2017 Part Three; Jillmwo's Reading Thread

Just starting up another thread because I was suspicious of how balky the other one was becoming. I spent the day with my attention split between Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility and Tolkien's The Silmarillion. With regard to the former, I was trying to determine whether Fanny Dashwood or Lucy Steele was the most venial. With regard to the Tolkien, I was feeling that stab of beauty that sometimes hits one.

Grabbing my seat.

Looking forward to following more of your literary musings.

I've never read The Silmarillion. Maybe it's time. You inspire me.

>1 jillmwo: & >5 Meredy: I loved The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. On that basis my wife bought me The Silmarillion. I am sorry, I could not get into it at all. I obviously lack the literary backbone that @jillmwo obviously has. @Meredy, if you read and enjoy "The Silmarillion" I shall know you have backbone too. If you are not impressed with it I will shout, "YES!".

>6 pgmcc: I've never thought that you lacked spine. Perhaps @pgmcc you made the same mistake that I did initially which was try to read it as a full length novel or narrative. It's not. It's a loosely connected cycle of five tales. Not to be read straight through but more as discrete segments. I do have more to say on this but can't right at the moment. so stay tuned.

>4 Sakerfalcon: and >5 Meredy: Welcome, pull up a chair and grab a bit of cheese. (Quick aside: Meredy, I assume you've read LOTR as well as Hobbit? The Silmarillion has a bit of a different flavor to it as @pgmcc discovered.)

And dagnabbit, I know that duplicate message wasn't there YESTERDAY. Why do the LT gremlins torment me and no one else?

>7 jillmwo:

Actually, it was. I started to say something smarty, but controlled myself.

As much as I strive to preserve the historical record of LT so that future researchers will be able to study our activity in all its glory, I'm going back up there and delete the second one. This is ridiculous.

*Murfle* There! I did it.

P.S. @Suitable1 gets brownie points for his amiability, his civility and discretion. (I've been reading Austen.)

>9 jillmwo: Future historians will write treatise, debate for days, and base careers on the subject of "What did @jillmwo write in post #2 that was so bad it had to be deleted?"

Rather than keeping the record straight you have sewn the seeds of discontent and disinformation that will feed dissident movements for centuries into the future. Ranks of believers shall chant the phrase, "For @jillmwo and beyond!"

Their rally cry will be, "Number Two!"

>9 jillmwo: I refrained from smartypants remarks too, no need to reward me though because I'm sure I'll make up for it somewhere somehow.

>6 pgmcc: I did enjoy the Silmarillion at the time I read it. That was in an age when I enjoyed reading long epic poetry, and even though it isn't all poetry, the images are very poetic.

>7 jillmwo: You're right about having to have the right expectations when reading The Silmarillion. When I first read it many years ago, I was disappointed not to have the same sorts of well developed characters that one finds in LOTR. Have you tried the other recent collections, or whatever they are? I slogged through The Children of Hurin and found it overwhelmingly gloomy.

I've tried multiple times to read The Silmarilion and just haven't been able to get into it. It's been several years since my last attempt. Maybe it's time to try again soon.

I loved The Silmarillion...some of the other "histories" not so much. "Gloomy" covers it well.

Well, I agree it has a certain Wagnerian opera element running through it, @Marissa_Doyle. And @MrsLee is right that the work consists of poetic images which means it won't be to everyone's taste in terms of the pace with which one can move through it. After all, it is mythology. And I give it high marks simply because I think a believable set of mythological tales is hard to create and Tolkien managed it. George R.R. Martin has a mythology for Westeros but he doesn't explain it to any extent any more than Lois McMaster Bujold really provides us with any of the religious tales of her universe of the five gods. For both of them, the religious aspect of their societies is not central to the themes of their work even if it's needed as part of the world-building process. Tolkien wrote a mythology that imbued events in Middle-Earth with meaning because he wasn't crafting it as a thing on the side. His belief structure was critical to the larger part of the story. The Silmarillion isn't written with an eye to plot or character development; it's all archetypes and metaphors. And tragedy. Lots and lots of romantic tragedy.

As an experiment, try reading it aloud to yourself rather than reading it silently. The language flows and it just works. I don't re-read this book with any regularity and I wouldn't characterize it as a comfort read (because of that whole Wagnerian opera thing), but when I do re-visit it, the stories have the power to remind me of higher aspirations that human beings conceive and pursue and the yearning nature of belief.

I have much more to say about this, but probably not 'til the weekend.

BTW, has anyone here read the novel, The Dragon of the Ishtar Gate by L. Sprague de Camp? Anyone able to tell me whether I'll like it or not? One of the book groups got away from me last night and settled on this while I was out of the room.

>16 jillmwo: The old, "wait toll she's out of the room" trick. I like it. You've been set up. You have bern knobbled. Good luck.

@pgmcc gave me a heads up that last Friday was the 40th anniversary of the initial publication of The Silmarillion. Having spent time with it over the past week or so, I still believe that the correct approach to reading The Silmarillion is to not to attempt to read through the 400+ pages as if the plot stretches across the five segments. In some ways, it does but the casual reader might just as successfully read the first two sections -- the Ainulindale and the Valaquenta -- to get a handle on the archetypal figures of the Valar initially and the nature of the opening conflict. And then put it to one side. The history of Middle Earth emerges thereafter as an incredibly rich and complex experience. One might find it more engaging to flip gently through the book in order to serendipitously encounter the hidden stories of the heroes. Reading straight through means that the reader hits those segments of the book where names (sometimes multiple names for the same person) and genealogies blur together and the wandering tribes of elves further confuse. Skimming the scattered shorter tales allows the casual reader to get a sense of the beautiful yearning that permeates Tolkien’s world. Once you have read those, you can navigate more easily the bewildering transition sections.

The Silmarillion could be summed up as a set of tales about the restless creative activity of men and elves and how that activity plays into the darkest Valar's desire for pre-eminence and power. There are in fact some marvelous stories of creation and craftsmanship. For my own part, I do not think that there is a more lovely creation tale than the tale of the two valar singing the two trees into existence after the Spring of Arda has ended. There are some tragically romantic stories of ever-enduring devotion and love. There are moments such as this captured from the tale of Beren and Luthien.

“She...began a song of such surprising loveliness.

All his court were cast in slumber, and all the fires faded and were quenched, but the Silmarils in the crown on Morgoth’s head blazed forth suddenly with a radiance of white flame; and the burden of that crown and of the jewels bowed down his head, as though the world were set upon it, laden with a weight of care, of fear, and of desire, that even the will of Morgoth could not support...The iron crown rolled echoing from his head.”

Other tales encountered more clearly convey the ominous sense of conflict between good and evil -- the outcomes of intentional actions and unintended consequences. Aule creates the dwarves without initially realizing how it might be in conflict with the original creator's intent.

Then Aule answered, “I did not desire such lordship. I desired things other than I am, to love and to teach them, so that they too might perceive the beauty of Ea which thou hast caused to be. For it seemed to me that there is great room in Arda for things that might rejoice in it. Yet it is for the most part empty still and dumb. And in my impatience I have fallen into folly. Yet the making of things is in my heart from my own making by thee. And the child of little understanding that makes a play of the deeds of his father may do so without thought of mockery, because he is the son of the father.

