-
Find more reddit channels over at @r_channels join @blarkhive for free audiobooks
collision of old and new worldviews. Such changes leave significant impact, and they are very interesting.
6. To be clear – in previous points I described things that I want to read about, but I don’t think that lack of them make these utopias bad. But a complete absence of the topic of women's rights in modern utopia was a massive disappointment. After LeGuin, none of the authors tried to explore (even just a little) how patriarchy works, how to destroy it, and what the world would look like if it was destroyed.
7. Also, in the utopian worlds of A Half-Built Garden and Everything for Everyone, religions have somehow solved all their problems and became entirely good. I wonder how.
Please share your utopia reviews and recommendations!
https://redd.it/1hu0y97
@r_books
describing old world problems (economical, ecological, etc.). But sexism or patriarchy (or their consequences) are not even mentioned in this book. Even Edward Bellamy in 1888 paid much more attention to women's rights than the authors from the 21st century!
Ruthanna Emrys – A Half-Built Garden
Book: 4. Difference: 3.
Benevolent aliens are trying to convince the inhabitants of the Earth to leave their planet and move to an artificial satellite – they believe that otherwise humanity would have no chance of survival. Many people, including the main character, disagree with them. But there are not only anarchist communes on Earth, but also remnants of former corporations, and for them deal with aliens could be a way to regain their former power.
For me it’s a very controversial book. The idea is absolutely amazing, the plot is both good and bad, characters’ refusal to take responsibility for their actions is frustrating, and the conflict between anarchists and capitalists, which could be one of the book's greatest strengths, is weak. It seems that the author understands that people are different, but does not really understand how and why: capitalists don’t have any ideas, beliefs or goals (the only thing that they want is deal with aliens). Both anarchists and capitalists have no idea how people on the other side live. It looked weird even in “The Disposessed”, and it became even weirder with modern technologies.
But overall, I liked this book, and I recommend it.
Margaret Killjoy – A Country of Ghosts
Book: 3,5. Difference: 3.
A young journalist goes to war with the anarchists, but by chance he quickly finds himself on their side. He starts to help them because he believes that this is the right thing to do and because his own survival depends on it.
The beginning of this book is weak: the opponents of the anarchists are absolutely cardboard. But the rest is more interesting. Two things caught my attention. Firstly, it’s the idea that good deeds can have unpredictable consequences: the main character wrote an article about the shelter where he lived as a teenager, describing terrible living condition and abuse, and the owner of the shelter set it on fire (three children died). As a result, some people curse the main character for this article, while others thank him, believing that such a terrible end is still better than what happened before it. Secondly, among all the anarchist communes there is one for people who were expelled from other communes or left on their own free will. The plot and characters aren't too memorable, but overall it's a pretty interesting anarchist adventurous utopia.
Becky Chambers – Monk and Robot Duology
Book: 5. Difference: 2
Once upon a time, people on Panga used robots. But a long time ago, robots developed a consciousness – and now two species don’t bother each other. Robots live in forests, and people (who have learned a lot since then) live in the utopia they have built during this time. Until one of the robots, Mosscap, joins a monk called Dex, who offers people tea and comfort.
This is the epitome of a cozy fantasy. If you need a tense plot, perhaps this book is not for you. If you are interested in the atmosphere and the inner world of the characters, I surely recommend it. In any case, it will become clear very quickly whether you like Becky Chambers' style or not, so give it a try.
There are two things I really like about this book. Firstly, Chambers does not idealize nature and understands why people need technology. Secondly, she is not afraid to explore her own ideas. For example, if a robot breaks any of their parts that they cannot fix themselves, then they voluntarily agree to an analogue of death: they are disassembled, and their good parts are used to create new robots. And in the second book, one of the Mosscap’s parts indeed gets broken. It amazes me how much the perception of ideas depends on their presentation. On the one hand, it is clear why this principle was introduced: otherwise it would be unclear which of the robots is worthy of living, and
A Book App Used AI to ‘Roast’ Its Users. It Went Anti-Woke Instead | One year-end summary from Fable, a social app where people share what books they read, told the user, “Don’t forget to surface for the occasional white author, OK?”
https://www.wired.com/story/fable-controversy-ai-summaries/
https://redd.it/1htr6og
@r_books
"All Over But the Shoutin'" is an incredibly beautiful and poetic memoir
By Rick Bragg, Pulitzer prize-winning journalist.
It's the true story of the son of a single mother who picked cotton to raise her 3 sons in rural Alabama. One of those little boys goes on to win a Pulitzer Prize. This story is told from Rick's point of view, but he uses his beautiful prose to make it as though you're viewing it through the eyes of his mother. A beautiful and dignified look at life in the middle of nowhere. This one will stick with you. I can't recommend it highly enough.
