1jroger1
I need absolution from a book priest. I recently read “War and Peace” for the first time and followed it with “Misery,” and I confess to enjoying “Misery” more. A lot more. In fact, I’m still shaking. I’m willing to do penance by reading “The Brothers Karamazov” next but only if I can follow it with “Christine.” Can someone please help me?
2treereader
War and Peace, and Misery. These two books serve completely different purposes. War and Peace wasn't written to be a thriller or a page turner. It's more of a "life and times" book, a reflection on society, values, the meaning of life, and it even throws in a bunch of history. Misery, which I haven't read yet, was likely meant to fall more into that thriller category, to somehow emulate a fight or flight response, to be more visceral. In the future, you'll probably recall Misery being the exciting read, but War and Peace should be driving you to compare your life and society to that of old Russia, to be introspective about life and its unfortunate events, to be a little more philosophical. Both books can coexist, though.
On an unrelated note, I found War and Peace and Les Miserables to be eerily similar as far as the format and structure of the epic novel go. They wouldn't be "epic" without all of the unnecessary interludes and side-commentary on history, plumbing, society, and whatnot. Perhaps it's books like those that prompted publishers to invent abridgements! I liked War and Peace much more, yet liked Les Miserables much more than Anna Karenina.
On an unrelated note, I found War and Peace and Les Miserables to be eerily similar as far as the format and structure of the epic novel go. They wouldn't be "epic" without all of the unnecessary interludes and side-commentary on history, plumbing, society, and whatnot. Perhaps it's books like those that prompted publishers to invent abridgements! I liked War and Peace much more, yet liked Les Miserables much more than Anna Karenina.
3jroger1
>2 treereader:
Aha! So if a thoughtful editor had introduced the appropriate chapters with a statement like “If you don’t care about wolf hunting in 19th century Russia, you can skip to page such-and-such,” I might have enjoyed it more? Makes sense.
Aha! So if a thoughtful editor had introduced the appropriate chapters with a statement like “If you don’t care about wolf hunting in 19th century Russia, you can skip to page such-and-such,” I might have enjoyed it more? Makes sense.
4HugoDumas
>1 jroger1: Congratulations on reading War and Peace. I have read it twice and just recently acquired the Criterion restoration in blu-Ray of the epic film Directed by Sergei Bondarchuk which I have seen about 7-8 times. https://www.criterion.com/films/28891-war-and-peace
I love this particular style of novel, simply because it is more than a novel as >2 treereader: states. Yes Hugo has the same style, and I have read Les Miserables twice. The Easton Press 5 volume DLE is the most coveted book in my collection; along with the 3 other Routledge editions. I think Moby Dick has a similar format with multiple diversions from the “story”.
To the uninitiated this style of writing can be annoying. Maybe your suggestion of an editorial heading would be helpful for those who may want to give up too fast through frustration. I know many very well read people who simply cannot digest Tolstoy, Hugo or Melville for the reasons you mention.
When I finish a serious huge book like War and Peace, I too look for lighter reading which tends to sweep me away into a pure story. I call this cleansing our mental palette. I also tend to choose a smaller book from my library which can be finished in a few days.
So no need to do penance over a guilty pleasure like a Stephen King novel. I have also read Brothers Karamazov twice. The Easton Press version is spectacular with the woodcuts of Eichenberg and the revised translation of Garnett commissioned by Macy for the Limited Editions Club. This was a very generous addition to their 100 Greatest collection. You will want to cleanse your palette after this one. I recommend that you follow up this massive read with a James Bond novel.
I love this particular style of novel, simply because it is more than a novel as >2 treereader: states. Yes Hugo has the same style, and I have read Les Miserables twice. The Easton Press 5 volume DLE is the most coveted book in my collection; along with the 3 other Routledge editions. I think Moby Dick has a similar format with multiple diversions from the “story”.
To the uninitiated this style of writing can be annoying. Maybe your suggestion of an editorial heading would be helpful for those who may want to give up too fast through frustration. I know many very well read people who simply cannot digest Tolstoy, Hugo or Melville for the reasons you mention.
