"I love the idea of loving to read ____ " is such a great way of looking at books I personally want to like. It's just not happening, but I continue to force myself to read them. It's a problem.
I personally love reading, but is too late for me.. I have never watched a movie or Television growing out, so in order to dream and scape I have reading. I honestly can't watch most things unless they are written down, since I can't focus
The thumbnail made me chuckle because Gravity's Rainbow is near the top of my list. Everything I've heard about Pynchon makes it sound like his work is right up my alley.
I've read (and LOVED) The Crying of Lot 49 for uni and now I want to read Gravity's Rainbow... but it's just so daunting. Like, can I really take 700 pages of postmodernism?
I have a irrational prejudice against Thriller/mystery. I've wasted a lot of time at thrift stores looking for horror, only to pull out something with a title like, "FACE RIPPER/VISCERA SNIPPER," get excited, then have my hopes dashed when I see, "A Detective Arthur T. Noodleborough Mystery" on the spine.
as a scandinavian, I feel this on a deep level. every time I see an interesting looking cover in a bookstore, it’s a gritty crime drama. every. single. time. and it never just *says* that it’s a mystery. I’ll start reading the backside of what sounds like a somewhat interesting book about a kid escaping abusive parents, and then 2/3 of the way through there’s a paragraph change, and it says something along the lines of “in department xoxo, Mattis Olufsen is back to work after being stabbed by the sunscreen killer, and his young assistant Liv is dealing with the trauma of almost being murdered again, but she’s also developing feelings for the new IT guy, Arne. together, can this crack team overcome Mattis’ alcoholism for long enough to find the missing girls?” and I *LIKE* mysteries. just not the types that are popular in my country, I guess.
@@esobelisk3110 Yeah, I can't remember how many times I went to my local bookshop in search of an interesting mystery or whodunit only to leave empty handed because none sounded genuinely investing. At this point I just began writing the books I'd like to read myself because I can't find them somewhere else.
"shipwrecked library" wait that.....ME!!!!! I am so excited, I saw this in my notifications and I SLAMMED that mf LIKe button, boys am I right?! Once I saw a tweet that said "Dickens doesn't even slap tho" and honestly I've never related more. I'm pretty glad we can bond over No Interest in Ayn Rand. In fact, Reddit Person who hated Faulkner with his hipster glasses and overpriced cake pops 100% reads Ayn Rand. Facts. I can absolutely assure you from just listening to this tag that you probably wouldn't like Addie Larue LMAO No one can safely say for sure but...it's romance heavy to say the least.
YES!!! Haha I finally got around to doing this and I'm so glad I did! Oh my god your reddit imaginary hipster loves Ayn Rand and thinks everyone should read Atlas Shrugged only to read Infinite Jest immediately after just to get your mind BLOWN, like rekt dude. It's so funny that I mentioned not wanting to read Addie Larue when RIGHT AFTER I posted this I see you did a review of it I'm still waiting to watch. Gonna SMASH that Like button when I do, holy cow.
Here's an anecdote about Ayn Rand: my uncle was a sociology professor and he had his own publishing company. He bought the rights to Ayn Rand's books, translated them to German and published them. When he died, he left us with 20 boxes of sealed copies of Anthem. Now I am stuck for the rest of my life selling these books that I absolutely hate. Every time I sell one I feel morally conflicted. But at the same time I like money. Which is kind of ironic.
I read Gravity's Rainbow at the worst possible time of the year: in the middle of Summer. A large chunk of it while I'd take lunchbreaks at my work. It's definitely not a Summer read, but I had a post-modernist phase where I read Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace, The Recognitions and JR by William Gaddis and Gravity's Rainbow back to back. Masochistic, I know. But though the time of year and my headspace weren't right and though Gravity's Rainbow isn't for everyone, it did conjure up a sort of early seventies type of melancholy you hear in Pink Floyd songs and can see in Kubrick's Clockwork Orange and other similar movies from the era. There's also some top-tier poetry by Pynchon that, though I'm not a poetry ready, found to be one of the best I've ever read. Also, the thing that stayed with me the most was the commentary about the role of the individual in major historical events and especially wars. All in all, it's dense, polarizing, not for everyone, but there's just something about it, a type of melancholia that evokes, which keeps one in it, even when the plot itself starts to slip away from you at times.
Indeed. It sets out not so much to make a “point” but to get your brain thinking about a thousand things you probably otherwise would not have thought of before. To break you out of the “zones” we arbitrarily put ourselves in, and have allowed others to put us in, even if the “others” are themselves afraid of some “others” that may or may not even exist. Indeed, it seems that Pynchon’s main thesis as a writer is “There is no grand conspiracy, and that’s actually kinda scarier than there actually being one, because that means those that control are just as lost and confused and stupid as the rest of us.” Also, after rereading the final bit of lyrics at the end of the book, I find that it pretty much sums up more or less what the story was trying to convey.
Did not know that BE Ellis is a conservative, and thinking about the criticism included in his books, I find that surprising. Anyway, he is a master of writing so that you cannot be sure what is real, and what is not. Recommend! The recommendation is based on American Psycho, Glamorama and Lunar Park.
yep, he's my favourite author and I adore his writing yet the modern day Ellis is everything him in the 80s hated. he's not like, full blown conservative but he's what I'd call a light Facebook aunt type conservative
im re-reading Gravitys Rainbow right now. you have to get past a certain undefined point, where you just accept you dont really understand everything going on, and thats okay. it was that way for me with The lluminatus! Triogy, which took me several false starts but ive read a dozen times now, and Infinite Jest was tough to get into, also. it takes a lot of faith to start a book that is nearly a 1000 pages, and you have no idea whats going on, or if youre gonna enjoy it. I would also like to mention, i started watching your channel from your short skits, so to find you started by reviewing books is pretty neat-o.
Right on. Gravity's Rainbow is an unforgivingly tough book, but once you sync up with its rhythm it's really rewarding. I definitely wouldn't have finished it had I not been assigned it for a class, though.
I don't get this whole problematic writers argument, like not every book is gonna conform with current ideals but that doesn't mean it's not worth reading. I have no care in reading Rand coz they don't seem like good books but there are others cases where people refuse to read books because they are controversial and think that by not reading them your in some way protecting yourself. No your just containing in your ignorance. It's like when people refuse to talk about controversial issues coz they don't wanna get in trouble, the only way you learn is by talking or looking at those issues from a neutral standpoint then forming your own decisions.
Which books you decide to read is a personal choice. It's an investment of your time and some of your head space. There is nothing wrong with not wanting to read certain books, based on any reason, really. Afterall, reading a book is a very personal experience. Unless you are reading in a class, or reading group where the reading is done aloud, it's just you and that book for at least a couple days, if not several weeks. When there are so many great books out there and only a limited amount of time in a day (or over the span of a lifetime) deciding you won't spend the effort or time on certain works for certain reasons is a perfectly acceptable practice. I personally love HP Lovecraft's work, in spite of how I feel about the man's xenophobia and racism. Some of those flawed beliefs make it into some of his works, but I am able to recognize it for what it is and enjoy the material regardless. However, purchasing an HP Lovecraft ebook isn't going to put money into the pocket of a racist, because the guy has been dead for a long time now. Purchasing books when it isn't second hand, or via some other means where the offer doesn't make money, feels too much like paying them to spout certain deplorable views. With that said, Brandon Sanderson is a Mormon. While there could be some things people interpret as veiled allusions to his religious ideology, I don't think you can say any of his books are hateful toward other real world religions, or attempts to indoctrinate his readers. Then again, being a Mormon and being a bigot aren't exactly equivocal. Maybe I'm a rambling a bit here now, but hopefully you take my point. It should be up to the individual. Nothing wrong with being able to separate the art from the artist. If you can enjoy Heinline, or Easton Ellis, or whomever else we could mention, good on you. Not every can, though. To put it another way: I love LOTR and if Tolkien were found out to have written a bunch of essays demonizing homosexuals and other people, it would be a huge punch to the gut for me, but I'd still read and enjoy LOTR. I just wouldn't want to read those specific essays. If, on the other hand, we were in an alternate timeliness in which Hitler wrote the Hobbit... well, I wouldn't be able to be a fan of the work. It's sort of situation and individual specific, to be taken on a case by case basis. I can see things from both sides is (hopefully) the point I've been trying to make. Lol. Best wishes.