I know that it was certainly popular at some point, as Bragg is fairly well-known, but I have never seen this book on any lists of great memoirs and it deserves to be there. Bragg has grabbed the English language by the horns and bent it to his will to craft images and feelings that jump straight off the page. I finished reading it, then I did the audiobook because I wanted to visit it again. The narrator Frank Muller somehow improves on the already gorgeous book with his accent and excellent voice work.
https://redd.it/1htmisx
@r_books
Literature where a character rises from working class to upper or even middle class without being punished in the end?
It feels like a lot of literature seems to treat social class as basically a natural order that ambition corrupts. So you rarely see a story of someone born working class rising through hard work or other honest means up the class ladder without an ending that makes it clear they should not have tried to do this.
Like Vanity Fair - Becky's ambition is notably reviled - she ends up despised by her friends and suspected of murder.
Great Expectations has the most movement in both directions - Pip starts out working class, has his few years of being an upper middle class gentleman - and then returns to being a working class/lower middle class clerk. He explicitly learns that his clothes and money didn't make him a gentleman - he was never one of them. Estella is born into the working class, adopted into the upper class, she ends up suffering for her marriage to a gentleman and finishes up probably lower middle class. Their rises are always through either living off the proceeds of crime or as part of an upper class plot and are temporary in both cases as they both shot for the upper classes and ultimately failed.
Oliver Twist looks like it would be the story of working class orphan rising up to the middle class through luck - but actually he finds his solidly middle class family and discovers his father was rich upper class - it's not a rise really - he's just discovering that he was middle class all along.
David Copperfield - spends time with the working class characters but actually David is born middle class and the whole book is just him establishing that yes he definitely is middle class.
Wuthering Heights - bringing a working class boy off the streets into the middle class Earnshaw household sets everything in motion. That decision seems to ruin all their lives - setting Kathy on a lifelong obsession, Hindley for a lifetime of resentment which leads to his drinking etc, Heathcliff makes it his goal to manipulate Hindley's property out of him and spend his life angry and miserable. All of which spills out and ruins the lives of the Lintons as well. It is all started by Mr Earnshaw bringing home a working class boy and treating him as if he is another middle class child. And doesn't end until that interloper is dead - at which point it's as if the natural order has re-established and the survivors seem to be happy again.
Jude the Obscure - working class lad has middle class ambitions and his whole life is miserable.
The Woodlanders - Grace tries to marry 'up' by marrying the Dr - ends up abandoned, abused and leads to the death of her childhood sweetheart - the working class boy she should have married.
What novels tell the opposite story?
https://redd.it/1htioa0
@r_books
Book tracking website (alt to GoodReads)
I signed up for StoryGraph a couple of days ago and am still waiting on my GoodReads import to finish. Apparently this first step can take up to 72 hours. In the meantime I'm wondering if it's even what I'm looking for.
I'm pretty happy with GoodReads, tbh. The only thing I really want (and the reason I'm looking elsewhere) is the ability to jot some notes down about a book. NOT a review, though honestly I'd probably use GoodReads review feature if there was a way to mark the review private, but I can't find this.
So, my list of features in order of priority:
1 - Tag and catalog books (did not finish, finished, to read, etc.).
2 - Take notes about a book.
3 - Social aspects... read others reviews, follow people, etc.
I generally don't even mark what I'm reading, because nobody follows me. I do kind of like following others though (classic lurker), particularly authors. Don't care that much about stats but it is kind of fun seeing the yearly roundup.
Also... I don't care about using it on my phone.
https://redd.it/1hteyhb
@r_books
Just finished Malibu Rising… feeling underwhelmed?
I got this as a blind date with a book Christmas gift. I finished it in three sittings.. and was just left underwhelmed?
I enjoyed the first half, but the back half was just a descent into madness and the end honestly felt like the author was like… how do I end this? and just did. It was generally predictable and felt like it was written to be either a Netflix movie or one of those shows where they’re like 4 episodes but each episode is an hour and a half long.
It was a super quick and easy read for me. Maybe this just isn’t my genre?
I’m not sure what I’m asking here, maybe I’m just looking for reassurance that it was a bland read.
https://redd.it/1hszvch
@r_books
Those who markup their books with pens and highlighters
I read this book called "how to read a book" by Mortimer Adler.
He has different stages of reading; elementary, inspectional, analytical and syntopical.
I'm trying to do more syntopical and analytical. Syntopical is where you read many books at once on a certain topic.
Part of analytical is to do scribbles and highlights.
This is the part I would like to discuss how you do this.
Sometimes when I buy second hand books I love to see what the user had scribbled. One person had sticky notes in the book.
So when I'm annotating, it doesn't amount to much because I don't have the space to write my thoughts.
He mentioned using the margins and the back of the book.