That there can be a certain heavy handed moral-hammer-thwack to the Silmarillion is indisputable. Tolkien was the product of his environment and his time. There are times when the stories here are inexhaustibly masculine. (My eyes do roll upon occasion.) But I still find it beautiful. I must admit that I have a warmer place in my heart for this single volume than I have for all three volumes of the Lord of the Rings. Your experience may vary from mine, but I don’t see myself giving this one away.

A quote from the 2015 biography, The Fellowship: The Literary Lives of the Inklings, there's this bit that pertains to reading the Silmarillion:

But the tales do not make easy reading. Tolkien's decision to cast these first stories of ancient days in the pseudo-ancient heigh style, with its ceremonious utterances, convoluted syntax and nightmarish glossary of names (for which Iluvatar, Ainur, and Melko/Melkor/Morgoth are fair examples), resulted as noted in Chapter 3, in a false archaism that bears no relation to any stage in the history of the England language and strains the patience of many -- a decidedly odd contribution from a trained philologist and literary historian.

I think the author is suggesting is that I have a certain fondness (if not illimitable patience) for a dubious self-indulgence by an Oxford professor. So much for my literary tastes and reputation here in the Pub.

The author of that quote, if I may say so, sounds like a self-important bore with sub-par reading skills.

He's also a stuffed shirt.

Jill that was a fabulous intro to and summation of The Silmarillion, which I eagerly consumed with some herbed Gouda.

>21 stellarexplorer: OMG! You ate a Silmarillion with herbed Gouda! This does not bode well.

>18 jillmwo: & >19 jillmwo: I cannot say it better than >20 Marissa_Doyle:.

I find that reading The Silmarillion is a bit like reading the Old Testament, nuggets of pure joy are there, but one must wade through lots of earthy bits to find them. World building, in any form entrances me. Even when I went to Disneyland, what I was most impressed with were the tiny details of his "land."

>22 MrsLee: When does it hit? Because I think I'm still well, maybe a tiny bit queasy, but that could be psychosomatic...

I remember looking back at The Silmarillion a year or two because I wanted to see more about Gondolin and Nargothrond, and to learn more about Galadriel's activities during that time. From TS, it seems that all she did was have tea with Melian and complain about how the orcs played on the lawn. I guess I'll have to dig up Lost Tales to find more.

Well, Tor (dot) com is going to do a set of posts intended to be a primer on the topic of The Silmarillion so ye of faltering heart can take courage and forge ahead in giving the book a second (or even third or fourth) try: https://www.tor.com/2017/09/20/welcome-to-the-silmarillion-primer-an-introductio...

A quote from that page:

To be sure, The Silmarillion is not a novel in the way we’re used to; it doesn’t resemble The Lord of the Rings very much in structure or even style, except perhaps in dialogue. It’s more like fantastic nonfiction, or like a history book that might be shelved in the library of Rivendell. Yet even the historical bits are interspersed with novel-like segments. The narrative often pans out—way out—offering a god’s-eye-view of all existence and spanning huge swaths of time in just a few passages, then at unexpected moments slows down, zooms in close, and observes the very words and manners of its heroes and villains.

>25 jillmwo: thanks for that link. The first entry is somewhat promising.

>25 jillmwo: Thanks for that.

>25 jillmwo: Thank you, Jill.

Things are a bit frantic for the next two weeks (maybe for the foreseeable next six weeks but I'm trying to stay positive.) I haven't had any chance to read anything recently. Or maybe it's just I can't retain anything more complex than stories featuring Dick and Jane and their dog, Spot. Don't worry if I don't show up here to do more than occasional chirps about still being alive over the course of that time frame. I'll ultimately return.

>29 jillmwo: Wishing you well for the coming weeks.

>29 jillmwo: watch out for Spot; he's tricky.

>29 jillmwo: So, you wouldn't be interested in the new Dick and Jane title where they acquire a ginger cat named Rust?

>32 MrsLee: I think @jillmwo is more focused on her acquisition of a puppy at the moment.

>29 jillmwo: If you want a more cosmopolitan reading experience, the Canadian equivalent of Dick and Jane were John and Janet. Unfortunately, I recently deacquisitioned my collection of school readers, so I can't provide a sample.

I hope everything goes well with your frantic lifestyle for the next few weeks, and look forward to your return.

>29 jillmwo: Hang in there! We'll be thinking of you and awaiting your return.

Real quick, here is the list of the winners of this year's British Fantasy Awards: http://www.locusmag.com/News/2017/10/2017-british-fantasy-awards-winners/

And thanks to all of you, >30 pgmcc:, >31 Jim53:, >32 MrsLee:, >33 pgmcc:, >34 SylviaC:, >35 Sakerfalcon:. As they said in Monty Python, this one's not quite dead yet.

>36 jillmwo: I'm sorry you're stressed/frantic. :o/ I had noticed you've been missing from Facebook.

So how many times have you read The Silmarillion, if you don't mind me asking? I do love it myself, but I'm firmly in the "it's not for everyone" camp. My parents gave me a copy for Christmas the year it was published inscribed with the words "to our favorite hobbit." :o) I tried to read it several times over the next couple of decades. I'm not sure why I was finally able to soldier on, yet when I finally read it at age 45 I found there was much to admire and appreciate about it. I have not revisited it yet, and have sworn an oath that the next attempt at it will be an audio version. (Just because I often feel that audio books tickle a different quadrant of my gray matter than straight ol' reading does.)

I love what you wrote in >18 jillmwo: "I do not think that there is a more lovely creation tale than the tale of the two valar singing the two trees into existence after the Spring of Arda has ended." Where is that 'hearts for eyes' emoji when one needs it?

>37 clamairy: I don't re-read The Silmarillion with the same frequency as I have re-read Jane Eyre (as an example). I think I need more distance from it. Maybe I re-read it every 5-10 years. I don't know about others, but the yearning expressed in the stories is such that I can't return to it that often. Consequently it hits me more powerfully when I do. (Although I don't think I could do it in audio form. The pronunciation of the names would throw me off.)

Speaking of the Silmarillion, for those of you who may lose track, here are some more links to that primer referenced above in #25:

The Creation of Life (https://www.tor.com/2017/10/04/the-creation-of-life-ea-and-everything/)
Meet the Valar (https://www.tor.com/2017/10/18/meet-the-valar-and-the-foundations-of-middle-earth/)

If I have any quibbles with what's been done, it's that the author sometimes insists on levity that (for me, at least) don't suit the material he's discussing.

Meanwhile, perhaps you're wondering if I've been reading anything while being cramped up in economy class. I read Julian Fellowes' Belgravia which was sufficiently light for the plane. However, since I can only recall two characters -- specifically, the two mothers who have each suffered the loss of a child -- I'm thinking it wasn't awfully memorable. It offered the charms of moving along quickly and not being too challenging.

The current read is The Anatomy of Murder by the various members of the Detection Club. What's memorable about that is that its the 1930's version of tales of true crime. Mystery writers take on accounts of famous murders and the resolution of the judicial cases. It actually introduced me to the Crumbles bungalow murders. Those murders aren't included in the volume, but references of such gruesome criminal acts to those murders sent me off to Wikipedia. Think severed heads amidst lightning flashes and the innocent ingenue in the next room....delicious shivers.

Oh, and as for The Dragon of the Ishtar Gate, it's really not my cup of tea. The main recommendation is that it has some humorous bits to it. Otherwise, it's just Conan the Barbarian in Babylonian dress. A buddy flick in prose for those born before the invention of D&D. Although every account I've read insists that L. Sprague de Camp did his historical research well.

