pineapplesf

pineapplesf t1_ja31fgs wrote

So the thing with their export feature (which is required by the eu) is that it's buggy and they made it hard for others. When I tried to import it to two different places, less than 10% of my books followed. Adding by hand thousands of books is a huge time investment. At this point, when I do it I'll probably move them to Gemini or something similar rather than trust another website like Goodreads.

2

pineapplesf t1_j6055ad wrote

I loved house of leaves. It's a pretty good critique of postmodern media. I would argue it's not merely deconstructive but attempts to posit solutions without a return to modernity.

I think Danielewski gets a lot of misplaced hate for making postmodernism not only accessible but enjoyable. It's quite a bit more optimistic, empathetic, and kind compared to other lit fic. His books have a naive earnestness which is distinct from the sort of distanced cynicism of Don DeLillo or Will Self. The backlash against him feels very similar to the backlash against Bruno Latour and I suspect it's for similar reasons.

You can certainly not like Danielewskis style, which includes so much multimedia it can come off as gimmicky, but I think it's hard to argue that he's not effective with it. His Familiar series was super interesting and I'm sad that it was cancelled.

1

pineapplesf t1_j5zqaad wrote

2666 was one of my favorite books last year. Rather than compare it to the difficulty of Murakami -- Id say it's more like Gravity's Rainbow, Infinite Jest, or The Familiar. They all take a while to understand what the author is going for. You many still not like the books methods or it's conclusion (which many people hate), but I believe the way it's written definitely achieves Bolanos goals.

2

pineapplesf t1_j1mw7j7 wrote

I feel like a lot of contemporary writers and editors fundamentally misunderstand the core concepts of writing in general and for their genre.

ETA; I suspect it hasn't actually changed but the books/authors that understand the logic of books are likely going to still be reread in 50 years. Especially over a book that fumbled it's way through. Survivors bias and all that.

3

pineapplesf t1_iyadlhc wrote

I disagree that Dorian Grey would have been improved with length. Oscar Wilde was a particular writer and his length was a choice that highlights his aesthetic ideals.

While I can think of many books which would be improved with editing it down, I'm not sure I can think of one that needed more length. Often the lack of clarity and high specificity of word choice in shorter stories serves a specific purpose.

1

pineapplesf t1_ix9ntjb wrote

I grew up areligious. I highly recommend The Catholic Bible, Personal Study Edition (green cover). Each section is has an introduction which explains the history, the original text, when, why and how subsequent versions changed it. It gives context on why some books were included and others were not which I found really illuminating. It also has copious footnotes.

My favorite part is that it explains common symbols/allegories/stories and how these are interpreted by various groups throughout history with contextualization. Seeing the evolution of how different groups viewed passages overtime is great for literary references because how we view it now is radically different than even 100 years ago.

ETA: KJV, despite people here insisting on it, didn't influence early Americans or Shakespeare. Most pilgrims brought over the Geneva Bible which is the foundation of puritanical Christianity and most American cultural beliefs -- which is why you won't find the same quotes in the KJV.

1

pineapplesf t1_ivuq15o wrote

This year was 520 books from around the world.

My health failed halfway through the year combined with getting very tired of the type of books I picked. I completed over half the challenge. In total, including non-challenge ones, I've read 453 books.

1