Jeez... typing on a broken phone... the typos are kind of obvious to mentally fill in the correct words though (hopefully). It won't let me edit for some reason.
@@citizensguard3433 I understand and mostly agree with you I would never say you have to read a book precisely because it's controversial (although I think it's a good idea because only through reading different material to the mainstream do you really gain your authentic worldwide). However if I was a book reviewer, I personally would rarely mention that a book is "problematic", as that term is so subjective and it depends on what you believe is a problem. I personally would be amazed if someone could find a book that could actually offend me, and then I'd be even more interested in it for that fact. But of course if you want to read just to enjoy reading and not test your worldwide then that's fine, but by saying 'problematic' your trying to turn something subjective into an objective and this should be left to the reader.
I think there's a difference between reading a serious philosophical work where you disagree with the author and reading a fiction book where some of the author's beliefs have seeped through. Like, I reread Ender's game and couldn't enjoy it that much because the author's sexism made it into the book. It's also completely reasonable to not read something because you think the author is harmful to society and you don't want to support them.
@@liammarshall-butler3384 I don't really see how an author can be 'harmful' to society. Realistically a book doesn't harm anyone, even if a book advocates for a violent act, the people who actually act that out are the ones with agency. To assume that is also to say you know what's good for society which is not a simple decision to make. Of course some claims are obviously harmful to any society but it's usually not so simple. You can have books that you disagree with but I don't think you should call a book problematic, it's just a blanket term that lacks nuisance.
I read half of it and loved it but all of a sudden roger mexico and pirate prentice were simply no longer mentioned and it only followed slothrop. Those were the best characters. So bizarre what was becoming one of my favorite books soon bored me and I completely lost interest.
For me it's the opposite: the more problematic is the author, more I'm interested in reading him. Especially because 99% of great artists are horrible people anyway. People on the internet think being an artist is being a good citizen who does society a favor by aesthetically depicting social problems and warns us with his ethical "wisdom", but that's not the case: artists are obsessive maniacs.
Whenever someone says Pynchon is not for them I need a moment to remind me that tastes are subjective. I went chronologically with Pynchon and it worked wonders. V. is sort of on the verge between modernism and post-modernism, and it really eases you into reading The Crying of Lot 49 and Gravity's Rainbow. However, I would probably suggest one starts with Inherent Vice, then Vineland and after that The Crying of Lot 49.
@@thebasedgodmax1163 I hope you enjoy it too, but I'm biased as Pynchon clicked immediately with me. But if you don't like his writing after 3 books, it might just not be for you.
It’s funny you talk about your dislike for crime an detective novels here when many of your later videos are about discovering detective thrillers! I’m curious if you ever have Pynchon another chance. I’m reading through his stuff now and like you, I bounced off one of his books (Inherent Vice) but found that I’ve loved everything since (Lot 49, Against the Day, and Masón and Dixon so far). Lot 49 is so different from AtD and M&D, I highly recommend it. They’re just long, fun journeys that will have you simultaneously questioning everything philosophically and also laughing out loud at the absurd humor.
Baffling comments here re Bret Easton Ellis. White is a book about his personal aesthetic and how his youth influenced it and his apathy in the face of people losing the run of themselves over politics. He's not a reactionary he just enjoys pissing people off who think politics is the be all end all of existence. Met him at a signing for it and got some other books signed he was very nice.
I'm also planning to read Mason & Dixon, but it's super long so I think I'll need a buddy-read to motivate me all the way through. If you want to do a buddy-read I'll join!
White by Bret Easton Ellis is a great essay collection and he is the furthest thing from a republican. His “controversy” is that he thinks his fellow liberals need to stop melting down with outrage over trump and the right.
Crying of Lot 49 is a discount Gravity's Rainbow for me. Pynchon himself hates the book, and I can see why. It's a little lightweight. Gravity's Rainbow has something that I think no other Pynchon novel really has - genuine seriousness lurking amidst the playfulness. I'm currently doing my PhD on Pynchon, and I'm having serious trouble not writing exclusively about Gravity's Rainbow. When I first read it I tried to just get through it, expecting that whatever I didn't understand (a great deal), I could come back to later. What I didn't expect is that I would actually enjoy the process of going back later to figure out what Pynchon meant.
I'm genuinely curious what you mean by 'genuine'. The seriousness of, say, Vineland was obviously genuine in the sense of sincere and deeply felt so I assume you mean it in some smart way.
@@peterkerj7357 I suppose I meant something more like genuine darkness and gravitas. Inherent Vice, Vineland, and Bleeding Edge all have very genuine moments but I feel they are more on the order of sentimentality. Gravity's Rainbow has an element of horror that I think lacks in those books - the stakes always feel much lower to me in them. Perhaps it's the WWII setting and the threat of V-2s. Of course, GR is full of irrelevance, indulgence, and the wackiness characteristic of his other books, but I feel it earns the right to be so. The more gravitas the novel successfully evokes, the more it earns the right to be playful, I feel. In fact, even the playfulness is dialled up to 100, so the achievement of the book among other things is that so much of it feels like a statement.
@@SB-lh5xb Good point about the horror. Vineland and AtD are both very dark but I guess they give off more of a feeling of resignation rather than horror.
@@peterkerj7357 currently reading ATD and I like it a lot so far - I appreciate its willingness to get into complex mathematics (which I don't understand but do understand the context/philosophy of at least)
As a leftist, I think reading Mein Kampf is actually very valuable because a lot of the tactics used by the alt-right and neo-fascists today is straight out of that book. It's basically their playbook and most of it is still effective even nearly a century later. Know thy enemy, as they say. I think it helps to be aware of how the enemy thinks and of their tactics.
I read it waste of money good talking piece tho and if you like political reading like I do then I guess it's worth reading once but there is better stuff out there written by dictators
"have you ever read Mein Kampf" "sigh, really" "have you ever read Mein Kampf" "yeah, a couple times--" "a couple times? Were there little ester eggs you didn't catch in there the first time?"
rewatching this one and seeing the comments from right wingers getting angry and saying 'you should expand your horizons!' because you don't want to read Ayn Rand is utterly hilarious. these are the usually the same people who want to ban anything left leaning, and certainly wouldn't sit down to 'expand their horizons' by reading, say, Marxist, feminist or race theory.
lol you and i are in the same boat with Dickens, I can't get into it. Also Addie Larue is a book you def have to be in the mood for cause it's kind of a slow burn, but I think it was really well done
Dickens...I have to be in a really patient mood for, lol. Addie Larue, I'm not totally sure why I included it, maybe because I've been seeing it all over the place -- I'm actually open to reading it at some point
I sat and read the four Ender Quartet books, and I still believe Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead have a lot of value and a lot of good ideas about compassion, empathy, and trying to understand people vastly different from you. Someday Orson Scott Card should try reading his own books.
I believe that just as most people get more conservative as they get older, sometimes comically so, he did too, but on the mormon path. So much so he started believing things literally diametrically opposed to what he used to believe
I mean, I hear there are some good books that don't include dragons, but they are so hard to get to when I know there are books I haven't read that do include dragons.