When I finish a serious huge book like War and Peace, I too look for lighter reading which tends to sweep me away into a pure story. I call this cleansing our mental palette. I also tend to choose a smaller book from my library which can be finished in a few days.
So no need to do penance over a guilty pleasure like a Stephen King novel. I have also read Brothers Karamazov twice. The Easton Press version is spectacular with the woodcuts of Eichenberg and the revised translation of Garnett commissioned by Macy for the Limited Editions Club. This was a very generous addition to their 100 Greatest collection. You will want to cleanse your palette after this one. I recommend that you follow up this massive read with a James Bond novel.
5jroger1
>4 HugoDumas:
Bond - James Bond? Of course! FS has been publishing his novels at the rate of one each year, and they are perfect for the purpose you describe. So are Mike Hammer and Perry Mason, both of which have been blessed with EP sets, as well as a host of others. I read many of those while wending my way through Durant’s histories several years ago.
It’s interesting that you should mention Moby Dick, which I have read 2-and-a-half times. I loved it in high school, admired it in my 30s, but didn’t finish it in my 60s because I was was getting tired of all the digressions. Perhaps gray hair causes impatience.
Bond - James Bond? Of course! FS has been publishing his novels at the rate of one each year, and they are perfect for the purpose you describe. So are Mike Hammer and Perry Mason, both of which have been blessed with EP sets, as well as a host of others. I read many of those while wending my way through Durant’s histories several years ago.
It’s interesting that you should mention Moby Dick, which I have read 2-and-a-half times. I loved it in high school, admired it in my 30s, but didn’t finish it in my 60s because I was was getting tired of all the digressions. Perhaps gray hair causes impatience.
6HugoDumas
>5 jroger1: I want that FS Bond set so bad! I believe you are the one who convinced me to get that fabulous Sweetwater press edition of Moby Dick with the complete Rockwell Kent illustrations. By the way I read all of Durant and found no need to cleanse my palette; he is that good.
7treereader
>4 HugoDumas:
I’m curious to know what you think of that new release of the 1966 War and Peace. I bought the previously new remake a couple of years ago (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01CRURRKG). I thought that one was alright. It really underscored how hard it must be to convert so much detail and story into a movie or mini-series format. I didn’t think it would hold up well for anyone who had not read the book in recent memory. For those who have read it and can recall things well, the mini-series feels like a good summarization.
I’m curious to know what you think of that new release of the 1966 War and Peace. I bought the previously new remake a couple of years ago (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01CRURRKG). I thought that one was alright. It really underscored how hard it must be to convert so much detail and story into a movie or mini-series format. I didn’t think it would hold up well for anyone who had not read the book in recent memory. For those who have read it and can recall things well, the mini-series feels like a good summarization.
8astropi
The first King novel I read was "Salem's Lot" and I thought to myself - wow, this is quite good! Perhaps people who say King is a mediocre writer should actually read his work.
Then I read a few more of his works, and my personal opinion is that he is quite talented, but yeah, I just can't call his work "world-class literature" :)
That said, War and Peace is something I read once and hope to never read again. Go for Dostoevsky. The Idiot is a fabulous work, lots of intellectualism and all that jazz oozing out of the pages, yet, it never bores like Tolstoy.
Then I read a few more of his works, and my personal opinion is that he is quite talented, but yeah, I just can't call his work "world-class literature" :)
That said, War and Peace is something I read once and hope to never read again. Go for Dostoevsky. The Idiot is a fabulous work, lots of intellectualism and all that jazz oozing out of the pages, yet, it never bores like Tolstoy.
9HugoDumas
>7 treereader: I remain committed to the 1966 Russian version by Sergei Bondarchuk. I also own the 1956 King Vidor version which is reasonable entertainment (I am a Hepburn fan). I caught a little of the BBC miniseries but did not finish it because it did not resonate with me.
10treereader
>9 HugoDumas:
Thanks!
Thanks!
11iluvbeckett
>3 jroger1: Exactly. I started reading War and Peace when I was home sick for a few days at age thirteen, and stopped when I got to the interminable wolf hunting section. Fast forward eleven years, when I decided I might as well finish it (in a different translation). Between Tolstoy's two epics, I guess I prefer Anna Karenina.
Adira para publicar