And in a week I need to talk about James Lee Burke and In the Electric Mist with the Confederate Dead.

Okay, today was spent almost entirely on developing the book list for next year’s township library discussion group (assuming that the Friends group will still feel they can fund it). I ended up with 38 titles from 30 different authors; it was then turned over to my library liaison to see what quantities were available for the use of our participants. Maybe this week, having crossed that task off of my to-do list, I can refocus again on work to-do lists and on reading just for fun. Ultimately, between her work and mine, we get it weaned down to 9 titles (with 9 or 10 copies needed to satisfy the requirements of the group.)

Prior to that I had sat down and spent some hours prepping for the group discussion of In Electric Mist with the Confederate Dead by James Lee Burke. The novel features Dave Robicheaux as the lead; his campaign catch phrase really should read something like “A Man’s Gotta Do What A Man’s Gotta Do.” Let me just say that I am so clearly not the targeted demographic for this title. Which meant I was that much more curious to hear how the group felt about it. The bulk of them appreciated Burke’s writing style and could acknowledge that the narrative that wove together crimes from the past to solve a crime in the modern day was thought-provoking. However they weren’t really crazy about that book.

Next month, they’re doing Case Histories by Kate Atkinson. (I suspect they might enjoy that a bit more.) In total, I probably spent six hours on the township library group today.

BTW, a friend of mine out of the blue commented on how much she enjoyed reading The Gentleman in Moscow. When both online and offline friends are raving about a book, one really must take it seriously. I”m thinking that title will be working its way up nearer to the top of my TBR pile. Of course, that still translates to being read in 2018 rather than in the next month or so.

You really need to move A Gentleman in Moscow to the top of the pile. It's that good.

I know where my copy is, @suitable1. I'll not let it go too long.

On the other hand, my alma mater apparently sponsored a reading marathon of John Milton's Paradise Lost. What enchants me is the way they billed it --> Spend The Day with Satan. See here for the university's announcement: http://www.longwoodshakespeare.net/miltonmarathon/

*Jill snorts with delight in a decidedly unladylike fashion*

I may have to show my solidarity with Longwood and re-read the whole thing.

>40 suitable1:, >41 jillmwo: I've just checked amazon and found out that A gentleman in Moscow is released in paperback in the UK on Thursday! It will be coming home with me that day and being read soon after! I've been looking forward to it all year.

>42 Sakerfalcon: Hardbacks do not make it to the shops in Ireland unless it's a special order. When the hardback is released in the UK we get a soft back version of the hardback, if you understand what I mean. That being the case I have a paperback hardback version from a while back.

>43 pgmcc: Interesting. Now I understand why my copy of The Way That I went looks as if it ought to be a hardback, and I think even shows on LT as one, though it is a paperback. I bought it in Dublin in 1982. However The Book of Kells -- a study of the famous original, not The Book Itself -- is a splendidly sumptuous hardback with slipcase and all. If I remember aright I rescued it from the shop in the National Museum of Ireland -- a truly marvellous souvenir.

>44 hfglen: Good save!

I loved A Gentleman!

Review: http://www.librarything.com/work/17697728/reviews/144565448

The next installment of The Silmarillion Primer is up.
https://www.tor.com/2017/11/01/dwarves-interrupted-and-the-promise-of-ents/

This week's posting has to do with the chapter that I quote up there in #18. Again, the guy writing the column doesn't have quite the sense of reverence that I might have in writing about it. But maybe one should be able to have some fun with it. However, the artwork included there is lovely.

Maybe the note I hear in Tolkien at the moment is the same note I hear in Paradise Lost. (No, I haven't pulled it off the shelf, but I still might.)

PS to >46 stellarexplorer: That's one heckuva review you wrote. You sound like you had a lot of fun in reading it.

>47 jillmwo: Thank you, Jill. I look forward to hearing what you think of the book -

The next installment of The Silmarillion is up (although it appears to be overshadowed in part by Amazon's announcement that they're going to make LOTR into a television series. I don't wish ill on the producers of the new series, but I'm skeptical about the potential for success). The primer: https://www.tor.com/2017/11/15/much-ado-about-eldar-and-much-to-do-about-melkor/...

I have been reading an awe-inspiring book! Will post about it soon. (No, it's not Gentleman in Moscow...It's something totally appealing to and nerd-ish for medievalists and archivists.)

Edited to remove unnecessary punctuation -- an extraneous set of parentheses -- that might otherwise irritate my friends in the pub.

Meetings with Remarkable Manuscripts: Twelve Journeys into the Medieval World
Christopher de Hamel
Penguin Press (2017) ISBN: 978-1-594-20611-5

On some levels, this book centers around scholarly privilege. Only an elite set of experts are ever allowed to view the actual manuscripts discussed in this 650-page tome. Only a very few prestigious libraries have the resources necessary to preserve such irreplaceable artifacts. Even among scholars of such historic manuscripts, few may have the professional network or financial wherewithal to travel to international archives in 12 major Western cities or expect to dine on a luncheon of white asparagus and salmon, sipping wine while waiting to meet with a chief curator or director of some national library. It’s a very special 1% who enjoy this kind of privilege and prestige. Envy is a natural (and very human) response to reading such accounts of travel and study.

For myself, however, I can’t begrudge the author of Meetings with Remarkable Manuscripts his global tour of historic libraries and museums. He recognizes his privilege and I am too charmed by the easy erudition with which he shares his experiences. How else might I share the experience of Ph.D. students at the University of Leiden as de Hamel gives an unofficial tutorial about recognizing the authenticity of an exemplar of an ancient Roman manuscript on astronomy (the Leiden Aritea)? Or deepen my understanding of the use of royal Psalters in teaching a young prince his alphabet (the Copenhagen Psalter)? If you’ve heard of it from no other source, it’s an opportunity to learn of the odd (albeit very rich) anthology of medieval song contained in the Carmina Burana. I know very little of medieval times or the manuscripts created in those centuries, but it was easy to absorb much from this particular reading experience. (Special note to @pgmcc -- you'll want to read his account of visiting Trinity College in Dublin and the two thefts associated with the Book of Kells.)

The production specs of the book are remarkable as well. The pages that de Hamel describes in prose are replicated in color so that the reader can see exactly the vivid carmine and lapis lazuli used in the illuminations. As de Hamel describes illustrations found in the illuminated Spinola Hours held in the Getty, the reader flips the next page and finds a color photograph of the image under discussion. This is extraordinary if only because the artifact itself will only rarely be seen; as with so many of these books, the original is rarely brought out for examination in the interests of preservation. (My informal assessment is that there's a nearly even split between pages of text and color reproductions of manuscript pages. Text may dominate but really only slightly.)

This is a nerd’s book. There’s a certain depth of detail shared regarding provenance or physical materials used that may strike the casual reader as unnecessary. But for those of us who experience awe in glimpsing (behind closed bookcase doors) the holdings of New York City's Morgan Library or who remember fondly seeing the Bodleian Library on an otherwise forgettable business trip, it’s a fabulous read. I learned a lot.

>50 jillmwo: That book sounds amazing.

I have a friend, Rob", who started studying late in life. He went to Trinity to study English. In first year he took the "Schols" exams. This is a set of exams that undergraduates can take and if they pass the become scholars and have five years' fees waived and get accommodation in one of the college residences. The exams are based on the material of the full degree so it is very few people manage to pass. Rob passed. Went on to obtain a First Class Honours degree in English and went on to do a Masters in Trinity. His Masters focused on medieval literature. He has now started a PhD in Harvard specializing on medieval literature.