I'm not a great admirer of Dickens either, but A Tale of Two Cities is worth a read. There's much less padding than in many of his books. It also contains the marvellous line "I am determined to be peevish after my long day's botheration!". With Pynchon, I quite enjoyed V; loved Lot 49 the first time I read it then absolutely hated it the second time (such an odd reaction that I've never had with another book); gave up on Gravity's Rainbow two-thirds of the way through. There were some enjoyable and clever moments but the constant absurdity is tiring and directionless. Maybe I'll finish it one day but I'm sure there are much better books out there to spend time with instead.
6:45 Speaker for the Dead is good, but the later books in the original quartet are a mess. From what I heard the later Bean books end being an even bigger mess. I find early Card interesting, but I wouldn't bother with anything he wrote after the 80s.
I disagree with the idea to not read books because you disagree with the author's views on certain subjects. In my opinion, reading only the works of authors that are on your idealogical pedestal will only lead to more one-way thinking, confirmation bias, etc.
But just because someone disagrees with you also isn't a reason to read them. Like, I don't think I would get anything out of reading Mein Kampf, so i won't. That's also how I feel about reading more Ayn Rand.
I know you hate mysteries, but have you ever tried reading Raymond Chandler? He might be the the antidote for everything you hate about the genre… it’s a masterclass in how to draw a reader in and keep them engaged.
I *love* Thomas Pynchon's "Crying of Lot 49" That being said, i absolutely cannot get through Mason & Dixon. I have all of his books, but i just can't get into it.
Maybe I'm stupid but I didn't catch any legitimate reason for not being interested in Pynchon, his work is beautiful and brilliant and you should absolutely read it, especially Gravity's Rainbow. I have no clue what people mean when they talk about how 'difficult' it is to read, it isn't at all, there's almost always something fascinating going on either narratively or stylistically. Don't try to understand 'the big picture' or whatever the first time, you never will, just take it in and let it flow over you and it'll BREEZE by.
The Ender Series is very good and I've read everything but the stuff he's released in the last 8 years or so. Ender's Game was the book that was the first kind of "adult" book I ever read and I read it all before having any awareness of Scott Card's views. Now I honestly can't even imagine picking them up to read, even though I love that series. I kind of feel the same with Harry Potter. It's very hard to separate author from art so I definitely feel you.
Same with Rowling... For me it's different when authors are dead and buried, it's a little easier to separate the art from the artist (depending on what it is, of course) But in the case of Card, I enjoyed Ender's Game but there's SOOOOO many books out there I can read instead.
@@ManCarryingThing As someone who doesn't have much of a problem to separate art from the artist, I always found the notion of not reading a book that should be right down one's alley because the author is problematic kind of strange. In my view, I would be sort of punishing myself by depriving myself of a great story rather than "punishing" the author who, let's be honest, would never know whether I did or did not read their book. I guess, I am lucky that I *can* separate authors from their works as I am of course aware that my line of thinking doesn't apply to folks like you who apparently won't be able to enjoy these stories. Anyway, just want to share my perspective. Feel free to disregard! ;-)
Full disclosure, I'm hardly a Rand expert, but I think her philosophy has been pretty bastardized by conservative authoritarians as a lazy justification for rigging things in favor of rich people/disadvantaging poor people. At the very heart of her philosophy is self-ownership and not initiating violence. That's my understanding anyway. Also, Invisible Life was one of the most excruciating experiences of my entire life... Do not read
I have read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead (an unfortunate detour when I was in 8th grade) and they were genuinely terrible. Bloated, to say the least, and that’s coming from a Wheel of Time fan. The Fountainhead is especially despicable for portraying the assault of a woman then having that woman say she deserved it/wanted it. The only reason I don’t regret reading the books is that they somewhat help me understand how conservatism works as an ideology (by completely shutting off one’s empathy)
"and that's coming from a wheel of time fan" Lol God, the fountainhead sounds terrible, and I didn't even know about that scene. I often see that book touted as rich people's bible (Mark Cuban named his boat Fountainhead, if I'm remembering right). I'm glad you came away with something after reading those books, though. I also had a phase in HS when I wanted to read Rand, but fortunately the page count kept me away. The fact that so many politicians in the US cling to her "teachings" explains a lot of what's wrong, today.
immediately looked at my never read brando sando hardcover collection and smiled. Love opening the stormlight books on my desk to look at the art, would never dare taking one of those to read in bed
AND HOLY SHIT I LOVE V E SCHWAB BUT HAVEN'T READ HALF HER BOOKS CAUSE I FEEL EXACTLY LIKE THAT ABOUT THEM ( I read the color trilogy and loved it, read the first superpower book and it was ok, never touched the others though I own them all. love to support her and plan to keep doing that when money allows tho ).
I love Ellis, but will say White is... pretty... dire. Less Than Zero and its sequel Imperial Bedrooms would be a good start of his older works if you wanted something else than American Psycho 👊
That's great to hear, and I forgot about Less Than Zero! I definitely want to give him a shot since he was so big in the 80s, and I will probably read Less Than Zero at some point. (Lol, even when I do a tag about books I don't want to read, I end up finding more books to read!)
I have these books that are in my room that I know I'll never read but also I'll never get rid of because I bought them, so now they just sit there as an eternal reminder of my consumerism and my poor decision making skills.
If Bret Easton Ellis really is a conservative then color me surprised as those kind of themes don't show up in his books at all. I'd recommend "Less than zero" and "The rules of attraction" since too many people only want to praise "A.Psycho". Another thing about "Rules" and "Zero" is that people either really love those books or find them utterly pointless.
As someone right leaning, I have the opposite problem with books. I enjoy good stories, not any kind of political propaganda. It’s always disappointing to see your side being demonized when you go to try to enjoy a good story.
most art is inherently political and a writer has every right to put that in their books. I'm not against your freedoms to politics, but most people who demonise the right are usually demonising the way the right seeks to deny basic human rights. the right are the ones who want being gay to be against the law. a gay person has every right (hehe) to write a book bashing an ideology which essentially demonises them for doing nothing.
@@user-zo8nl9be5l i wouldn't say so. i used to kind of be afraid of reading books with opposite views and then i started a bookclub for my students and ended up reading books with opposing viewpoints. I think i had this weird thought in the back of my head that it would somehow make me a different person hehe but it's a actually kinda interesting
@@autodidacticseaturtle7955 he said he didn’t mind it as long as their views aren’t present in their works which is understandable but eh It’s a very narrow minded view since he seems left leaning he probably just keep reading those types of books
@@GroovyDavid8 No, he said that in connection to Ayn Rand, who wrote novels explicitly with the sole goal of spreading a given set of ideas, alas, her books are only vehicles of ideas, not really works of art with autonomy (no works of art are really truly autonomous). I don't understand him to being "unable" to read books with content he disagrees with, but rather not being interested in reading fiction that only embody ideas that he disagree with. And I agree. I'd rather read a political/philosophical treatise by someone I disagree with, than read their shitty attempt at framing it within fiction. That also counts for people I agree with, i.e. Another Now by Yanis Varoufakis is a really bad novel by a thinker I otherwise really really respect.
Bret easton ellis has been one of my favorite writers for a long time and it really is heartbreaking to have seen him buy into his own bullshit. I was rooting for him for so long to pull out of his ignorance because in his writing it always felt like somewhere deep down he knew yuppie culture was killing both him, his friends, and the nation. I theorize writers block and his inability and unwillingness to cope with it pushed him over the edge into alt right thought patterns. I've read all of his books but white and doubt I'll ever give it a shot. I remember when I first saw a copy of it and my heart just sank when I read the back. He finally turned into a parody of his own characters.
