Alexander's Reading 2016

[Ben]

Interesting reading your thoughts on the Lord of the Rings trilogy as a whole. It's been a long, long time since I read them - and I only ever have once - but I feel as if it's one of those series' that lends itself to having the proper time to sit down and read, rather than 10-15mins in fits and starts.

 

As it happens, I've never had any trouble with huge amounts of detail/description/conversation - but only if I have the time to sit and concentrate on it. (Indeed, some of my favourite bits in the Game of Thrones books are descriptions and battle scenes.)

 

Definitely due a re-read in any case.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Ben

[Alexander the Great]

@bobblybear: It's obviously very subjective, but to me the books really did get better as I went a long. I think it's getting used to the style and the manner of story-telling, combined with the story becoming more concise, to the point and thrilling.

 

@frankie: It's hard to rate the overall reading experience, because I really did struggle with The Fellowship of the Ring and liked especially The Return of the King considerably more. I feel that if I give a rating, it might be clouded by that more positive view on the latest instalment. The entire trilogy could do with an edit, but LOTR is sacred so that will never happen and anyway it wouldn't feel right without the author's input. I had this feeling with the Millennium trilogy in reverse - the first book being the best one and then the books published after the author passed away declining in quality, and being truly in need of some editing.

 

But to honestly answer the question - I'd go for 2.5. The parts I enjoyed, I did enjoy a lot. It's also a very unique world that Tolkien created and I can't just ignore the legacy. It helped for me to set myself goals - to reach a certain page number that day or before a certain time. If you're the sort of reader who can get through hard parts, at times even boring, I'd say it's worth it. But if you're the kind of reader who doesn't want to invest reading time in something they're not enjoying, don't force yourself on my behalf

 

@Madeleine: I didn't mind the Ents so much, actually! As for the battles - the Battle at Helm's Deep was hard to get through, but the Siege of Gondor was okay. I saw the films years ago and I seem to remember there being more battles in the films than in the books - which I probably just misremember. Your mention of Game of Thrones is interesting - because I love those books, but in that series the same goes - the chapters set in the North are often harder to get through for me because there's so much Nature involved, and Bran's chapters are the absolute worst for me because he does so much traveling.

 

@Ben: I agree that LOTR is something you need time to read for. I don't know if I've mentioned it before, but I often found myself thinking that going to work all day and then coming home to reading LOTR, it felt like more working at times and wasn't relaxing it all. So maybe I need to re-read these when I have some time off. I don't mind descriptions an sich, I'm just not a big Nature guy.

 

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child review

 

Reading this has been a delight.

 

Now I will tell you honestly that I can't say whether it's reading a Harry Potter story again and going back to that familiar world, but in a new story - or if it's really the merit of the story itself. Of course it's not perfect and I would have preferred a regular novel over a script, but it's not so bad. I liked the characters - liked their flaws and how they're no copies of their parents. I'd love to see the play and I will be reading it again.

Edited December 25, 2016 by Alexander the Great

[Madeleine]

I find Bran's scenes in GofT a bit tedious too, especially the "travelling" bits, they just seem a bit pretentious.  I actually quite liked the "nature" bits in the North, I found that actually quite pagan and it mirrors the period in Britain when Christianity was slowly starting to take over from what we'd now call paganism. But for sheer tedium I can't beat the grunts and groans of the Dothraki!

[frankie]

@frankie: It's hard to rate the overall reading experience, because I really did struggle with The Fellowship of the Ring and liked especially The Return of the King considerably more. I feel that if I give a rating, it might be clouded by that more positive view on the latest instalment. The entire trilogy could do with an edit, but LOTR is sacred so that will never happen and anyway it wouldn't feel right without the author's input. I had this feeling with the Millennium trilogy in reverse - the first book being the best one and then the books published after the author passed away declining in quality, and being truly in need of some editing.

 

But to honestly answer the question - I'd go for 2.5. The parts I enjoyed, I did enjoy a lot. It's also a very unique world that Tolkien created and I can't just ignore the legacy. It helped for me to set myself goals - to reach a certain page number that day or before a certain time. If you're the sort of reader who can get through hard parts, at times even boring, I'd say it's worth it. But if you're the kind of reader who doesn't want to invest reading time in something they're not enjoying, don't force yourself on my behalf

 

I understand how it was tricky to try and rate the book but I think you gave it a rather fair try! Thank you for that  I know that a rating doesn't tell you much about what a certain book is like, but I was just curious to hear if it was possible to rate it somehow, in your opinion  

 

I have the book (I actually have both the Finnish and the English copy) so I'm going to read it at some point, but I've been very intimidated by the lenght of it, and the descriptions and songs and endless meandering  

[Alexander the Great]

@Madeleine Reading your reply, something else occurs to me. Like Frodo and Sam's journey is separated entirely from that of the rest of the Fellowship in The Two Towers, in Game of Thrones the story in the South is separated from the North and Essos in the last two books. I feel this worked better for me in LotR because I was interested in both sides of that story. For Game of Thrones, that made A Dance with Dragons very hard for me to read - because it was basically all about the North, which I don't care for enough to have the entire book set there. The parts in Essos didn't make it much better, because Daenerys' story drags by that point.

 

@frankie Ratings are always tricky for me, which is why I only provide them when asked. I'll rate books on Goodreads, but not on here (unless someone asks) because it's so hard. I have the Dutch and the English copy of LotR. I think there were mainly songs and endless meandering in The Fellowship of the Ring. For me, getting through that was the key, but I've read others who've had more trouble with The Return of the King so it's very personal. I very much wanted to read this because it's a classic. Maybe it's a good idea to read it when you have some time off, because this was not the way to relax for me after long days at work, the way reading usually is.

 

The Great Gatsby review

 

This is truly a riveting story.

 

Fitzgerald has a very unique style, which I enjoyed immensely. The writing style and the story itself match, turning this into a one-of-a-kind reading experience. The descriptions are florid, the characters out of this world, but because everything bears significance and nothing is drawn out too long, it's just right.

 

The only reason I gave it three stars is because many characters felt quite one-dimensional. I'm sure there was much more to them than we gathered from this. Maybe that's part of the appeal, but I'd have liked to see more sides of them.

[Madeleine]

Hi Alexander - I totally agree with your last post re Lotr and Game... I found the fifth book almost interminable, it was in serious need of an editor!

[Ben]

The Great Gatsby review

 

This is truly a riveting story.

 

Fitzgerald has a very unique style, which I enjoyed immensely. The writing style and the story itself match, turning this into a one-of-a-kind reading experience. The descriptions are florid, the characters out of this world, but because everything bears significance and nothing is drawn out too long, it's just right.

 

The only reason I gave it three stars is because many characters felt quite one-dimensional. I'm sure there was much more to them than we gathered from this. Maybe that's part of the appeal, but I'd have liked to see more sides of them.

 

Really glad you enjoyed this, but disappointed it wasn't more than a three-star (although, I know, ratings aren't that important). It's probably in my top three books of all time and long overdue a re-read. I see your point about the one-dimensional characters but I think Fitzgerald packs so much into such a relatively short book, that I often find myself discovering more each time I read it. It's such a richly rewarding book for how short it is.