So just wondering how you guys annotate and would love to see some of your pictures (if we can share images in comments)
https://redd.it/1ht1k0n
@r_books
Are men’s reading habits truly a national crisis?
https://www.vox.com/culture/392971/men-reading-fiction-statistics-fact-checked
https://redd.it/1ht19n5
@r_books
What are authors that you almost enjoy
... but annoyingly, you end up DNF'ing or slogging through their work?
Mild spoilers for Sharon Kay Penman's work (tbh not much more than what it says on the blurb).
For me this is Sharon Kay Penman. She is an excellent writer who did a lot of historical research for her novels. Many people love her and I understand why.
Especially Here Be Dragons started out SO good. I was so intrigued and ready to call Penman the next GRRM with how she set up these characters. But when the love story started, I ended up hating that so much, and kind of stopped caring about any of the characters. I thought it was an odd choice to make a marriage between a 14 year old girl and her 30-something husband into a love story. It was uncomfortable.
Then her other book When Christ And His Saints Slept. The author set up the story beautifully and the characters were all SO promising, but then they all just let me down. I thought that that was a problem with both of her books that I read, actually. It seems like the characters are going to have great depth and that their relationships with the rest of the cast will be better developed. But then she kind of drops the ball imo.
OTOH another reason why I didn't like WCAHSS is purely my own problem and not at all the author's fault. It was just so disappointing to see how all of the characters treated Maud/Empress Mathilda. Even the female characters thought she was to blame for her husband abusing her. In hindsight I think this was a historically accurate way of handling these characters, and I applaud her for that. Still, after the book lost its appeal for me, this became more and more unbearable to read about.
Thanks for letting me vent. What are some authors that you ALMOST like but not quite? And why?
https://redd.it/1hsr8kb
@r_books
Novelist and academic David Lodge dies aged 89
https://www.penguin.co.uk/articles/2025/01/david-lodge-obituary
https://redd.it/1hsl035
@r_books
Have You Ever Had a Book Change Its Meaning for You Over Time?
I’ve been thinking about how our experiences shape the way we interpret stories. For me, The Catcher in the Rye was a book I read as a teenager and didn’t fully connect with—Holden just seemed frustrating and aimless. But rereading it in my late 20s, I saw his vulnerability and the deeper themes of isolation and longing, and it hit completely differently.
It made me wonder—what books have shifted in meaning for you as you’ve grown or changed? Have you ever revisited a story and found a completely new perspective waiting for you?
https://redd.it/1hsiktu
@r_books
Just finished reading Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier and I NEED to talk to someone about the narrator and Frank Crawley
So I just finished Rebecca a few hours ago and I can't stop thinking about it for many reasons. I'm curious if anyone else had the same thought throughout -
>!I really thought Mrs. de Winter would end up with Frank. Since she didn't mention her husband by name in the prologue, only that they had both been present for the events of the book and were away from Manderly, I was convinced while reading her new husband was Frank! Especially since he seemed to try and look out for her much more than Maxim did. !<
I'm curious if anyone else had a similar thought??
https://redd.it/1hs4bka
@r_books
Slate article: “It’s Time To Treat Reading Like Working Out”
https://slate.com/life/2025/01/reading-decline-books-new-years-resolution.html?cx_testId=6&cx_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=0&cx_experienceId=EX7KGHGYKIJY&cx_experienceActionId=showRecommendations4EMB3X9F23GS02J#cxrecs_s
https://redd.it/1hs1628
@r_books
I read (almost) all of the Erik Larson books in 2024; here's my ranking.
Erik Larson writes primarily narrative nonfiction. He is adept at putting a narrative spin over all of the facts and figures to make his stories compelling for today’s readers. The result isn’t bad. In fact his books are, for the most part, really good. In my opinion though, they do bend and blur the line between fiction and non. The speculative gloss coating his stories is thinner than historical fiction, but far too thick to call them purely historical.
#7 - In the Garden of Beasts
When I looked back at all of Larson’s books to compile this ranking, it was almost like I discovered In the Garden of Beasts for the first time again. That’s how completely I forgot it.
#6 - Thunderstruck
This is one of two Larson books that weave a tale of creation together with a tale of murder; the other being The Devil in the White City discussed below. His narrative in Thunderstruck is riveting, but the sheer volume of details bogs down a reader like me. My interest in the history of wireless is minimal and that’s what lands this book at sixth
#5 - The Demon of Unrest
This one read more like a history textbook than the rest of Larson’s works. Demon has its problems. The fascinating story of what led up to the events at Fort Sumter gets lost at times in a fair bit of self-indulgence from Larson. Just because he did the research, readers are asked to care about a few too many unlikeable, and in my opinion irrelevant, characters. Also, there wasn’t enough Lincoln.