I feel the same way about Ayn Rand. I have a friend who adores "The Fountainhead" for Rand's writing and keeps pushing me to give it a try. She doesn't associate with Rand's views at all the book just helped her get back into reading. I think it is a book with one of the most interesting controversies because of the social stigma heavily associated with it.
I enjoyed Orson Scott Card's books in high school. Lots of interesting ideas about interspecies contact, biology, religion, and the soul as an elementary particle. Those books had a big effect on me, but looking back, I'm not sure they hold up well. Card's universe seems culturally stagnant even 3000 years into the future, partly due to his politics peeking in here and there, partly for plot reasons. Characters also have a tendency to paychoanalyze each other because Card thinks subtlety in literary symbolism makes it "inaccessible", so it becomes almost preachy instead. The Ender's Shadow quartet is especially egregious for absurd rightwing geopolitics. (Resolving the War on Terror by nuking Mecca? Really?)
For Dickens, I recomend trying an audiobook. If that doesn't work Andrew Davies and the BBC have done some great new(ish) adaptaions. Those are pretty great. I have not been able to get through a print copy of Dickens' work either. Love the plots and characters though! This was a fun video! Thanks.
A nice way to ease yourself into Thomas Pynchon is to read Inherent Vice-I think it's his most "readable" novel and incredibly entertaining on a sentence-by-sentence level because of all the stoner humor. Then watch the movie PTA made to help you understand what the fuck you just read-then read the novel again. At that point, you'll have been seeded with the pattern of his consciousness, and when you approach more difficult works like Gravity's Rainbow, Mason & Dixon, or Against the Day, things will fall into place more readily. Also, utilize the thriving Pynchon culture online: there's an incredibly helpful Pynchon wiki, and the Pynchon subreddit is fantastic, with truly illuminating groupreads of every novel. I recommend to start reading him while you're young, so that you can periodically reread him as you age. He's not just any author.
Man i love classics but Dickens was such a difficult read, the characters were so interesting but unfortunately, the writing style is just not for me also poetry I simply "don't get it"
i want to like lord of the rings, in theory it's the perfect trilogy for me it has the worldbuilding the fantasy the premise,,,,, but i just can't get trough the first book i tried 5 times already i'm gonna try again because my mom wants to watch the movies with me
If you can push through to the last like third of Fellowship the rest of the trilogy just pulls you in and holds you. I had the same issue myself but the slowness and rather almost relaxed and small scale of the first book adds so much weight later on that you don’t realize until you’re out of the slog
I also wouldn't read Ayn Rand's books, not so much because of her politics, but because they sound boring as heck. Arquitecture? Trains? _We_ fanfiction? What a dork
I don't get people that say they won't read a book because the author did or said something controversial. Why can't you separate the author and the book itself? Most of the time, I don't even think about authors when reading books. It's like separating the voice actor from the character. Sometimes it adds to the book, most of the time it doesn't. And wouldn't you be even more curious about the book when the author has an opposing view from you? Or if the author is a killer or worse? It's just curious to see how different types of people think and write. You can criticize such books anyway, so I don't think you should not read them because of the author.
I loved The Girl on the Train. She's not a girl, that's a hot marketing word. She's a grown ass woman and she's on the train because she's commuting and she sees something suspicious. Gets involved because stupid. Sticks her nose in where it doesn't belong because that 's what drives stories forward. Great character POV. I love an unreliable narrator and this one's a raging alcoholic. And don' t you just love the pretty cover? The shifting/doubling werdz? It represents her drunken train riding and seeing things that aren't quite as they seem and if you trip on those tracks you'll get ch-ch-chopped up real good. Deep. Clever. Don't be a snob. More enjoyable than The Dark Tower (but then everything is).
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
"I love the idea of loving to read ____ " is such a great way of looking at books I personally want to like. It's just not happening, but I continue to force myself to read them. It's a problem.
HAHAHA yeahhh I understand that. Some books I wish I could just FORCE myself to love. Life would be so much easier
I personally love reading, but is too late for me.. I have never watched a movie or Television growing out, so in order to dream and scape I have reading. I honestly can't watch most things unless they are written down, since I can't focus
@@SieMiezekatze
How does your post relate to the thread?
i have this problem with tv.
Literally me with A Clockwork Orange
The struggle of buying a beautiful book and never being able to read it is REAL
Isn't it!? One of the saddest parts of life. NO exaggeration
"There's a girl... on a train... for unknown reasons" I don't know why but this cracked me up.
Me too! Haha
Hahaha, glad that tickled you. I'm really great at gathering info on book plots before I record videos, lol
It's brave of you to have Calvin and Hobbes as every choice.
That idea is actually sacrilegious and is punishable by death
The thumbnail made me chuckle because Gravity's Rainbow is near the top of my list. Everything I've heard about Pynchon makes it sound like his work is right up my alley.
I've read (and LOVED) The Crying of Lot 49 for uni and now I want to read Gravity's Rainbow... but it's just so daunting. Like, can I really take 700 pages of postmodernism?
@@ethanlivemere1162 If you’re not a Sanderson reader, you can. The Recognitions is better anyways
I have a irrational prejudice against Thriller/mystery. I've wasted a lot of time at thrift stores looking for horror, only to pull out something with a title like, "FACE RIPPER/VISCERA SNIPPER," get excited, then have my hopes dashed when I see, "A Detective Arthur T. Noodleborough Mystery" on the spine.
Okay but Noodleborough has got to be one of the best names I've ever read.
@@thelonetraveller lmfaooo
as a scandinavian, I feel this on a deep level. every time I see an interesting looking cover in a bookstore, it’s a gritty crime drama. every. single. time.
and it never just *says* that it’s a mystery. I’ll start reading the backside of what sounds like a somewhat interesting book about a kid escaping abusive parents, and then 2/3 of the way through there’s a paragraph change, and it says something along the lines of
“in department xoxo, Mattis Olufsen is back to work after being stabbed by the sunscreen killer, and his young assistant Liv is dealing with the trauma of almost being murdered again, but she’s also developing feelings for the new IT guy, Arne. together, can this crack team overcome Mattis’ alcoholism for long enough to find the missing girls?”
and I *LIKE* mysteries. just not the types that are popular in my country, I guess.
@@esobelisk3110 Yeah, I can't remember how many times I went to my local bookshop in search of an interesting mystery or whodunit only to leave empty handed because none sounded genuinely investing. At this point I just began writing the books I'd like to read myself because I can't find them somewhere else.
@@esobelisk3110 "the sunscreen killer" has me ROLLING
"shipwrecked library" wait that.....ME!!!!! I am so excited, I saw this in my notifications and I SLAMMED that mf LIKe button, boys am I right?! Once I saw a tweet that said "Dickens doesn't even slap tho" and honestly I've never related more. I'm pretty glad we can bond over No Interest in Ayn Rand. In fact, Reddit Person who hated Faulkner with his hipster glasses and overpriced cake pops 100% reads Ayn Rand. Facts.
I can absolutely assure you from just listening to this tag that you probably wouldn't like Addie Larue LMAO No one can safely say for sure but...it's romance heavy to say the least.
YES!!! Haha I finally got around to doing this and I'm so glad I did! Oh my god your reddit imaginary hipster loves Ayn Rand and thinks everyone should read Atlas Shrugged only to read Infinite Jest immediately after just to get your mind BLOWN, like rekt dude. It's so funny that I mentioned not wanting to read Addie Larue when RIGHT AFTER I posted this I see you did a review of it I'm still waiting to watch. Gonna SMASH that Like button when I do, holy cow.
@@ManCarryingThing atlas shrugged = Anthem + 800 pages
It's funny watching this years later and hearing you say you're not into mysteries and thrillers when you've been reading a ton of noir recently.