I am sure he would be fascinated with this book.

Sounds like a something I’d love. And from your description, I was expecting something pricier. My book lust just kicked in!

>52 stellarexplorer: Please allow me to egg you on. Buy it! Buy it!

What most tempts me is your beguiling line, “This is a nerd’s book”!

I just used Amazon's "Look inside" feature on Meetings With Remarkable Manuscripts, and it looks gorgeous!

>50 jillmwo: White asparagus is highly overrated. ;)

That does sound like a terrific book.

>56 MrsLee: I think all varieties of asparagus are over-rated. That said, the author clearly deemed that particular luncheon a great privilege.

>55 SylviaC: It really is an amazing reading experience and the inclusion of the artwork makes a huge difference.

Oh, and a quick heads-up to all of the Sayers fans here. I"m in the final chapters of The Documents in the Case. It may be one of her lesser works, but I've been enjoying it. (Looking up the particulars of the original case was also rather fun.)

Oh, in the mail today, I got a cheap paperback edition of Somerset Maugham's novel The Razor's Edge. Has anyone here read it?

I actually watched the movie version (1946) that had Tyrone Power and Gene Tierney this past weekend. I doubt that I'll enjoy the book as much if the narrative there involves a lot of Eastern mysticism, but the movie was surprisingly good. Although Anne Baxter kind of chewed the scenery in her scenes later in the film, IMHO.

>58 jillmwo: Yes, that book made a big impact on me as young person, and drew me to Maugham’s work. Admittedly, I was very open to Eastern philosophy, and still find great wisdom in Buddhism. I reread it perhaps 10 years ago, and it still appealed. I’ve often veered away from convention myself, so identified strongly with the protagonist.

I liked the Tyrone Power version quite a bit, and the Bill Murray version had its strengths too. Largely Murray, who turns out to be a surprising talent in his non-comedic roles.

>58 jillmwo: OK, I'll bite, what does "chewed the scenery" actually mean? I am not familiar with that term.

Somerset Maugham is one of those authors whose works I have, sitting on my shelf, waiting to be tried.

>60 MrsLee: Generally speaking, the phrase suggests over-acting on the part of a performer. In the context of my specific reference, Baxter played a woman who has taken to drinking after the loss of her spouse and child. In playing the alcoholic, she becomes frantic (shrieking) and generally more dramatic in presentation than I think is really plausible. In the context of pop culture, think of those instances in the original Star Trek series where James T. Kirk pontificates about what it all MEANS (overly serious with dramatic pauses and emphasis not justified by what has been viewed on screen).

Does that help? If not, I might appeal to my fellow Pubbers to offer other examples.

>60 MrsLee: Thank you, Lee. I thought it was another "nations divided by a common language" phrase.

>61 jillmwo: Ahhh

Okay, so I read (I believe for the very first time) Dorothy L. Sayers’ novel, The Documents in the Case. I found it intriguing as a mystery novel, but more importantly it felt to me as if it were an initial step towards mysteries written in the 21st century. (Warning: spoilers may appear throughout throughout this discussion)

The Documents in The Case as others here have noted (see reading thread from @pgmcc) is not a Peter Wimsey story. Sayers wrote it as a stand-along, creating an epistolary novel reminiscent of Wilkie Collins. There is a theme to the novel -- what does it mean if scientific research can artificially replicate exactly an organic substance. The solution to recognizing the crime of murder in this instance rests with those working in a laboratory. What impact has that on a normal human jury making life-or-death decisions if they don’t always understand the complexities of science? What impact does it have on policing and the legal system if we determine that life is not so very unique or precious after all? (The repercussions from the deaths of those soldiers fighting in World War I is another factor in this novel. What does society do about the cynicism that follows naturally regarding the value of life in the context of wartime death?)

While it’s not Sayers’ best work, it is an attempt to consider larger issues in the context of the mystery genre.

Move then to a second (albeit a bit less satisfactory) read -- Six Against the Yard. This was a money making collaborative effort by the Detection Club that was published in 1936. The chapters are stand-alone short stories by leading authors of the day (Sayers, Allingham, Berkeley, Knox, etc.) followed by a response from a professional policeman. The writer concocts a “perfect” crime -- one that might easily escape retribution -- and the policing professional responds with how he believes Scotland Yard might actually have investigated and managed to uncover such an act.

The point in both of these is to acknowledge the complexities faced in detecting criminal behavior and the expertise of those who do it for a living. The key concept is the complexity. Criminals are not always stupid or careless in their planning. At the same time, witnesses may lie (for a variety of reasons -- good and bad). It’s harder than it looks to be a detective and the narrative technique used in writing a novel readily glosses over the behaviors of human beings.

Then move to a much more recent novel -- Case Histories by Kate Atkinson. It’s at the far end of the spectrum of mystery literature. The private eye - Jackson Brodie -- manages to solve two of three of the cases put before him, but the author makes it clear that he doesn’t by any means clear up all of the secrets that make up the network of suspects and family members. In fact, there are lots of loose ends at the end of the novel (as the women in my library reading group today made clear). Acts of murder and the subsequent cover-ups are messy as are the motivations behind both. There are critical drivers of behavior that the investigator (no matter how Sherlockian in mental capacity) may never uncover. There is no nice tidy ending as suggested in Christie novels. The murderer may not go placidly off in handcuffs. Instead there may be murderers among us. As there were early on in Raymond Postgate's novel, Verdict of Twelve. That one served on the jury...

This was not an intended outcome of my reading in recent weeks, but it was nice to make the connections across mystery novels along a specific historical timeline. I much prefer the tidy ending, but in our modern society we must learn to accept the ambiguity that exists in modern life. Honestly, I’m afraid I will need to re-read Case Histories yet again in order to understand the author’s mechanism for delivering the meaning, because I’m pretty sure I missed some stuff.

So now *maybe* I can get to Gentleman in Moscow during the month of December. I need a good DNBR day. (One where “they” bring me tea and sandwiches on a tray so I need not interrupt my thought processes. One where I am supplied with a cat in my lap or at the very least an electric throw across my knees.)

I can't remember whether I've read The Documents in the Case. I assumed that I had, but none of the recent commentary has any ring of familiarity. I do have a copy, and maybe whenever I get around to reading it something will come back to me. Six Against the Yard sounds very interesting. I hadn't heard of it before.

I have read The Documents in the Case but it's been awhile. I'm feeling like a reread is in order to refresh my memory.

File under Detritus-From-The-Desk

Was Henry David Thoreau Really Sherlock Holmes?
https://daily.jstor.org/the-truth-about-sherlock-holmes-hes-actually-henry-david...

100 Must Read Mystery & Crime Novels Around The World
https://bookriot.com/2016/07/26/100-mystery-crime-novels-around-the-world/

The Year in Best Sellers: What Happened to 2017? A Gentleman in Moscow, Perhaps
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2017/11/what_the_2017_best_seller_lists...

Out of the Shire: Romanticism in a Post-Tolkien Era
https://fee.org/articles/out-of-the-shire-romanticism-in-a-post-tolkien-era/

Okay, are you all thinking about your best reads of 2017 yet? I actually have a "long list" of eleven titles that I found memorable (two or three of which were re-reads), but I haven't worked it down to five yet. Still shouldn't move too quickly ahead because I've not yet read Gentleman in Moscow. And I believe that @stellarexplorer told me that one was the best.

