What are you reading now?

[Michael]

(May I offer a pun in return?) There is nun so blind as he who will not see!!

A male nun? Ye Gods!

[Bonn1827]

I meant that the boring bits should be cut out! But this is based on a cursory glance in a bookshop. God knows how I got through the book when I was younger, but I was very tenacious. I got through "Moby Dick" when I was eleven. I won't say I had a whale of a time, but I did like it, in spite of the fact that most of it is completely static: one chapter is devoted to cutting up a sperm whale.
But I digress. Or do I?
Books were very hard to come by when I was young, simply because we couldn't afford to buy many. As a result, I relied upon gifts or throwaways from relatives, and anything readable would be perused from cover to cover. I remember getting through a thing called "With the Naval Brigade in Natal". I even attempted a book called "Italy and the New World Order" and got about ten pages into it. My absolute favourite was a battered tome called "The Girl Who Played the Game". In spite of the suggestive title, it was a perfectly innocent story of a girl cricketer who transformed the private school she attended. It was a bloody good read with picnics in haunted priories, and it put most boy's books to shame. I must have read it about ten times and I remember my father casting worried looks at me every time he saw me with it. He was quite relieved when I went on to Billy Bunter and the Remove.

Well, Michael, that was a very amusing little anecdote - I find myself laughing (like a mad relation?) at many of your postings!! "Haunted priories" aye? (May I offer a pun in return?) There is nun so blind as he who will not see!!

[Sorrano]

Moby Dick comes across to me as a series of essays and satirical writing. There is some action in the book, but most of it are small dissertations with whaling as a binding background. If you are looking for adventure you will find it boring.

[Preston]

Thanks, Michael.

I meant that the boring bits should be cut out! But this is based on a cursory glance in a bookshop.

I have never read any of Dumas' work, and have only read a little on him. Though, do you agree that a lot of times with books the boring parts are there for details, detailed explanation, etc.?

God knows how I got through the book when I was younger, but I was very tenacious. I got through "Moby Dick" when I was eleven. I won't say I had a whale of a time, but I did like it, in spite of the fact that most of it is completely static: one chapter is devoted to cutting up a sperm whale.

I have not read "Moby Dick", though I imagine that the chapter about cutting the sperm whale would be to explain, something similar to the terror of killing such a mammal? Is that right?

[Michael]

I do not understand what you mean by that? The term judicious abridgement, is not in my vocabulary.

I meant that the boring bits should be cut out! But this is based on a cursory glance in a bookshop. God knows how I got through the book when I was younger, but I was very tenacious. I got through "Moby Dick" when I was eleven. I won't say I had a whale of a time, but I did like it, in spite of the fact that most of it is completely static: one chapter is devoted to cutting up a sperm whale.
But I digress. Or do I?
Books were very hard to come by when I was young, simply because we couldn't afford to buy many. As a result, I relied upon gifts or throwaways from relatives, and anything readable would be perused from cover to cover. I remember getting through a thing called "With the Naval Brigade in Natal". I even attempted a book called "Italy and the New World Order" and got about ten pages into it. My absolute favourite was a battered tome called "The Girl Who Played the Game". In spite of the suggestive title, it was a perfectly innocent story of a girl cricketer who transformed the private school she attended. It was a bloody good read with picnics in haunted priories, and it put most boy's books to shame. I must have read it about ten times and I remember my father casting worried looks at me every time he saw me with it. He was quite relieved when I went on to Billy Bunter and the Remove.

[Preston]

I hate to say this about any books, but I do think that the Dumas works would benefit from a little bit of judicious abridgement.

I do not understand what you mean by that? The term judicious abridgement, is not in my vocabulary.

[Michael]

ALL FOR ONE AND ONE FOR ALL

I have been reading about Alexandre Dumas. Is anyone familiar with him? I have not read his books.
.

I did read "The Three Musketeers" when I was a teenager and I found it quite tough going. I was recently leafing through it in a bookshop and the prose still seemed quite turgid and indigestible. Maybe it's the translation but I doubt it. I have three different translations of "War and Peace" and each one is extremely readable. I hate to say this about any books, but I do think that the Dumas works would benefit from a little bit of judicious abridgement.

[Bonn1827]

John Donne's Holy Sonnets.

Clever, imaginative and architecturally shaped gems which reflect Donne's preoccupation with all things spiritual and sensual, namely:

"Batter my Heart, three-person'd God; for You
As yet but knock, breathe, shine and seek to mend;
That I may rise and stand, o'erthrow me, and end
Your force, to break, blow, burn and make me new..
.......
.......
Yet dearly I love You, and would be loved fain,
But am betroth'd unto Your enemy;
Divorce me, untie, or break that knot again,
Take me to You, imprison me, for I
Except You enthrall me, never shall be free,
Nor ever chaste, except You ravish me"

Does the English language get ANY better than this?

[Preston]

ALL FOR ONE AND ONE FOR ALL

I have been reading about Alexandre Dumas. Is anyone familiar with him? I have not read his books. Though, I thought deeply about the saying, "all for one and one for all"- which, I have long believed- not in a wholly general sense, though in a more articulated sense. What, I am "kind-of" saying is that all human beings are born equal (In the sense of the soul. Yes, you do have the handicapped. Though, when I say "born equal" I mean it in more of a general sense), and, should, have the same rights, opportunities, privelages, etc.- though- this will never happen, IMO, it seems.

All for one and one for all- also, reminds me of one of the messages in Schiller's, "Ode to Joy"- universal brotherhood. And, to care for another as much as you care for yourself.

[Peter]

Have you got a round head?

You have a great sense of humour Michael and I had the best laugh of the day!! Having met Hollywood I can vouch that fortunately she has no resemblance to her famous (infamous!!) ancestor, warts 'n' all !!!!

[Hollywood]

Have you got a round head?

LOL!

[Michael]

I just started reading the book Oliver Cromwell by John Morrill (from the Very Interesting People Series). I just recently discovered that my 10 times great grandfather was Sir Oliver Cromwell the Lord and Protector's uncle (so this makes him my first cousin 11 times removed).

Have you got a round head?

[Hollywood]

I just started reading the book Oliver Cromwell by John Morrill (from the Very Interesting People Series). I just recently discovered that my 10 times great grandfather was Sir Oliver Cromwell the Lord and Protector's uncle (so this makes him my first cousin 11 times removed).

[Michael]

Interestingly, that last sentence could apply (in a sense) to "War and Peace". As far as I can remember, the original ending was a bit vague, especially regarding Nicolai Rostov and Princess Maria. It was some years before Tolstoy decided to add the famous epilogue in which most of the loose ends are tied up.
Only a couple of years ago, an earlier draft of the novel was published in which Prince Andrei did not die!

[Bonn1827]

Actually, that's what one of the panelists said on the book show I was watching. She said she preferred "War and Peace" because she found Anna and Vronsky "unsympathetic" characters to the reader, but she "understood" their attraction to each other!! An unusual observation, I thought.

So, Tolstoy "recanted" on "Anna"? I'm not sure we should "allow" authors to do this. What about Sondheim and his feelings about "West Side Story"? He claimed he was embarrassed about the "purple prose" sung by the teens in the musical and wished he'd never written these. I guess he'd never read Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet", then?!!!

When I taught Extension English I gave the students "Pygmalion", which Shaw had later commented about (regarding interpretation) and for which he provided an extensive "postlude", if you will. I remember saying to the kids: "whom should we believe; the tale or the teller"? I think this a valid point when literature is finally in the public domain. It has to "stand" or "fall" on its own merits, regardless of what the author/composer later claims.