#4 - The Devil in the White City
Based on the title and brief synopsis, one expects this book to be an interwoven tale where Holmes’ killings bear some attachment to the designing and ultimate execution of the World’s Fair. In fact, these events have almost nothing to do with each other. When the title promises “The Devil”, I expect a significant and compelling character to emerge (think Milton's Satan). However, of the ink that Larson spilt writing The Devil in the White City, less than 25% of it is dedicated to Holmes. The World's Fair chapters are interesting and well-written, but the book didn't deliver on its promise.
#3 - Isaac’s Storm
Isaac's Storm is an vividly told cautionary tale. In fact, it was published just a couple of years before Hurricane Katrina. Perhaps we will never learn. The writing in this book is not nearly as fine-tuned as it is in Larson’s more recent publications, but the story of this hurricane is extremely engaging. It’s a quick, easy read for anyone interested in the history of meteorology.
#2 - The Splendid and the Vile
The Splendid and the Vile is a book that grabbed my attention and never let go. It ranks second on my list mostly on the back of Churchill as a character. This book is entertaining and informative. It made me want to learn more, which is the best thing that I can say about a narrative nonfiction book like this.
#1 - Dead Wake
The scenes aboard the U-20 submarine are the most compelling. Larson himself admits enjoying this part of his research and writing the most. He fills these sections with pungent details about the cramped conditions, shoddy machinery, and the many horrible odors that a WWI submariner experienced.
The book’s climax, the attack and sinking of the Lusitania, is told in vivid and lucid prose that any novelist would be proud of. It’s extremely rare for me to wish a book would go on longer. I think most books overstay their welcome. Not Dead Wake.
That's my list. I'm interested in what everyone else thinks of Larson's works. I think he will serve as a good gateway to more historical reading for me. However, my hunch is that I'll enjoy other historical writers more than Larson once I get there.
https://redd.it/1hrw66a
@r_books
which of them should be disassembled into spare parts. On the other hand, such adherence to traditions looks a bit like a cult, and for another author it could very well become part of a dystopia. (By the way, robots can ask humans for help, but they don't do it).
The utopia in this book is quite standard anarchist one, but with one interesting nuance: there is a kind of money analogue – when you get any help, you transfer this pseudo money to the helper’s account. However, it is not forbidden to have a negative balance; a big negative balance only shows other people that you need some help.
There are also two YA books that are not 100% utopia, but close to it (at least on a surface level).
Nick Fuller Googins – The Great Transition
Book: 4. Difference: 3.
In some ways, this YA book is similar to Everything for Everyone: the old world collapsed under the weight of economic and environmental problems, and people barely managed to build a new world. Now young people can hardly imagine previous life, and the older generation is trying to cope with their traumas. These traumas pull family of Larch, Kristina and their daughter Amy apart: Larch wants to forget the past, Kristina wants to remember it (and make others remember it as well), and Amy wants to live her life and not be blamed for not suffering enough.
Sometimes plot of this book is weak, but I still love it very much. Firstly, for the Larch storyline – it was very vivid and interesting. And secondly, for Kristina, an absolutely insufferable zealot and an incredibly interesting and realistic character. She is willing to fight for justice, she is ruthless towards herself and others, and she resents new generation when they are not sharing her ideals.
If the characters are more important for you than the plot, I recommend this book 100%. If not, take a closer look at this book anyway, it's good.
Akwaeke Emezi – Pet
Book: 2. Difference: 1.
Not poetic enough for a fairy tale and not realistic enough and far too predictable for YA, this is a book about sexual abuse in the seemingly utopian city of Lucille, and about the attempts of its inhabitants to silence this abuse.
As a utopia, this book is not very interesting: at first, everybody seem to be ideal people living an ideal life, but they are all ready to cover up the abuse, >!until the very end, when everyone changes their minds.!<
The topic of the abuse itself described is just as poorly: what angered me the most was that the main character blindly trusts the self-appointed abuser hunter only because her gut tells her so, and the narrative never ever shows us that this choice was wrong. There is also sexism in the supposedly utopian Lucille: it is briefly mentioned that three-year-old boys and girls wear different clothes, and, again, it is treated like something normal.
Of course, when an author describes something does not mean that they approve it. But if all characters actions only have consequences that the author needs to express their ideas, it is a bad book.
Overall, there are a few things that I’ve noticed:
1. Except from Looking Backwards, all utopias are entirely anarchist. I would like to read some kind of non-anarchist utopia.
2. The impact of technology on life is not explored by anyone except Becky Chambers. The use of technology in decision-making is mentioned in A Half-Built Garden, but the system there resembles an old-fashioned Internet forum from the mid-2000s. It’s a shame; I think that the use of technology in utopia building could be very interesting.