>68 jillmwo: I plan to read A Gentleman in Moscow when I finish my current read, Gnomon.

>68 jillmwo: But, I still have one more month! Ask me again in January. :) I have to say, True Grit is right up there, but I just finished it and I like to let books simmer in my brain awhile before deciding something like that.

The next entry in the Silmarillion Primer: https://www.tor.com/2017/11/29/here-there-and-everywhere-sundered-elves-and-the-...

>70 MrsLee: Of course, you still have some time. But I thought particularly organized types might want to begin cogitating on what would be considered particularly worthwhile reads in 2017.

External parties are already publishing their lists: https://kottke.org/17/11/the-best-books-of-2017

And from Atlas Obscura, there's this list of Best Photography Books: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/captured-most-wondrous-photo-books-2017-wi...

Just over one hundred pages in and I'm thoroughly enjoying A Gentleman in Moscow. At this point, I'm just worried it will end sadly; I suppose it's bound to since we're talking about the Russians. (Nobody need tell me whether I'm right or wrong. I truly do want to have the full experience/reaction in reading the book.)

I’m so glad you’re thoroughly enjoying it, in any case!

And indeed it will be on my annual favorite reads, with reviews, which I send to friends and family and post here at the end of each December.

A Gentleman in Moscow for me had several themes – understanding one’s purpose in life, the importance of bread (which like purpose) is a critical necessity of life, and the passage of time as one tries to operate with purpose. Only the first of those three themes is obvious in the early pages of Count Rostov’s story; the author telegraphs it in the poem that opens the book and with an early reference to Montaigne’s Essays. The second theme is not so much about bread as a physical portion of an ordinary diet (although food is a running element throughout the book). It’s more about bread as the “staff of life”, about “earning one’s bread”, about bread as a shared commonality found in all cultures and societies. The third theme is one presented in a more subtle and structural fashion. The narrative quietly points to the ways in which time condenses and expands over the individual’s limited life span.

Towles’ book might be characterized as a philosophical character study. As a result -- if If I may be permitted a slight quibble -- I would note that the manner in which the Count’s character is not quite “realistic”. Alexander Ilyich Rostov has no substantive blemishes or flaws in his character. In the final pages of the novel, his handwriting (as an unique expression of his personality) is summed up as being proud, proper and open-hearted. His behavior is calmly considered and correct; his manners are impeccable. His moments of visible temper and anger are few and clearly justifiable as a response to provocation. Of course, one explanation might be that the Count is supposed to be Everyman, but what the author is conveying is more on the order of the Count being every civilized man.

How then should man live? There are two bits of parental advice that the Count imparts to his daughter. The first is another reference to Montaigne: “If one did not master one’s circumstances, one was bound to be mastered by them”. The second is that “the surest sign of wisdom is constant cheerfulness”. This is the message to the reader, perhaps the author's own life wisdom based on his own self-evolution and experience. (For myself, I tend to agree, particularly with the insight captured in that second point as a good indicator of wisdom.)

I tried to read this book slowly, with some degree of meditativeness. That was harder than it sounds. The prose isn’t difficult to parse and the reader doesn’t get bogged down in any morass of specific detail. But the meat of this novel was for me very similar to the meat of the book, Imprimatur read earlier this year. There were sufficient clues to a wealth of thematic threads that an initial read couldn’t possibly allow opportunity to grok them all immediately. (For one thing, I need to go track down those critical frames found in the movie, Casablanca, to see if I agree with the Count.)

I enjoyed this one. It might well be in my top five for the year. Kudos to those who were nudging me to read it! (That’s a thank you.)

Glad you enjoyed it. So are you recommending Imprimatur?

>77 stellarexplorer: I recommend it. I found it a wonderful read providing intrigue, critic of the media, humour and elements of history that still have real consequences for people in my country.

>77 stellarexplorer: I do recommend Imprimatur but with the caveat that it isn't a light read. It is instead a memorable and complex read. There are twists and spirals in the narrative that demand full attention. That's different from the type of read that I experienced in reading A Gentleman in Moscow. I think Towles' novel is easier to read in terms of sentence structure and narrative flow. But there are many layers of meaning in it, just as there are in Imprimatur. It took me two weeks or perhaps three to get through Imprimatur, but only a week to finish Gentleman.

Both novels seem (to me) to be focused on how we manage and understand our life experiences, how we make the journey. They both recognize that the process may challenge or bewilder. As Montaigne suggests, one must learn to master one's circumstances. Monaldi's book suggests that for the young apprentice, it is a complex thing to understand all the things that are not clearly explained and laid out for understanding; Towles suggests that, if one is properly equipped with the right social skills and attitude, the complexities need not be insuperable barriers to happiness.

Edited to Add: If I were to pick which of the two I preferred as a reading experience, it would probably be A Gentleman in Moscow, but that title was also the less intellectually challenging of the two.

I have determined that this year, I'm going to name my top five reads more in the context of what thought process they piqued in me rather than the work's literary merit. Some material this year wouldn't qualify as great literature but might still have added significantly to my thought process about how things (or people) operate in this world.

Another update to that Silmarillion primer over on the Tor publisher site:
https://www.tor.com/2017/12/13/silmarillion-primer-everythings-coming-up-feanor/

By the way, with regard to #76 above, Turner Classic Movies is showing Casablanca this afternoon and I've determined that (IMHO) the moment of Rick setting the glass upright in his cafe following Ugarte's arrest is likely a piece of stage business that Humphrey Bogart added to the scene. I think it's rather indicative of the character's concern for his carefully ordered environment (as a carapace around him) and maintaining that order even as the Nazis create the chaos surrounding Ugarte's arrest. This is just before we see Ilsa and Victor walk into the establishment which is when we see Rick's world fall apart.

The other thing that occurred to me was the parallel that the City of Casablanca has with the Metropol Hotel in A Gentleman In Moscow. They're both just temporary stopping points for the people in transit.

Okay, so much for follow-up. I have the library book group talking tomorrow about Baltimore Blues. Better than average start to a mystery series, but I'm not particularly taken with it.

Sausage and risotto in the crock pot for dinner. Hoping it will come out right. (I had a real dud last minute dinner that I pulled together last weekend and it's not fair to the long-suffering spouse if there were to be two in a row.)

>81 jillmwo: I love your parallel between the city and the hotel - great insight!

And Bogart’s glass adjustment too - this seems like the apt explanation, not sure it’s even arguable.

Thank you

After weeks and weeks of deadlines (some assignments appearing with just 24-48 hours for completion), it was nice to spend some time this week with a mild-mannered Agatha Christie novel. The Sittaford Mystery (or Murder at Hazelmoor as it is known in the UK) involves a murder just weeks prior to Christmas. The opening chapters are set in a comfortable upper-class home (rather than a Great House) as two recent arrivals to the area host an evening gathering with some of the neighbors. There’s a game of “table-turning” -- a form of entertainment during which a spirit from the Other Side tells the gathering of the death of one of their own. It’s nonsense, of course, but the weather shows signs of worsening and perhaps someone should just go check? The Major trudges out into the snowy night, ultimately tripping over the Captain’s corpse and the plot unfolds from there.