I had the exact same thought
"I would read it only as a punishment to myself" 😂😂
Lol, it's the truth!
To be fair, I'm a filthy capitalist, and even I found her books very hard to get through.
Here's an anecdote about Ayn Rand: my uncle was a sociology professor and he had his own publishing company. He bought the rights to Ayn Rand's books, translated them to German and published them. When he died, he left us with 20 boxes of sealed copies of Anthem. Now I am stuck for the rest of my life selling these books that I absolutely hate. Every time I sell one I feel morally conflicted. But at the same time I like money. Which is kind of ironic.
Only good thing about Ayn Rand was this approximate line of hers: "He was so ugly, it was fascinating" 🤣
KDBooks sent me here, and your rant about "seeming smart on camera" while "watching twitch streams off it" is what's making me stay :')
KDBooks is awesome :) And thanks so much for sticking around!
I read Gravity's Rainbow at the worst possible time of the year: in the middle of Summer. A large chunk of it while I'd take lunchbreaks at my work. It's definitely not a Summer read, but I had a post-modernist phase where I read Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace, The Recognitions and JR by William Gaddis and Gravity's Rainbow back to back. Masochistic, I know. But though the time of year and my headspace weren't right and though Gravity's Rainbow isn't for everyone, it did conjure up a sort of early seventies type of melancholy you hear in Pink Floyd songs and can see in Kubrick's Clockwork Orange and other similar movies from the era. There's also some top-tier poetry by Pynchon that, though I'm not a poetry ready, found to be one of the best I've ever read. Also, the thing that stayed with me the most was the commentary about the role of the individual in major historical events and especially wars. All in all, it's dense, polarizing, not for everyone, but there's just something about it, a type of melancholia that evokes, which keeps one in it, even when the plot itself starts to slip away from you at times.
Indeed. It sets out not so much to make a “point” but to get your brain thinking about a thousand things you probably otherwise would not have thought of before. To break you out of the “zones” we arbitrarily put ourselves in, and have allowed others to put us in, even if the “others” are themselves afraid of some “others” that may or may not even exist.
Indeed, it seems that Pynchon’s main thesis as a writer is “There is no grand conspiracy, and that’s actually kinda scarier than there actually being one, because that means those that control are just as lost and confused and stupid as the rest of us.”
Also, after rereading the final bit of lyrics at the end of the book, I find that it pretty much sums up more or less what the story was trying to convey.
Having discovered this channel for the sketches, it's uncanny to see your older stuff
Like watching childhood photos of your teacher
Did not know that BE Ellis is a conservative, and thinking about the criticism included in his books, I find that surprising. Anyway, he is a master of writing so that you cannot be sure what is real, and what is not. Recommend! The recommendation is based on American Psycho, Glamorama and Lunar Park.
yep, he's my favourite author and I adore his writing yet the modern day Ellis is everything him in the 80s hated. he's not like, full blown conservative but he's what I'd call a light Facebook aunt type conservative
Glamorama is really interesting, but man those first 100 or so pages were hard to get through.
@@harrybehemoth2751 I'd disagree here, I thought it was some of the funniest writing he's ever done. but I understand how you feel that way
He’s gone full reactionary at this point.
Unbelievable considering his early work.
@@PeebeesPet Amazing
im re-reading Gravitys Rainbow right now. you have to get past a certain undefined point, where you just accept you dont really understand everything going on, and thats okay. it was that way for me with The lluminatus! Triogy, which took me several false starts but ive read a dozen times now, and Infinite Jest was tough to get into, also. it takes a lot of faith to start a book that is nearly a 1000 pages, and you have no idea whats going on, or if youre gonna enjoy it. I would also like to mention, i started watching your channel from your short skits, so to find you started by reviewing books is pretty neat-o.
Right on. Gravity's Rainbow is an unforgivingly tough book, but once you sync up with its rhythm it's really rewarding. I definitely wouldn't have finished it had I not been assigned it for a class, though.
I LOVED Infinite Jest. It blew and still blows my mind when I think or talk about it. Hope to reread one day but with a knowledge of Hamlet in mind.
@@jan_Travis infinite jest is amazing. i enjoyed every second.
Wow.... trains and Dickens. Two of my favorite things ever.
lol i'm sorry
@@ManCarryingThing it’s ok. I won’t let them know.
Same for me with trains and Christie - just don't tell him about Murder on the Orient Express
I don't get this whole problematic writers argument, like not every book is gonna conform with current ideals but that doesn't mean it's not worth reading. I have no care in reading Rand coz they don't seem like good books but there are others cases where people refuse to read books because they are controversial and think that by not reading them your in some way protecting yourself. No your just containing in your ignorance. It's like when people refuse to talk about controversial issues coz they don't wanna get in trouble, the only way you learn is by talking or looking at those issues from a neutral standpoint then forming your own decisions.
Which books you decide to read is a personal choice. It's an investment of your time and some of your head space. There is nothing wrong with not wanting to read certain books, based on any reason, really. Afterall, reading a book is a very personal experience. Unless you are reading in a class, or reading group where the reading is done aloud, it's just you and that book for at least a couple days, if not several weeks. When there are so many great books out there and only a limited amount of time in a day (or over the span of a lifetime) deciding you won't spend the effort or time on certain works for certain reasons is a perfectly acceptable practice. I personally love HP Lovecraft's work, in spite of how I feel about the man's xenophobia and racism. Some of those flawed beliefs make it into some of his works, but I am able to recognize it for what it is and enjoy the material regardless. However, purchasing an HP Lovecraft ebook isn't going to put money into the pocket of a racist, because the guy has been dead for a long time now. Purchasing books when it isn't second hand, or via some other means where the offer doesn't make money, feels too much like paying them to spout certain deplorable views.
With that said, Brandon Sanderson is a Mormon. While there could be some things people interpret as veiled allusions to his religious ideology, I don't think you can say any of his books are hateful toward other real world religions, or attempts to indoctrinate his readers. Then again, being a Mormon and being a bigot aren't exactly equivocal. Maybe I'm a rambling a bit here now, but hopefully you take my point. It should be up to the individual. Nothing wrong with being able to separate the art from the artist. If you can enjoy Heinline, or Easton Ellis, or whomever else we could mention, good on you. Not every can, though. To put it another way: I love LOTR and if Tolkien were found out to have written a bunch of essays demonizing homosexuals and other people, it would be a huge punch to the gut for me, but I'd still read and enjoy LOTR. I just wouldn't want to read those specific essays. If, on the other hand, we were in an alternate timeliness in which Hitler wrote the Hobbit... well, I wouldn't be able to be a fan of the work. It's sort of situation and individual specific, to be taken on a case by case basis. I can see things from both sides is (hopefully) the point I've been trying to make. Lol. Best wishes.
Jeez... typing on a broken phone... the typos are kind of obvious to mentally fill in the correct words though (hopefully). It won't let me edit for some reason.
@@citizensguard3433 I understand and mostly agree with you I would never say you have to read a book precisely because it's controversial (although I think it's a good idea because only through reading different material to the mainstream do you really gain your authentic worldwide). However if I was a book reviewer, I personally would rarely mention that a book is "problematic", as that term is so subjective and it depends on what you believe is a problem. I personally would be amazed if someone could find a book that could actually offend me, and then I'd be even more interested in it for that fact. But of course if you want to read just to enjoy reading and not test your worldwide then that's fine, but by saying 'problematic' your trying to turn something subjective into an objective and this should be left to the reader.
I think there's a difference between reading a serious philosophical work where you disagree with the author and reading a fiction book where some of the author's beliefs have seeped through. Like, I reread Ender's game and couldn't enjoy it that much because the author's sexism made it into the book. It's also completely reasonable to not read something because you think the author is harmful to society and you don't want to support them.