3. Special mention goes to the medical technologies. I have chronic diseases, and my perfect world definitely includes very, very advanced medicine. What could be more utopian than a world when “a chronic disease” is an outdated term? But nobody writes about it either.
4. There are no fractions in any utopia except A Country of Ghosts – in all other utopias, all “good guys” live by the same rules. There are also no selection or self-selection mechanisms anywhere.
5. I would like to read more books that explore the
Let's talk about utopias
Let's talk about utopias! I have read several utopias and rated them on two five-point scales. The first of them evaluates the quality of the book (plot, characters, etc.), the second – the difference of opinion between the characters. I believe that difference of opinion is a key quality for a good utopia. If all the characters are similar, it is much easier for them to avoid any conflicts. And if all of them are ideal (which happens in several utopias that I’ve read), then it is unclear what’s the point of the utopia at all. Ideal people would live in happiness, peace and harmony under a lot of regimes.
(I'm sorry for any mistakes – I’m not a native English speaker).
Let's go!
Edward Bellamy – Looking Backward: 2000–1887
Book: 3. Difference: 4.
Classic utopia, published in 1888. It’s a collection of ideas (some of them are very interesting) about building an ideal socialist society (controlled by the government). This book would be better as nonfiction – it has a plot, but it is very weak (especially romantic relationship).
I respect Bellamy for two things. Firstly, he really tried to test his utopia for strength and to think about what could go wrong and what could be done about it (although he explored open resistance and not quiet sabotage). Secondly, he wrote about women's rights. Yes, some of his suggestions are very sexist (well, it was 1888), but the others are still interesting – for example, creating a role of women’s ombudswoman in the government.
William Morris – News from Nowhere
Book: 1. Difference: 0.
William Morris did not like the government control in Bellamy's utopia at all, which resulted in a saccharine utopia about perfect people in a perfect world. This book is notable only for its historical significance, otherwise it is the most boring description of a dream that I’ve ever read. I dnfed this book.
Ursula LeGuin – The Disposessed
Book: 5. Difference: 5.
This is a book about two worlds: anarchist Anarres and capitalist Urres. A scientist called Shevek moves from Anarres to Urres, because he no longer can live and work on Anarres, but his new world turns out to be extremely far from perfect. LeGuin, being an anarchist, described two worlds very vividly and realistically.
The brutal honesty with which LeGuin tests her ideas for strength is extremely rare and truly impressive. Anarres is a complex world with its own advantages and disadvantages, and they are closely related to each other. No one is left without water, food, shelter, clothes. Everybody is closely watching each other. Everybody can express their ideas freely, but those who disagree with the majority are ostracized, and in some cases, severely abused.
"The Disposessed" is an excellent (100% recommend) book, but I think that it’s a dystopia. This is a very unpopular point of view, not shared by the author herself (LeGuin called her book “an Ambiguous Utopia”) and many readers. But, in my opinion, that’s how it should be. What is utopia for one person is dystopia for the other.
M. E. O’Brien, Eman Abdelhadi – Everything for Everyone: An Oral History of the New-York Commune 2052-2072
Book: 2. Difference: 0.
The idea of this book is great – to create a collection of pseudo-interviews with people living in a fictional anarchist commune. But all characters are sharing all authors’ ideas, and most of them are indistinguishable from each other. Almost all characters like to live, eat, spend time, and raise children in a large commune. The enemies of the new regime have either been killed (and no one wants to avenge them), or they are not trying to regain power. The solution to any problem is described as “we worked as a group, discussed our differences and found a solution”. In short, it’s another perfect utopia with perfect people.
Is there anything good about the book? Yes, I liked how the members of the commune describe their previous experiences. The parts where they talk about their traumas are not bad. Well, that's all.
What is even worse is that the authors had spent a lot of time
Has anyone watched One Hundred Years of Solitude on Netflix? Curious if people like it.
One Hundred Years of Solitude is one of my favorite books, and I have read it 4 times, and skimmed it for my favorite parts countless times. I was wary when I saw the new series on Netflix. I am not someone who hates movies from books or anything, but since this one is so near and dear I really debated whether to watch it. But I really liked it! I feel they're keeping the feeling of the book, in that they are telling the story similar to the book (using a narrator helps this I feel), and the actors and actresses sort of fit how I always pictured them. That it isn't a hollywood production I think helps give it a more authentic and intimate feel. Wondering if other people like it also, or if not, why?
https://redd.it/1htq7g8
@r_books
The Maid by Nita Prose is horrendous
Ugh. This book.
I look at the cover expecting a tantalizing who-dun-it a la the book version of Big Little Lies or White Lotus.
I expect a well fleshed out and interesting story from the perspective of a hotel maid.
I expect witty humor and deep characters.