Admittedly, I didn’t find this Agatha Christie novel to be particularly memorable. It’s primary appeal for me was that it was an easily absorbed, soothing sort of read. There were character types familiar to Christie fans -- the bright and lively heroine, the young men vying for her attention, the former military man, the loyal retainer, the mysterious neighbor, etc. -- with plenty of traditional cautions having to do with isolated circumstances, the dubious antecedents of some and the hidden identities of others. Really, it’s not a particularly memorable work (except for how the presence of those elements may remind one of other Christie output such as The Secret Adversary or The Mousetrap).

But I am at the end of a two year span of time, during which I have read great quantities of Christie. Certainly more than I might ever have imagined myself reading as I’d never particularly enjoyed her when I was younger. Certainly, I have never thought of her as a favorite author (not that I do so now). But I do see reason for crediting Christie with shifting the direction of crime fiction from cold ratiocination of the Great Detective to a warmer portrayal of human interactions with which most of us can sympathize. People do impulsive and stupid things that cast unnecessary doubt on their actions and create unintended misinterpretation of their intent. Christie integrated more of that aspect of human behavior into her work than did Conan Doyle.

Sitting in Panera for what may not be a FULL DNBR day, but to confirm that I’m still participating and contributing to the community. The virtue of Panera is that they make the coffee and do the cooking. I just have to wander up to the counter and look plaintive. The worst thing I can say about it today is that there’s an old geezer sitting in front of the fireplace bellowing into his cell phone that he can sell snow to an eskimo. It would be rude to complain too loudly about that however because either Patrick or I will be guilty of the same class of sin before too long. (That is, being old farts oblivious to the volume of our own voices and boasting of rather mundane, mid-life accomplishments.)

At any rate, the last book group of the year was last night. (Wave to Didi, everyone; she lurks here as I learned when she mentioned my review of A Gentleman in Moscow during book group.) We had read Lois McMaster Bujold’s The Spirit Ring. This was Bujold's first stab at writing fantasy (as I understand it) and it was published back in 1992. One of the things we wrestled with was whether this qualified as a YA coming-of-age tale, a romance or just a stand-alone fantasy. If you’re unfamiliar with it, it’s set in an alternate universe Renaissance Italy with many smaller state conflicts making life difficult for artists and monks. Bujold notes at the close of the book that many of the events in the novel parallel events recounted by the sculptor Benvenuto Cellini in his autobiography. (Cellini, bronze statue, Perseus holding out the head of Medusa. Ring any bells? The Spirit Ring also features his famed salt cellar, but with a magical tweak. Perseus also plays a significant part in the story.) Everyone enjoyed Bujold’s novel, but we did spend a bit of time talking about its appropriate placement.

My belief was that it was a YA coming of age tale targeted to female teen readers (a subset of fiction sadly lacking back in the ‘90’s). Others in the group disagreed because they didn’t feel that Fiametta had sufficiently matured and they pointed out that she ends up with her true love in the end (not a particularly feminist ending for the early ‘90’s). My justification for it being a coming of age story was that (a) Fiametta loses her single parent about 25% into the story and must proceed on her own in unfamiliar territory; (b) she is required to cope with uncertain wartime conditions as she tries to escape those hunting her down and (c) she must come to understand her own power before she ends up with her true love.

I’m now going to either go read Christie’s Crooked House -- her own favorite work. Because later on, I’m going to watch the movie w/ Glenn Close in it. Then I’ll do a compare-and-contrast thing. Or I may read one of Antony Sher’s books -- Year of the King: An Actor's Diary and Sketchbook or Year of the Fat Knight. Because perhaps on New Year's Eve or New Year's Day (uncertain as we are as to planning), we may watch him in the RSC's production of King Lear.

Alternatively, I could be more responsible and work on my freelance assignments like a good professional woman before I meet up with my buddy, Deb, this afternoon. Our plan is to gab and goof off.

Hi, Didi!

Okay, so now I've actually finished Crooked House by Agatha Christie and in my opinion, of all of her works that I've read, this one really is the most tightly constructed. One might see the resolution a bit down the road (if familiar with Christie's techniques) but most of us are too busy sorting out the potential motives for each of the family members to pay attention. It's really quite a page turner.

At this point, I rather think I'm saturated by Christie and Golden Age mysteries. I'll have to get away and read some non-fiction to clear the palate. But if I were to note which of hers I think are most worthy of note, I'd probably list the following:

(1) Crooked House (she was right to be pleased with this one)
(2) Five Little Pigs otherwise known as Murder in Retrospect (mostly on the basis of narrative construction)
(3) Witness for the Prosecution (short story, primarily for the punchline but also for what she made of it later on the stage.)
(4) And Then There Were None (as an examination of the concept of murder and appropriate allocation of guilt and/or justice)
(5) Final three tied for fifth slot --> Appointment with Death (sheer cold-blooded-ness); Death on the Nile (for its twisted solution) and the wild-card one After the Funeral (for its largely unrecognized and under-appreciated theme regarding the ways in which women are perceived.)

Now I think I'll put Christie back up on her shelf for a while (at least until I can work out again what of hers remains unread) and start off the New Year with non-fiction. I keep promising myself that I will read more biographies.

Have you read William Manchester’s magisterial duology of the life of Winston Churchill, The Last Lion? I don’t know if it’s up your alley, but it’s wonderful. Sad that he wasn’t able to complete the planned trilogy.

Also, Robert Massey’s biography Peter the Great is picturesque. Peter is insufficiently appreciated.

How lovely that you are making the most of your reading days between the holidays.

Interesting non-fiction as my final read of 2017, Sir Antony Sher, one of the preeminent actor members of the Royal Shakespeare Company, wrote Year of the Fat Knight as a kind of late-in-life update to his earlier 1984 book, Year of the King. The earlier title has to do with how he went about preparing for the role of Richard III for the RSC. The second title (the one I’ve gulped down in two days) regarding his preparation to play Falstaff was written in 2014 and published in 2015 . From the perspective of physical type, Sher who is “height-challenged” might well be considered to be the wrong sort to play Falstaff who is usually played as an overweight, hard-drinking, old soldier. Sher, who played the perfect form of Disraeli against Judi Dench in the film, Mrs Brown, wrestles to a certain extent with taking on a role for which he seems such a wrong sort. (See https://www.rsc.org.uk/henry-iv-part-i/past-productions/gregory-doran-2014-produ... to see a photo of Sher as Falstaff in 2014. There’s an eight-minute clip of his performance on YouTube as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdI2jVJAyIE. )

Sher tells of some amusing exchanges, one being the break-the-ice exercise where he admits to the company that he sleeps with the director of the RSC. (They’ve been together as partners for 26 years as of the book’s writing but, as with any married couple who work in the same industry, his partner blushes at what might appear to be an unnecessary trumpeting of the personal in the midst of the professional.) There are times when he panics over whether he’ll ever get the lines right and other times when he clearly works so hard at achieving a well-rounded characterization that you can’t see how such a person would receive anything BUT excellent reviews from critics. I loved that he flew to New Zealand to be a part of the one of the Hobbit movies, only to have his bit cut from the theatrical release and only available in the extended edition of that portion. A renowned Shakespearean actor and the work ends up on the cutting room floor. Srsly?