@@liammarshall-butler3384 I don't really see how an author can be 'harmful' to society. Realistically a book doesn't harm anyone, even if a book advocates for a violent act, the people who actually act that out are the ones with agency. To assume that is also to say you know what's good for society which is not a simple decision to make. Of course some claims are obviously harmful to any society but it's usually not so simple. You can have books that you disagree with but I don't think you should call a book problematic, it's just a blanket term that lacks nuisance.
I read Gravity's Rainbow, first time as a fiction book and the second with a source and context companion. It's a seriously good read.
I read half of it and loved it but all of a sudden roger mexico and pirate prentice were simply no longer mentioned and it only followed slothrop. Those were the best characters. So bizarre what was becoming one of my favorite books soon bored me and I completely lost interest.
Which companion book did you use?
Chaucer is "problematic?" To people who hate good literature?
I assume he is referring to the anti-semitism in the Prioress’ Tale.
@@robertdullnig3625 Oy gevalt!!!
For me it's the opposite: the more problematic is the author, more I'm interested in reading him. Especially because 99% of great artists are horrible people anyway. People on the internet think being an artist is being a good citizen who does society a favor by aesthetically depicting social problems and warns us with his ethical "wisdom", but that's not the case: artists are obsessive maniacs.
Only Pynchon novel I read was Inherent Vice but I definitely recommend it. It's a trip, and very funny.
Whenever someone says Pynchon is not for them I need a moment to remind me that tastes are subjective. I went chronologically with Pynchon and it worked wonders. V. is sort of on the verge between modernism and post-modernism, and it really eases you into reading The Crying of Lot 49 and Gravity's Rainbow. However, I would probably suggest one starts with Inherent Vice, then Vineland and after that The Crying of Lot 49.
I tried Vineland and Crying and hated both. I'm gonna try IV though, hope I enjoy because I loved the PTA movie
@@thebasedgodmax1163 I hope you enjoy it too, but I'm biased as Pynchon clicked immediately with me. But if you don't like his writing after 3 books, it might just not be for you.
I have been reading V. after I finished Inherent Vice and it has been a perfect bridge to the more dense Pynchon work like Gravity’s Rainbow
Have you read House of Leaves by Mark Z Danielewski? 10/10 gives you nightmares but you cant put it down
@@scorpioassmodeusgtx1811 Congratulations, you've discovered the point of House of Leaves
Inherent Vice is a much easier to digest Pynchon book that I really enjoyed.
Thank you for all the recommendations Chris Nolan
It’s funny you talk about your dislike for crime an detective novels here when many of your later videos are about discovering detective thrillers!
I’m curious if you ever have Pynchon another chance. I’m reading through his stuff now and like you, I bounced off one of his books (Inherent Vice) but found that I’ve loved everything since (Lot 49, Against the Day, and Masón and Dixon so far). Lot 49 is so different from AtD and M&D, I highly recommend it. They’re just long, fun journeys that will have you simultaneously questioning everything philosophically and also laughing out loud at the absurd humor.
It's funny how much tastes change! especially when you try new things. Totally open to trying pynchon again - maybe vineland soon
Baffling comments here re Bret Easton Ellis. White is a book about his personal aesthetic and how his youth influenced it and his apathy in the face of people losing the run of themselves over politics. He's not a reactionary he just enjoys pissing people off who think politics is the be all end all of existence. Met him at a signing for it and got some other books signed he was very nice.
Scandalous. Refreshing. Definitely subscribing 😂😂😂❤❤❤
I'm also planning to read Mason & Dixon, but it's super long so I think I'll need a buddy-read to motivate me all the way through. If you want to do a buddy-read I'll join!
White by Bret Easton Ellis is a great essay collection and he is the furthest thing from a republican. His “controversy” is that he thinks his fellow liberals need to stop melting down with outrage over trump and the right.
A Tale of Two Cities is his best book. Give that one a shot.
along with David Copperfield imo
Inherent Vice was a cool book that's fairly accessible for Pynchon
Made it half way through Gravity’s Rainbow… I’ll come back to that in 40 years
Crying of Lot 49 is a discount Gravity's Rainbow for me. Pynchon himself hates the book, and I can see why. It's a little lightweight. Gravity's Rainbow has something that I think no other Pynchon novel really has - genuine seriousness lurking amidst the playfulness. I'm currently doing my PhD on Pynchon, and I'm having serious trouble not writing exclusively about Gravity's Rainbow. When I first read it I tried to just get through it, expecting that whatever I didn't understand (a great deal), I could come back to later. What I didn't expect is that I would actually enjoy the process of going back later to figure out what Pynchon meant.
I'm genuinely curious what you mean by 'genuine'. The seriousness of, say, Vineland was obviously genuine in the sense of sincere and deeply felt so I assume you mean it in some smart way.
@@peterkerj7357 I suppose I meant something more like genuine darkness and gravitas. Inherent Vice, Vineland, and Bleeding Edge all have very genuine moments but I feel they are more on the order of sentimentality. Gravity's Rainbow has an element of horror that I think lacks in those books - the stakes always feel much lower to me in them. Perhaps it's the WWII setting and the threat of V-2s. Of course, GR is full of irrelevance, indulgence, and the wackiness characteristic of his other books, but I feel it earns the right to be so. The more gravitas the novel successfully evokes, the more it earns the right to be playful, I feel. In fact, even the playfulness is dialled up to 100, so the achievement of the book among other things is that so much of it feels like a statement.
@@SB-lh5xb Good point about the horror. Vineland and AtD are both very dark but I guess they give off more of a feeling of resignation rather than horror.
@@peterkerj7357 currently reading ATD and I like it a lot so far - I appreciate its willingness to get into complex mathematics (which I don't understand but do understand the context/philosophy of at least)
One problematic author I won’t read is Adolf Hitler
As a leftist, I think reading Mein Kampf is actually very valuable because a lot of the tactics used by the alt-right and neo-fascists today is straight out of that book. It's basically their playbook and most of it is still effective even nearly a century later. Know thy enemy, as they say. I think it helps to be aware of how the enemy thinks and of their tactics.
I read it
waste of money
good talking piece tho
and if you like political reading like I do then I guess it's worth reading once
but there is better stuff out there written by dictators
"have you ever read Mein Kampf"
"sigh, really"
"have you ever read Mein Kampf"
"yeah, a couple times--"
"a couple times? Were there little ester eggs you didn't catch in there the first time?"
I think you'd like Mason & Dixon better. It's one of his more underrated books, whatever that really means. Have you ever read William Vollmann?
I haven't!
The last time i encouered a book it was a painful experience
rewatching this one and seeing the comments from right wingers getting angry and saying 'you should expand your horizons!' because you don't want to read Ayn Rand is utterly hilarious. these are the usually the same people who want to ban anything left leaning, and certainly wouldn't sit down to 'expand their horizons' by reading, say, Marxist, feminist or race theory.
Read Anthem & Atlas Shrugged. Their shit.
There is nothing I won’t read. Nothing
Except anything from L. Ron Hubbard
@@godfunkchallenge accepted. Go read Finnegan's Wake.
@@BladedEdge ordered from Amazon i’ll let you know how it goes lol
@@BladedEdge “He addle liddle phifie Annie ugged the little craythur…” no truer words have been spoken
lol you and i are in the same boat with Dickens, I can't get into it. Also Addie Larue is a book you def have to be in the mood for cause it's kind of a slow burn, but I think it was really well done
Dickens...I have to be in a really patient mood for, lol. Addie Larue, I'm not totally sure why I included it, maybe because I've been seeing it all over the place -- I'm actually open to reading it at some point
I sat and read the four Ender Quartet books, and I still believe Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead have a lot of value and a lot of good ideas about compassion, empathy, and trying to understand people vastly different from you. Someday Orson Scott Card should try reading his own books.