Instead, we get:
- A stereotypical protagonist who is coded as on the spectrum but has no nuance; it feels like the author googled spectrum behavior and then just dumped that into creating Molly the maid (which, really?). There is no complexity to her behavior
- An absolutely awful plot that made little to no sense. The characters’ motivations were silly and trite. The pacing was too slow and too fast at the same time.
- Boring prose with no effort at interesting sentence structure, imagery, etc.
- A boring ending
Thoughts?
https://redd.it/1htjv9o
@r_books
How long do you read a classic book specifically, before you give up on it?
I tried searching old posts and didn't find anything fitting my specific query so wanted to get people's opinions. I'm on a lifelong quest to read the classics. I've got a "bucket list" of 100, and it's not a competition, the list is meant to be a lifelong journey, and I've quite enjoyed tackling the classics and gotten a lot of joy out of them.
That being said, I'll be he honest, even my favorite classics were a slog at some points, especially since the pace and language are often very different from today's books/media. Even if I haven't always enjoyed the book, I can sometimes still appreciate the historical context and what the author was trying to say. For example, I recently finished The Sun Also Rises and found the characters miserable and the story mid. However, I can appreciate Hemingway's writing style and what he was trying to say about The Silent Generation and their PTSD and numbing their pain in various ways because there wasn't mental health help back then.
So all of this is a long winded way to say, when you're reading a classic, which admittedly can sometimes be work/a chore, at what point do you decide you dislike it so much that it's not worth reading? The classic I'm reading right now (I'm not going to name it because I don't want people coming after me with pitchforks lol) is just really not my cup of tea. I haven't yet read a classic that I hate as much as this one, and it's a ~450 page book so I'm really trying to debate if it's worth finishing it for the sake of crossing it off my bucket list, or if I should just call it and replace it on my list with a different book instead. What are your guys' methods?
https://redd.it/1htfh8c
@r_books
who else hate being interrupted in the middle of reading?
Maybe it's me but being interrupted while I'm in the middle of a book has a tendency to make me angry, worst when it's making me wasting time and the person ask me to do something while I'm the middle of reading something (I can clean after I'm done reading not while). The issue is I just can't restart where I was before I got interrupted since I forgot, so I waste time restarting where I started reading before the interruption. I also consider that verry impolite. Something that'll make me show anger is also if the person kept interrupting me after i explicitly told multiple times I don't like that.
https://redd.it/1htfbdd
@r_books
Judge rules Arkansas law criminalizing librarians is unconstitutional
https://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/story/Judge-rules-Arkansas-Law-Criminalizing-Librarians-Unconstitutional-Censorship-News
https://redd.it/1ht5cef
@r_books
The masterpiece that is I Who Have Never Known Men
On my site, I recently shared a review of I Who Have Never Known Men, and I have to say, it might just be one of the greatest books I’ve ever read. Writing the review only deepened my appreciation for its meaning, message, nuance, and the heartbreak that it left with me. I’d love to hear others’ thoughts on the book. I know some readers have expressed frustration over the lack of a 'resolution' or 'explanation,' and I can understand that perspective. Normally that would bother me too, but IWHNNM impeccably sets the tone from the very beginning: this is not a story, it’s an exploration of who we are.
But what are your thoughts? What were your likes, dislikes?
https://redd.it/1ht1ww1
@r_books
How do you see a book while reading it? Movie, text, sound, feeling?
I just found out that people have vastly different ways of reading a book. This should've been obvious, but it was really interesting finding out the different ways people read. Some can visualize it, some can't, some people have to literally read every word with their inner voice, and others can read words silently (hard to explain).
I honestly thought everyone reads like me, since everyone I know does it similar to me (maybe it's more common this way). I can visualize a movie in my head pretty clearly (with crappy frame rate), and I can 'hear' dialogue in the characters' voices in my head when the are speaking. I don't hear the narrator though, I just imagine it like a movie.
I would say that I can feel, smell and taste things in a book but that's bullshit lol
https://redd.it/1hszawg
@r_books
Favourite libraries in movies and tv
I hope this isn’t breaking any rules, apologies if it is!
So recently, some colleagues and I (we work in libraries) did some work about our favourite libraries in films and tv and it got me thinking that it might be fun to discuss that a bit here!
So I’d love to know:
-What libraries do you love from films and tv?
-What do you like about them? Have they inspired you at all?
-Have you done much research into the background and design of those libraries? (I ask this one because I found this part really interesting when I was researching my chosen library!)
I’d love to hear everybody’s thoughts!
https://redd.it/1hsls53
@r_books
I wish more adult books had pictures
Some of my favorite childhood reading experiences are from reading picture books. I'm talking about illustrated books with high production value, like amazing cover art, great design, and of course many beautiful pictures.
