. He told me if I didn't like it, I
could bring it back and he'd refund my money.

How could I argue?

But how did he know?!

_Spacetime Physics_ by Taylor and Wheeler. I could teach relativity
to a monkey with this book. It's that good.

_The Hero With a Thousand Faces_ by Joseph Campbell. On the one hand,
it is kinda heavy handed and can grate, after a while. On the other
hand, although Campbell was a man with a hammer on a universal quest
for nails, he was not a stupid or a crazy man, and there's a lot to
what he has to say, about story structure, about religions, and about
their intersection in mythic structures. This one goes on the list
because after having read it (and other works of Campbell) I find I
get a lot more out of other great works of fiction, and on different
levels than before.

_Nanosystems_ by Eric Drexler. This is pretty much the seminal work
in nanotechnology, to this day. Written over ten years ago, it's
still one of the very few books (as opposed to journal articles) on
nanotechnology that is very much *not* a popular work. This is
Drexler's PhD thesis from MIT, expanded, fleshed out, and solidified.
It's a long hard slog through a lot of different branches of science,
and it's really pretty damned impressive.

Even if the claims turn out not to be practicable, it's still a hell
of an intellectual accomplishment. (And for the record, for anyone
following the public debates, Smalley and Drexler are both embarassing
themselves, at this point.)


--
John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
The Humblest Man on the Net

John S. Novak, III

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 1:59:53 AM12/7/03
to
In article <slrnbt06gn...@mica.ibruce.org>, Michael Bruce wrote:

>> I just realized: TStMatS? I really wouldn't have figured you as a
>> fan of that book, Monsieur Bruce.

> Another one that's hard to really explain.

> But I do go for the arty stuff, every once in a while. I really liked
> the way the book played out, and what is was talking about, even though
> it isn't something I can directly sympathize with.

I like high concept books and odd narrative structures, as well. Brust
is a good enough writer to pull it off. I liked that one, too, just
not as a favorite book.

John S. Novak, III

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 2:05:13 AM12/7/03
to
In article <pvc2tvcd1q2c8nehs...@news.verizon.net>,
Kate Nepveu wrote:

> So far I think I've seen every Kay book listed as a favorite, except
> Fionavar. And I'm sure someone out there likes Fionavar best, too.

The flaws are just too deep for me.
The highs were higher than _Tigana_, and many of the scenes will stay
with me forever, like the Matt Soern and the crystal dragon, Pwyll
hanging on the tree (Jesus Christ, that one will fucking haunt me
forever...), the explosion of the mountain and the War Moon's
appearance in response, and Kevin Laine's end.

But the lows were too low. The Arthurian angle never meshed with the
rest. The Jennifer/Guinevere thing was handled terribly-- Jennifer
wasn't a character, she was a piece of the landscape! And the whole
winged pegasus was an LD50 dose of saccharine.

John S. Novak, III

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 2:14:54 AM12/7/03
to
In article <ck22tvc4nge00tshn...@4ax.com>, Leigh Butler wrote:

> Hrm. I think it must have been more than that - I would have bought it
> if it was only fifteen bucks.

> *amazons*



> Yeah, it was 22 bucks - Amazon discounts it to 16. Maybe I'll get it
> when I finally get up the courage to send my credit card numbers out
> into the void and buy the last Sandman.

On the one hand, it's about twenty bucks. On the other, it's twenty
bucks for ten complete books. Even if five of those ten books sucks,
in my opinion, it's still a pretty good price for what you're buying.

They're also just incredibly fast reads. You could probably read the
first five in a day if you put your mind to it.

> Oh, and those Choose Your Own Adventure books. I remember my favorite
> had a story ending where you turned into a unicorn. I had a system all
> worked out for keeping multiple places marked with various fingers so
> I could flip back and forth quickly and get the story "right". I must
> have looked spastic, reading those things.

Didn't we all?

John S. Novak, III

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 2:32:11 AM12/7/03
to
In article <v3TRP72SpnaTKs...@News.CIS.DFN.DE>, Trent Goulding wrote:

>>* The Sarantine Mosaic, Guy Gavriel Kay

> Great stuff, but not my favorite Kay. Apropos of which, really,
> really looking forward to next March and _Last Light of the Sun_.

Ah, I had forgotten about that.
Alas, still set in the Sarantine world, which is not my favorite.

>>* _Look to Windward_, Iain M. Banks

> An interesting book, but I found Use of Weapons more impressive.

And _The Player of Games_ more interesting, and _Excession_ more
exciting.

Allyson Robinson

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 3:57:26 AM12/7/03
to
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 18:06:17 -0800, Allyson Robinson
<all...@allyangel.acomhosting.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:22:31 -0800, Leigh Butler
><leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:51:26 +0000 (UTC), Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <o0m1tvkkirklhv6u3...@4ax.com>,
>>>Leigh Butler <leigh_...@paramount.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Still haven't read the Amber books. I saw an omnibus edition of,
>>>>apparently, all of them (it was massive) in B&N a few weeks ago, but I
>>>>balked at shelling out that much cash for an entire series in one blow
>>>>that I didn't even know if I was going to like.
>>>
>I found mine in a used bookstore for about $5, although it was just the
>first 10 broken into 2 different books. I never bothered reading the
>2nd 10, however.
>
>>

Bah. I meant 1st five, and 2nd five, obviously. Teach me to post while
half asleep.

Karl-Johan Noren

unread,
Dec 7, 2003, 4:24:25 AM12/7/03
to
Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org> writes:

> goetzvonbe...@comcast.net (Goetz Von Berlichingen) wrote:
>
> >Horatio Hornblower series by C. S. Forester
>
> I haven't read these. I probably really should. Is chronological or
> publication order important?

From my experience (admittedly 15+ years ago) it isn't.

--
Karl-Johan Norén -- k...@postladan.se <-- New e-mail!
The snuggliest man on the net -- http://hem.passagen.se/kjnoren/
- To believe people are as stupid as one
believes is stupider than one can believe

It is loading more messages.
0 new messages