I believe that just as most people get more conservative as they get older, sometimes comically so, he did too, but on the mormon path. So much so he started believing things literally diametrically opposed to what he used to believe
I mean, I hear there are some good books that don't include dragons, but they are so hard to get to when I know there are books I haven't read that do include dragons.
I'm not a great admirer of Dickens either, but A Tale of Two Cities is worth a read. There's much less padding than in many of his books. It also contains the marvellous line "I am determined to be peevish after my long day's botheration!".
With Pynchon, I quite enjoyed V; loved Lot 49 the first time I read it then absolutely hated it the second time (such an odd reaction that I've never had with another book); gave up on Gravity's Rainbow two-thirds of the way through. There were some enjoyable and clever moments but the constant absurdity is tiring and directionless. Maybe I'll finish it one day but I'm sure there are much better books out there to spend time with instead.
Dude looks mad handsome with short hair.
6:45 Speaker for the Dead is good, but the later books in the original quartet are a mess. From what I heard the later Bean books end being an even bigger mess. I find early Card interesting, but I wouldn't bother with anything he wrote after the 80s.
The satire is top notch
I disagree with the idea to not read books because you disagree with the author's views on certain subjects. In my opinion, reading only the works of authors that are on your idealogical pedestal will only lead to more one-way thinking, confirmation bias, etc.
But just because someone disagrees with you also isn't a reason to read them. Like, I don't think I would get anything out of reading Mein Kampf, so i won't. That's also how I feel about reading more Ayn Rand.
@@liammarshall-butler3384 True, there should be a balance or a middle ground between the two.
When I saw your channel name I just assumed it was a channel about strength training
It's kind of funny watching this now knowing how much you got into mystery crime thrillers down the road.
I know you hate mysteries, but have you ever tried reading Raymond Chandler? He might be the the antidote for everything you hate about the genre… it’s a masterclass in how to draw a reader in and keep them engaged.
Oh no Orson Scott card was a *ghasp* HO-HO-HOMOPHOBE???? *faints*
I *love* Thomas Pynchon's "Crying of Lot 49"
That being said, i absolutely cannot get through Mason & Dixon. I have all of his books, but i just can't get into it.
Maybe I'm stupid but I didn't catch any legitimate reason for not being interested in Pynchon, his work is beautiful and brilliant and you should absolutely read it, especially Gravity's Rainbow. I have no clue what people mean when they talk about how 'difficult' it is to read, it isn't at all, there's almost always something fascinating going on either narratively or stylistically. Don't try to understand 'the big picture' or whatever the first time, you never will, just take it in and let it flow over you and it'll BREEZE by.
Ok this is driving me crazy. What song is used in the background of the vid? I can't find it anywhere
Mason & Dixon is exactly what I would recommend, funnily.
The Ender Series is very good and I've read everything but the stuff he's released in the last 8 years or so. Ender's Game was the book that was the first kind of "adult" book I ever read and I read it all before having any awareness of Scott Card's views. Now I honestly can't even imagine picking them up to read, even though I love that series. I kind of feel the same with Harry Potter. It's very hard to separate author from art so I definitely feel you.
Same with Rowling... For me it's different when authors are dead and buried, it's a little easier to separate the art from the artist (depending on what it is, of course) But in the case of Card, I enjoyed Ender's Game but there's SOOOOO many books out there I can read instead.
@@ManCarryingThing As someone who doesn't have much of a problem to separate art from the artist, I always found the notion of not reading a book that should be right down one's alley because the author is problematic kind of strange.
In my view, I would be sort of punishing myself by depriving myself of a great story rather than "punishing" the author who, let's be honest, would never know whether I did or did not read their book.
I guess, I am lucky that I *can* separate authors from their works as I am of course aware that my line of thinking doesn't apply to folks like you who apparently won't be able to enjoy these stories.
Anyway, just want to share my perspective. Feel free to disregard! ;-)
Full disclosure, I'm hardly a Rand expert, but I think her philosophy has been pretty bastardized by conservative authoritarians as a lazy justification for rigging things in favor of rich people/disadvantaging poor people. At the very heart of her philosophy is self-ownership and not initiating violence. That's my understanding anyway. Also, Invisible Life was one of the most excruciating experiences of my entire life... Do not read
I loved Gravity's Rainbow ...
When it comes to Pynchon you have to read it like a conspiracy corkboard 😂
Speaker for the dead is amazing
Fun fact: Ayn Rand was actually named after Rand al'Thor
I have never purchased a book simply for its cute cover. They are already expensive as they are for me to waste my money on one for decoration only.
I have read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead (an unfortunate detour when I was in 8th grade) and they were genuinely terrible. Bloated, to say the least, and that’s coming from a Wheel of Time fan. The Fountainhead is especially despicable for portraying the assault of a woman then having that woman say she deserved it/wanted it.
The only reason I don’t regret reading the books is that they somewhat help me understand how conservatism works as an ideology (by completely shutting off one’s empathy)
"and that's coming from a wheel of time fan" Lol
God, the fountainhead sounds terrible, and I didn't even know about that scene. I often see that book touted as rich people's bible (Mark Cuban named his boat Fountainhead, if I'm remembering right).
I'm glad you came away with something after reading those books, though. I also had a phase in HS when I wanted to read Rand, but fortunately the page count kept me away. The fact that so many politicians in the US cling to her "teachings" explains a lot of what's wrong, today.
You could try some Philip K. Dickens instead.
No, because Philip K. Dick doesn't ally himself politically with him...
As someone whose favourite book is Gravity's Rainbow
...yeah
I also dislike Dickens, never been able to finish one of his books despite trying multiple times.
immediately looked at my never read brando sando hardcover collection and smiled. Love opening the stormlight books on my desk to look at the art, would never dare taking one of those to read in bed
AND HOLY SHIT I LOVE V E SCHWAB BUT HAVEN'T READ HALF HER BOOKS CAUSE I FEEL EXACTLY LIKE THAT ABOUT THEM ( I read the color trilogy and loved it, read the first superpower book and it was ok, never touched the others though I own them all. love to support her and plan to keep doing that when money allows tho ).
I love Ellis, but will say White is... pretty... dire. Less Than Zero and its sequel Imperial Bedrooms would be a good start of his older works if you wanted something else than American Psycho 👊
That's great to hear, and I forgot about Less Than Zero! I definitely want to give him a shot since he was so big in the 80s, and I will probably read Less Than Zero at some point. (Lol, even when I do a tag about books I don't want to read, I end up finding more books to read!)
Same thing with Dickens here! In theory, we should click, but in practice, it's complicated.
I love A Christmas Carol (maybe because it's short) but I tend to like the movie adaptations of his books more than the actual books!
I have these books that are in my room that I know I'll never read but also I'll never get rid of because I bought them, so now they just sit there as an eternal reminder of my consumerism and my poor decision making skills.
I absolutely HATE it when a book is released and turned into a film before I get a chance to read it.
If Bret Easton Ellis really is a conservative then color me surprised as those kind of themes don't show up in his books at all. I'd recommend "Less than zero" and "The rules of attraction" since too many people only want to praise "A.Psycho". Another thing about "Rules" and "Zero" is that people either really love those books or find them utterly pointless.
As someone right leaning, I have the opposite problem with books. I enjoy good stories, not any kind of political propaganda. It’s always disappointing to see your side being demonized when you go to try to enjoy a good story.