As an adult, it is quite rare that the books I read have good quality pictures. Most have no pictures at all. Apparently those things are childish and not needed for serious literature. And I'm not saying I want to read books that are two sentences per page followed by a huge drawing, but I do appreciate more illustrations.
I once found in a library, many years ago, a book written by Charles Dickens (sadly it escapes me which) that right away took my breath away. It was not written in English but the drawings were fantastic. I so wished the book was in English or that I could buy it but I do remember that when I wanted to check it out again (after I borrowed it once or twice), the book had gone missing. Later it was recovered they told me but was badly damaged and no longer appeared on the shelves.
Today, when someone was telling me that you can find spirituality even in books that may have nothing to do with spirituality and then mentioned Dickens, that memory suddenly came back to me. Perhaps you think I'm being sentimental and maybe that's part of it, but I still think it would be a good idea to produce more beautifully illustrated books for adults. And that includes classics and other serious fiction. Surely not pictures every other page (and really depends on the book itself) but combining art and literature can add value and make the reading experience more enjoyable.
Or so I think.
https://redd.it/1hsksnk
@r_books
I've realized that every single book I have purchased in the last decade has been a sequel.
I recently read Hyperion by Dan Simmons, which was a book I thoroughly enjoyed. Unfortunately, the book ends on a cliffhanger that cuts the story off right before the moment that the whole plot has been building up to. So of course, I check the library for the second book, Fall of Hyperion, and there's 40 holds in line before me. I didn't want to wait a month to keep reading, so I just bought a copy of Fall of Hyperion. The clerk at the bookstore mentioned to me that I was buying the second book and should get the first one instead. I told her that I'd already read the first book and usually start new series by checking them out at the library.
After saying that out loud, I found myself curious when the last time I bought a first book was and couldn't recall. I went through all the books I own, and realized my collection doesn't just have a lot of sequels where I don't own the first book, but that's literally all of them!
I've always heard that in publishing the sequels make more money, but I never really made the connection between this and my purchase habits until right now. I've always thought one of the problems with art in the modern day is that publishers favor safe investments in sequels over taking risks on new ideas. Thankfully, novels are not nearly as bad about this as Hollywood is with film. Yet here I am, a guy who purportedly dislikes sequelitis, but I also only ever buy sequels.
I always check the first book out from the library, and if there are a lot of holds I'm willing to just wait a few weeks. A new book may have interesting concepts or friend recommendations to catch my interest, but the reality is I'm not going to get invested in the story until I start reading. Then once I'm invested in the story, my willingness to wait is gone. My book collection is actually full of several series where I own all the books but the first one! It turns out I am the problem after all!
My thought process is exactly the same as the publishers', too - I don't want to risk spending my money on a book that I end up not liking. Once I've enjoyed the first book, I am confident I will enjoy the second. I feel much more motivated to continue a series than to start a new one.
Anyway, in 2025 I want to buy some first books. I want to start on series that aren't finished yet, despite the fact that I usually avoid that. Newer authors who are just getting started need the financial support more than the well-established ones, and I am not supporting them. I always try to be mindful of my purchase habits, and I want the money I spend on books to help the authors who need it.
https://redd.it/1hs6fy7
@r_books
Our Wives Under the Sea and Mitski
I've been going through Mitski's discography and the song Pearl Diver stopped me in my tracks. If you have read Our Wives Under the Sea, this song perfectly encapsulates the themes of the book, the eerie tone, the deeper meanings of the story/fable, (the doomed ending)...
I was awestruck. I must have listened to this song about 10 times now.
At surface-level, it's a sea shanty/siren song that is mourning the ill-fated diver or seducing the diver to their death in turn. The singer encourages the diver to give in to "the monsters on your shoulder" and dive, dive down.
Under the (water's) surface, it is a rebuke of obsession that destroys the obsessor. Maybe a punishment for pursuit of knowledge beyond what we are meant to know?? I could write a whole essay on how this song relates to Our Wives. Just listen to it.
But hunter, you were human/ don't forget it and go safely/ and I, I'll live without you/ though the struggle will be daily
Pearl diver/ dive, dive deeper
Pearl diver/ dive, dive down
https://redd.it/1hs1fk3
@r_books
The "Trauma Vampirism" of Yellowface by R.F. Kuang
Spoilers for Yellowface ahead
I adored Yellowface for many of the same reasons people loved and even hated it for. The genre of "crappy people with unchecked trauma making one horrible decision after the other" is a favorite of mine ever since I read Oyasumi Punpun.
The stellar character writing, sharp wit, insightful commentary on diversity, and pointed criticisms of capitalism already make Yellowface a good read. What elevated the novel to greatness for me was its portrayal of trauma as a commodity, a resource to be drained for all its worth.
