cquayhl
19-07-2004, 11:58 AM
Hey guys,
I feel like I'm jumping in midway through a conversation. But since I always do before I think...
I wanted to propose some sort of guideline for thread titles. It seems like so far many of the thread titles are very nondescript or very broad; it's hard to tell from the title which books or authors are being discussed in the thread. I was thinking if we try as much as possible to have authors/books as titles, people can immediately see what's what.
One of the consequences I forsee if we use this system is that threads will move much slower because say Syamsul starts a thread on Dostoyevsky, it may be months before I gather the guts to pick up Brothers K again and respond to his post. But I think this way the discussion may be more focussed.
Let me know what you think. To kick things off, I'm posting a short review I wrote a while ago.
Cheers,
Charis.
First, here's a link to Byatt's official homeppage: www.asbyatt.com.
possession by a.s. byatt was marvellous. it's about (ah, that primary school book review phrase) two researchers in the present day who unearth an affair between two victorian poets through their writings. the poets are of course fictitious so byatt writes pages of poetry and letters 'by them'. there are also other 'victorian' letters and journal entries and a lot of 'modern' literary criticism. it's quite amazing how well byatt manages to write in character with the various stereotypes of academic, not to mention, of course, the victorians, but those parodies i was a little less capable of appreciating. this is a book about books, a literary treasure hunt, a gigantic joke. what more could one ask for? :-) with the exception of a few awkward passages at the beginning, the book reads remarkably smoothly. sentence flows into sentence and paragraphs seamlessly blend together. it was a real pleasure to read.
after a few weeks, i decided to have a look at 'the virgin in the garden', also by a.s. byatt instead of doing my quantum field theory final. it's the first book in a tetralogy or quadrilogy or some other word i don't know. in any case, the four-ology appears to be more or less the life and times of the potter family (no relation to harry potter), more particularlyof one of the daughters, fredrica potter, who at this point in the story is in her a-level year. compared to possession, the narrative here seemed less linear - there were more subplots and tangents - which made it a little more difficult to read but somehow also better. i wondered a little about the episodes involving the potter son, marcus and his potty teacher, wilson partly because they were strange, but also because i often also mentally drawn geometrical patterns between lamps and that sort of thing, particularly in churches and lecture halls. i wonder whom byatt knew who did that, or whether it's just a well-documented sign of insanity. ;-)
N. B. The other books in this series are Still Life, Bable Tower and a Whistling Woman. The latter came out within this past year if I'm not mistaken.
I feel like I'm jumping in midway through a conversation. But since I always do before I think...
I wanted to propose some sort of guideline for thread titles. It seems like so far many of the thread titles are very nondescript or very broad; it's hard to tell from the title which books or authors are being discussed in the thread. I was thinking if we try as much as possible to have authors/books as titles, people can immediately see what's what.
One of the consequences I forsee if we use this system is that threads will move much slower because say Syamsul starts a thread on Dostoyevsky, it may be months before I gather the guts to pick up Brothers K again and respond to his post. But I think this way the discussion may be more focussed.
Let me know what you think. To kick things off, I'm posting a short review I wrote a while ago.
Cheers,
Charis.
First, here's a link to Byatt's official homeppage: www.asbyatt.com.
possession by a.s. byatt was marvellous. it's about (ah, that primary school book review phrase) two researchers in the present day who unearth an affair between two victorian poets through their writings. the poets are of course fictitious so byatt writes pages of poetry and letters 'by them'. there are also other 'victorian' letters and journal entries and a lot of 'modern' literary criticism. it's quite amazing how well byatt manages to write in character with the various stereotypes of academic, not to mention, of course, the victorians, but those parodies i was a little less capable of appreciating. this is a book about books, a literary treasure hunt, a gigantic joke. what more could one ask for? :-) with the exception of a few awkward passages at the beginning, the book reads remarkably smoothly. sentence flows into sentence and paragraphs seamlessly blend together. it was a real pleasure to read.
after a few weeks, i decided to have a look at 'the virgin in the garden', also by a.s. byatt instead of doing my quantum field theory final. it's the first book in a tetralogy or quadrilogy or some other word i don't know. in any case, the four-ology appears to be more or less the life and times of the potter family (no relation to harry potter), more particularlyof one of the daughters, fredrica potter, who at this point in the story is in her a-level year. compared to possession, the narrative here seemed less linear - there were more subplots and tangents - which made it a little more difficult to read but somehow also better. i wondered a little about the episodes involving the potter son, marcus and his potty teacher, wilson partly because they were strange, but also because i often also mentally drawn geometrical patterns between lamps and that sort of thing, particularly in churches and lecture halls. i wonder whom byatt knew who did that, or whether it's just a well-documented sign of insanity. ;-)
N. B. The other books in this series are Still Life, Bable Tower and a Whistling Woman. The latter came out within this past year if I'm not mistaken.