It’s a great account of what professional acting requires of one. The immersion, the concentration required, the awareness of what others may be thinking of your work and the attendant stress. And this is the experience of one at the near-pinnacle of the profession. Sher also is an artist and his sketches of himself and his colleagues are part of the telling. I did wish that I had some way of knowing just how edited the man’s diary entries actually were from his original scribblings. Nothing appears here that would ever embarrass a colleague or a theatrical rival. But the stress of his situation still is discernible. He admits that his creative activity as a writer rivals his activities as either a performer or an artist, which is also interesting. Must be nice to be so talented across so many channels. (Yes, that was envy speaking.)

So I did look at the final statistics for the twelve months of 2017. The statistics aren't all that impressive.
--More than 52 titles read (that works out to be my usual pace of about one book per week), so I really didn't dramatically slow down as I'd thought I'd try to do. There were those occasional --and very enjoyable-- bursts of related reading (like the reading surrounding Witness for the Prosecution or other Christie titles.)
--More fiction than non-fiction read. It worked out to roughly one non-fiction title per month.
--More female writers (2/3) than male writers (1/3) read; more authors who were new to me.
--The average number of pages in books completed were in the lower 300s - about 308. (Total number of pages read was 18,718, but since the trim size of the books were lacking in uniformity, pages isn't really a good metric.)

The quality of the book group reads were actually rather poor (in the context of my own tastes) relative to titles encountered in other years.

Well, the system doesn't think I need to start a new thread just yet, so I suspect I'll have to continue a week or two into the New Year before the option to begin another page for 2018. Can someone aid me towards the 150 that tends to trigger the system? Just post something (inane puns, awkward photos, cryptic single word messages).

I'm about to start threatening to read and post quotes from Whatsis-name Bulwer-Lytton or possibly more horrifying from Barbara Cartland...with appropriate ellipses and absurd breathless dialogue.

>91 jillmwo: We're here for you J!

Honest, together, we can make this thread ..UGE!

Yeah, I know that borders on politics, sorry.

>90 jillmwo: Do you have some Star Stats handy?

I can talk about star stats a lot!!!

"Warning: This books requires the use of common sense" -- Jan Braai: Red Hot

*in a deep announcers voice*

Bookstooge started strong, but then >97 hfglen: threw his hat into the race

It's wide open folks! This thread could go ANYWHERE!

Come on folks, reach DEEP inside and give that comment. Jillmwo needs them!

>95 BookstoogeLT: Quite seriously, what are Star Stats? Is this a thing on LT that I've not recognized? I apply star ratings to the books I read, but probably not effectively -- everything I finish is usually a four or above. There's the occasional 3-star, but I am usually irritated by those and too embarrassed to admit to finishing anything that rates only one or two stars. (Does that make sense?)

>97 hfglen: I just clipped the following description from Amazon:

Red Hot follows on from Fireworks and moves beyond instructions for cooking steak on the fire. Jan challenges us to try more meals cooked on the fire - pancakes, chicken mayo toasted sandwiches or brandy tiramisu! The recipes are new but the book has the same fantastic photos, clear and easy-to-follow recipes and Jan's characteristic touches of braai humour.

What is meant by the phrase, braai humour?

>101 jillmwo: Star stats are where you list all the star ratings you have for the previous year. Some people, like me, like to take those numbers and do all sorts of things with them.
Averages, graphs, etc, etc. Think of an accounting nerd, but not for work :-)

>101 jillmwo: And it does make sense. So you consider a 3 star bad?

>101 jillmwo: Working even further back, do you have a rating philosophy? Sounds like we need to start there :-)

>101 jillmwo: What would make you give a book a 1star, a 2star, etc?
That should get you 5 more posts here easily :-D

>106 BookstoogeLT: Here are mine:

5 Stars:

An Epic read that I will buy in hardcover and read again and again or a book that has profoundly changed my life.

4 Stars:

A book that I thoroughly enjoyed but am not sure I will read again. It ‘might’ not hold up to the Me I’ll be in 10 years.

3 Stars:

A completely average book that I enjoyed. Nothing really special but nothing bad to note either.

The majority of what I read falls into this category.

2 Stars:

Did not enjoy this book. It might have been grammar, editing or plot issues. It might also have been Religious and Philosophical in nature.

1 Star:

Crap. Probably could not finish. Most likely Blasphemous in one way or another. Could also be that the skillz of the writer were of a 3rd grade level.

Half Stars:

Whenever a book is a Strong or Weak X Star Book, I tend to go for the half stars. They make my life so much easier!

Hope that helps!

*stops to catch breath*

>102 jillmwo: The book (and its predecessor) are written with a delightfully light touch. For example " If I say it feeds eight but you have the front row of the local rugby club over to dinner, clearly no matter how much meat you braai, it will serve three"

>106 BookstoogeLT: Well, see that's the thing. My first reaction to that question would be something like Um, stupidity? but that's not entirely fair. Sometimes, there's nothing wrong with a book that I pick up and then discard. It can be my mood that results in me finding something insipid or irritating. I have a plethora of titles available to me at the moment but I'm afraid to pick any of them lest I find them to not meet my hopes. For example, I am curious about The Lost City of Z, but possibly for all the wrong reasons. (The title put me in mind of an old Frances Parkinson Keyes title -- The Explorer that was all about woman married to a man who goes off to Peru to uncover a city. My son enjoyed both the film and movie so that was what prompted me to ask for it for Christmas and, being a good son, he granted that wish.

I have been dipping into a deeply serious biography of Jane Austen by Honan but I haven't been reading it in a linear way so again it might be unfair to apply stars. It's good for what I'm looking up but I don't know that I'd find it to be a good read if attention were applied in the normal fashion.

My husband's reading Year of the King which is the forerunner to the Sher book I read this past week. He's not done with it or I would steal that from him.

There are two books about Tolkien that have been patiently awaiting my attention. One is the biography of the Inklings that came out a year or two ago and the other is Tolkien and the Great War which is literary criticism. I might be able to start one or the other.

But my real reviews (the ones that run three or four paragraphs) are more indicative of my thinking than are the stars. The stars are just faster to put up...

Feedback?

>115 hfglen: Ha! I like it.

>116 jillmwo: Hahahahaa.
But I know what you mean. However, that is why I wrote out my guidelines. That way someone can look at my review and see if I liked the book or not. Then if they're interested, they can read the actual review for all my reasons .

>116 jillmwo: Stars to me are just quick milemarkers on the highway. The review is the actual mapbook.

>116 jillmwo: Not everyone who follows me on WP wants to read the mapbook. Especially with so much of the SFF that I read. They just want to know if they should even consider thinking about wondering if they might want to look into it :-D

BookstoogeLT, you make me laugh. You have entered into the full spirit of my request for assistance in lengthening my current thread. (The bit about stopping to catch your breath in #114 made me grin.)

I am going to go back and see what my stars (or the application thereof) say about my mindset this past year. (Lest anyone think I'm consulting an astrologer for reading advice....)

>121 jillmwo: What!?!?! You don't consult the Great Cosmo on a regular basis?

So Year of the Fat Knight and Crooked House got five stars. However, The Sittaford Mystery I found to be disappointing so I only gave that one three stars.

The Documents in the Case got four stars even though it wasn't Sayers' best work. I found the epistolary style enjoyable and thought-provoking in terms of how to effectively structure narrative as an exercise for a writer. Then, Six Against the Yard was interesting because it was essentially a dialogue between the author of mystery short stories and the professional policeman.