I will be using vampire metaphors not because I think Kuang did so purposefully, but because I love vampire metaphors.
The premise of Yellowface sees June become a celebrated author after she steals the manuscript of her dead friend. Said manuscript is sourced from the stories of abused and exploited Chinese laborers in World War One.
Although June expresses genuine shock at the contents of Athena's manuscript, it doesn't stop her from viewing these horrific scenes from the past as a chance to escape her mundane and disappointing life.
She drains Athena's legacy to empower her own. Athena's fame, money and even talent become June's. Whenever there is something to gain, June does so at the expense of others, even in situations she doesn't have to. She will not, and as the story showcases, physically cannot, raise her status without benefiting from the direct suffering of others.
And she's not alone in the feasts. The publishers, editors, marketers and movie producers stand to profit from the monetization of these tragic retellings. Their actions makes the reader question the morality of writing about horrific events. Do writers even have to ask for consent from these people to share these experiences as fictional retellings? How many levels of separation would you need to not trigger the people who inspired your story, if they do read it? Do writers even owe anything, or is it simply acceptable to use real people as an asset?
These questions are why Yellowface is so much more than just "be angry at the racist white lady" book. It showcases how assumptions can railroad people into using exploitation at every level to stay on top, even at the cost of integrity and basic human empathy.
It also becomes increasingly clear throughout the story that June feeds off trauma like an addict. When she feasts on The Last Front, it sustains her for over a year. When the high starts to fade, every attempt she makes to reignite it comes from trauma. At first, she tries to get it from random historical tragedies, but they don't hit because there's no emotional connection. She becomes reclusive, anxious and temperamental, desperate for a fix to cure her insecurity.
Her eventual novella, Mother Witch, combines Athena and June's complicated relationships with their mother. Once again, June feeds herself for another year, and had it not been for Candice, likely would have kept drawing from that same vein.
Of course, Athena herself is guilty of this. She empathizes with the trauma of others but shows no qualms using their stories as fuel for her own success, oftentimes without their consent. Writing a deeply personal SA story of her friend is the most blatantly cruel example of this, and arguably what set June down the path of mistrust and bias. Unwittingly, Athena's "bite" turned June into a trauma vampire like herself.
TL;DR: Writers are miserable little piles of secrets
https://redd.it/1hry062
@r_books
What's a book you were looking forward to reading, but were bitterly disappointed by?
If I have to think of a book for which I had high expectations and then instead was very disappointed, I have no doubt: Stardust by Neil Gaiman. Not because it is a bad book per se, although I am pretty sure I would not have liked it anyway, but because I saw the movie first.
I saw the movie in 2017 when it was released in theaters and read the book shortly thereafter. Doing a bit of research, I found out that I was not the only one who was disappointed with the book after seeing the movie, and that Neil Gaiman has stated that the two works should be seen as alternate versions of the same story, as happens in comic books with alternate dimensions, and that he understands that some readers who came to the book after loving the movie are disappointed.
I am among those readers, and while I understand that book and movie are different media and need different solutions, some of the things I liked most about the movie were precisely additions from the movie or directions the movie had taken while the book takes diametrically opposite directions.
What is it about? We are in rural Victorian-era England, and a wall separates our world from a fairy world. One night, a shooting star plummets into the middle of the forest beyond the wall, and Tristan, the protagonist, wants to retrieve it to give it to his girlfriend in exchange for her hand. Small problem, the many despicable children of the king of the fairy kingdom are also looking for the fallen star; whoever finds it will become the new king, and they are willing to do anything! Another complication, The stars in the fairy kingdom are flesh and blood people and Tristan falls in love with them.
The story is very fairy-tale-like, and I liked the movie quite a bit, and since the book is always better than the movie, I expected great things...unfortunately, the book is even more fairy-tale-like, extremely fairy-tale-like, excessively fairy-tale-like, and it both bored and annoyed me.
In the movie, Tristan is a goofball who doesn't realize that his relationship with Victoria is super toxic and that she is leading him on in hopes that he will bring her the star but she already has Henry Cavill courting her so...we already know how it will end. In the book Tristan is a pathological recoil addict with whom it is impossible to empathize, he takes an infuriating amount of time to realize the most obvious things, I can't do it, I hated him.
But he's not the only character I had problems with, Septimus, the evil prince, has much more charisma in the movie than he does in the book, and my favorite character, the pirate captain played by Robert De Niro, who in the movie had me laughing out loud with his contradictions and the mentor-pupil relationship he develops with Tristan, in the book is only mentioned in passing in half a paragraph...
I'm not saying it's a bad book, many people liked it, but it's definitely not a book for me and represents to date the only case, in my opinion, where the movie is better than the book, the exception that confirms the rule.
https://redd.it/1hrtvb7
@r_books