Completely agreed. We always get unreasonably bashed in... Basically everything.
most art is inherently political and a writer has every right to put that in their books. I'm not against your freedoms to politics, but most people who demonise the right are usually demonising the way the right seeks to deny basic human rights. the right are the ones who want being gay to be against the law. a gay person has every right (hehe) to write a book bashing an ideology which essentially demonises them for doing nothing.
3:46 oh my goodness he looks like Shaun Micallef parodying Bret Easton Ellis
I hated Dickens too, that is until I made it through A Tale Of Two Cities. That shit absolutely crushed me, amazing novel
why is chuacer so problamatic?
Many books suck, but I haven’t been without a book since 1985.
Try Oliver Twist from Dickens.
Ewww.
Inherent Vice was pretty good. It meandered, but I liked it. Never watched the movie
Do you like Celine; Henri de Monterlant: Thomas Wolfe or Erskine Caldwell?
Sad that you don’t like mystery books as I love them but definitely see your other points!
I still have hope that I will find that one msytery that will change my opinions! Maybe I just haven't found the right book for me.
@@ManCarryingThing Rebecca is a great book and I definitely didn’t see the ending coming.
@@ManCarryingThing , try some English writers.
The names escape me right now, I'll come back with them later.
@@ChristmasLorecome back
Drinking game: take a shot every time he says "books"
Kinda sad how you can't separate the art from the artist. You're depriving yourself of so many great books.
Thats a perfect way to say it.
but it's different when the author's views make their way into their books
I feel like with a lot of authors you can tell their beliefs from their work and that can really detract from it
@@user-zo8nl9be5l i wouldn't say so. i used to kind of be afraid of reading books with opposite views and then i started a bookclub for my students and ended up reading books with opposing viewpoints. I think i had this weird thought in the back of my head that it would somehow make me a different person hehe but it's a actually kinda interesting
Wait, you do book reviews? I thought this was just a meme channel.
Not reading authors whose opinions you disagree with seems like a great way of never challenging your own beliefs.
He also explicitly said he didn't mind reading authors he disagree with.
@@autodidacticseaturtle7955 he said he didn’t mind it as long as their views aren’t present in their works which is understandable but eh It’s a very narrow minded view since he seems left leaning he probably just keep reading those types of books
@@GroovyDavid8 No, he said that in connection to Ayn Rand, who wrote novels explicitly with the sole goal of spreading a given set of ideas, alas, her books are only vehicles of ideas, not really works of art with autonomy (no works of art are really truly autonomous). I don't understand him to being "unable" to read books with content he disagrees with, but rather not being interested in reading fiction that only embody ideas that he disagree with. And I agree. I'd rather read a political/philosophical treatise by someone I disagree with, than read their shitty attempt at framing it within fiction. That also counts for people I agree with, i.e. Another Now by Yanis Varoufakis is a really bad novel by a thinker I otherwise really really respect.
He comes off as a massive brainlet in this video.
@@autodidacticseaturtle7955 yeah, but then he said he wouldn't read Orson Scott Card or Bret Easton Ellis because of their views.
Bret easton ellis has been one of my favorite writers for a long time and it really is heartbreaking to have seen him buy into his own bullshit. I was rooting for him for so long to pull out of his ignorance because in his writing it always felt like somewhere deep down he knew yuppie culture was killing both him, his friends, and the nation. I theorize writers block and his inability and unwillingness to cope with it pushed him over the edge into alt right thought patterns. I've read all of his books but white and doubt I'll ever give it a shot. I remember when I first saw a copy of it and my heart just sank when I read the back. He finally turned into a parody of his own characters.
I feel the same way about Ayn Rand. I have a friend who adores "The Fountainhead" for Rand's writing and keeps pushing me to give it a try. She doesn't associate with Rand's views at all the book just helped her get back into reading. I think it is a book with one of the most interesting controversies because of the social stigma heavily associated with it.
I enjoyed Orson Scott Card's books in high school. Lots of interesting ideas about interspecies contact, biology, religion, and the soul as an elementary particle. Those books had a big effect on me, but looking back, I'm not sure they hold up well. Card's universe seems culturally stagnant even 3000 years into the future, partly due to his politics peeking in here and there, partly for plot reasons. Characters also have a tendency to paychoanalyze each other because Card thinks subtlety in literary symbolism makes it "inaccessible", so it becomes almost preachy instead. The Ender's Shadow quartet is especially egregious for absurd rightwing geopolitics. (Resolving the War on Terror by nuking Mecca? Really?)
House of Leaves, Bro'....!
For Dickens, I recomend trying an audiobook. If that doesn't work Andrew Davies and the BBC have done some great new(ish) adaptaions. Those are pretty great. I have not been able to get through a print copy of Dickens' work either. Love the plots and characters though! This was a fun video! Thanks.
A nice way to ease yourself into Thomas Pynchon is to read Inherent Vice-I think it's his most "readable" novel and incredibly entertaining on a sentence-by-sentence level because of all the stoner humor. Then watch the movie PTA made to help you understand what the fuck you just read-then read the novel again. At that point, you'll have been seeded with the pattern of his consciousness, and when you approach more difficult works like Gravity's Rainbow, Mason & Dixon, or Against the Day, things will fall into place more readily.
Also, utilize the thriving Pynchon culture online: there's an incredibly helpful Pynchon wiki, and the Pynchon subreddit is fantastic, with truly illuminating groupreads of every novel. I recommend to start reading him while you're young, so that you can periodically reread him as you age. He's not just any author.
All these questions lead to only one answer for me:
James Joyce
Reading Dickens is 100% a chore ha ha
Books lol I hate them- yeah that sums it up… time to read
It seems that many of your critiques is I don't like their political views so they're out.
Exactly. It's wilful ignorance.
Man i love classics but Dickens was such a difficult read, the characters were so interesting but unfortunately, the writing style is just not for me
also poetry
I simply "don't get it"
i want to like lord of the rings, in theory it's the perfect trilogy for me it has the worldbuilding the fantasy the premise,,,,, but i just can't get trough the first book i tried 5 times already i'm gonna try again because my mom wants to watch the movies with me
Just watch the movies, all the good stuff from the books is there.
If you can push through to the last like third of Fellowship the rest of the trilogy just pulls you in and holds you. I had the same issue myself but the slowness and rather almost relaxed and small scale of the first book adds so much weight later on that you don’t realize until you’re out of the slog
I also wouldn't read Ayn Rand's books, not so much because of her politics, but because they sound boring as heck. Arquitecture? Trains? _We_ fanfiction? What a dork
We The Living, her first novel, would be a good alternative in that case.
I don't get people that say they won't read a book because the author did or said something controversial.
Why can't you separate the author and the book itself? Most of the time, I don't even think about authors when reading books. It's like separating the voice actor from the character. Sometimes it adds to the book, most of the time it doesn't.
And wouldn't you be even more curious about the book when the author has an opposing view from you? Or if the author is a killer or worse? It's just curious to see how different types of people think and write. You can criticize such books anyway, so I don't think you should not read them because of the author.
"White Fragility" by Robin D'Angelo..
Its pretty much gas lighting an entire race of people.
I loved The Girl on the Train. She's not a girl, that's a hot marketing word. She's a grown ass woman and she's on the train because she's commuting and she sees something suspicious. Gets involved because stupid. Sticks her nose in where it doesn't belong because that 's what drives stories forward. Great character POV. I love an unreliable narrator and this one's a raging alcoholic. And don' t you just love the pretty cover? The shifting/doubling werdz? It represents her drunken train riding and seeing things that aren't quite as they seem and if you trip on those tracks you'll get ch-ch-chopped up real good. Deep. Clever. Don't be a snob. More enjoyable than The Dark Tower (but then everything is).