Meetings with Remarkable Manuscripts got a five because I found it fascinating. But I meant it when I said it was a book for nerds because that degree of technical detail about medieval manuscripts can't possibly be everyone's cup of tea.

I gave Case Histories by Kate Atkinson four stars because that one was one of the better titles that I did with my library book group this year. One had to pay attention to names of characters serving as narrators in various chapters.

Oops, There's another three stars applied to Anatomy of Murder. The topic was interesting but the various chapters varied in quality and approach. I still haven't finished the chapter by Dorothy Sayers. And The Norths Meet Murder got three stars just because it felt rather dated. Patricia Cornwell's Postmortem also got three stars. I wasn't particularly impressed with it personally, but thought the members of the library book group would enjoy reading the first in what was a groundbreaking series. Otherwise I would probably have just passed on it.

A Gentleman in Moscow got five stars as did Tragedy at Law by Cyril Hare. (I gave the smaller book group copies of that one for Christmas because I look forward to hearing their experience. I'm bursting to talk to someone about it without having to worry about spoilers.)

OOOhhh, then there were the three stars I applied to Jane Austen: The Secret Radical which I actually hated. However, given the author's credentials with regard to the subject, I couldn't give it one or two stars. She may well know more about Austen than I. I just thought her interpretation of the various titles was inane. I plowed through that one (holding myself at gunpoint) because I wanted to give it a fair shot.

Switching genres (from mystery to fantasy), I gave The Hallowed Hunt five stars because I enjoyed it so much. It was the polar bear that got me.

So how does one characterize my review philosophy if stars are used as indicators?

LOL, this batch of posts has made me laugh. :) I love the thread-continuation functionality here, and the way it automatically links continued threads and carries forward the yellow star. I do wish it didn’t have the 151-post limit to trigger it, though.

Well, that's the thing, you're going to have to determine what it means. If I tell you, then it's me secretly being a puppetmaster and actually rating your books for you.

Wait a second....

That sounds like a LOT of power to me.

Mwhahahahaa....

* rubs hands together *

So, here's my rec for you:

5 Stars

Worth buying

4 Stars

Enjoyed a lot

3 Stars

Well written but didn't grab you at all. Meh.

2 Stars

Disliked but not necessarily poorly written

1 Star

Poorly written, bad facts, etc. A Bad Book!

Okay. That indicator of what deserves five stars makes sense. Is four just worth borrowing?

Damn, you're fast! I got one response up to #127 and you were already on to #132.

To join in the fun, here’s how I define my star ratings. They’re based purely on how entertained I feel when I finish the book. Sometimes there are books I would change the rating on after time has passed and I remember them more or less fondly, but I let my original ratings stand as a representation of how I felt at the time.

5 stars - Took over my life. I kept reading even when I had more important things to do, and I barely refrained from pitching a temper tantrum when I had to put it down. It may not have been a perfect book, but I loved reading it so much that I was able to overlook the flaws.

4 stars - Liked it a lot. I looked forward to picking it up whenever I had time, and I thought about it between reading sessions, but I usually didn’t have much trouble putting it down when I needed to.

3 stars - This can mean either that there was a combination of things I really liked and really hated, or that I was moderately entertained by it but I occasionally got bored and/or had a lot of nit-picking complaints.

2 stars - I read it all the way through, and I didn’t consider it a complete waste of time, but I didn’t enjoy it over-all and I had a lot of complaints.

1 star - Either I couldn’t finish it (very unusual for me) or I did finish it but passionately hated it and found no value in the experience. I don’t think I’ve actually given any book this rating yet in the 4+ years since I started rating and reviewing books.

Half stars - I use these whenever I can’t decide between two star ratings, or whenever if I think a book was “almost, but not quite” up to a certain star level. For example, I tend to give quite a few 4.5 stars ratings, but not very many 5 stars, which represents a book I really loved but that failed to take over my life.

My average star rating in 2017 was 3.8.

>135 YouKneeK: My average was 3.47. I'm pretty happy with that.

>130 BookstoogeLT: I'd probably modify it to adequate, but didn't grab me at all. Adequate describes it I think because there's probably nothing really wrong with it. Two is seriously questionable and one would for me indicate a serious questioning of the publisher in deeming it worth the investment. (Where the heck is the ROI?)

Coffee.

The above was a response to your request in >91 jillmwo: for cryptic, single-word messages. A colleague of mine once IM’d his boss with a question that we needed an answer on for a project we were working on together. Our project had nothing whatsoever to do with beverages; I believe the subject was labels or packing slips or something like that. Her response: “coffee”. My colleague’s response: “donut”.

>135 YouKneeK: Excellent assessment. Your three star explanation is in line with my own, I suspect.

>137 jillmwo: Whoa, whoa, whoa. Who's the Puppetmaster here!?!
;-)

>138 YouKneeK: Nope, vpx Bang energy drink!

>139 YouKneeK: I am laughing. More interoffice email exchanges should be like that. (And as an aside, that's exactly what I had for breakfast this morning. New Year's Day is not when one should focus on nutritional value.)

Almost...

Now a question for both of you is how you determined what your average star rating was. Is that something LT tracks for you? I mean, you're talking fractions of stars.

...there.

>145 jillmwo: Sadly, it isn't. I add up all my stars and divide them by the number of books I read, which gives me the average.

And I'm giving both of you top billing in my 2018 thread. The collaboration in this effort is highly valued.

>142 BookstoogeLT: LOL, Vanilla Coke Zero is the most caffeine I can do in one beverage. I don’t actually drink coffee at all. Once in a great, great while I’ll drink tea. The problem is, when I want a caffeine boost, a soda can be obtained in two seconds. Tea takes too long!

>145 jillmwo: The half stars really throw the fractions to the dogs...

>143 jillmwo: They are amusing, although sometimes exasperating! A few too many of our interoffice exchanges with this particular manager are like that.

We’ve learned, for example, that we ask her if she wants x or y, and her response is “yes”, it means she wants x and didn’t bother to read the “or y” part.

>147 BookstoogeLT: Well, darn! That requires math (or maybe spreadsheet skills) and I'm a humanist all the way.

BAM!!!!

>151 YouKneeK: OMG, I've dealt with ones like that. You just want to shake them. Read ALL the words!

>153 BookstoogeLT:, Nope. Sadly it didn't trigger the thing. You'll have to import public domain length texts from Project Gutenberg.

>153 BookstoogeLT: Wait, yes, it did!!

Woo hoo, we made it!! :) And that was fun... we should do this every year.

>145 jillmwo: I’m a freak and maintain an Access database. It has a variety of info including star ratings I awarded, read dates, etc. So, since I have access to all my own raw data, I can just write queries. In this case, my query adds up the numeric star value I gave to each book read in a specified year and divides by the # of books to determine the average rating.

Here’s a picture with the stats my database spit out for me:
https://i.imgur.com/ZNL3hup.png

>154 jillmwo: Yes, exactly!! I get so mad sometimes because her reluctance to spend an extra 15 seconds reading the entire sentence can result in hours of wasted time if their response is misinformed or misunderstood.

That was a highly entertaining way to bump up @jillmwo's post count :) @BookstoogeLT, I think you just gave Jill a rating system!

>159 Narilka: Always glad to lend a hand for Order against the forces of Chaos ;-)

*blink, blink* Wow, I step out of the pub for a minute and return to find jillmwo's thread blown up. Good for you! Looking forward to the new one, and I had fun reading this!