The books have some great set-piece scenes, too - Green Mars features the fall of a space elevator cable.
Unless they rebuild it, that's in Red Mars. (I went to the Strand today looking for the other two, which I haven't read yet, but they weren't there. For a store with 8 miles of books, their sci-fi section is kind of sad. Lots of William Shatner books, and at least two copies of the LXG novelization, no Kim Stanley Robinson at all.)
I did find Singularity Sky, which I'd forgotten I was looking for, and Clouds End, which I picked up because people had been talking up Sean Stewart in this thread. Also a reprint of the 1903 Good Housekeeping Everyday Cookbook and a book called Cookoff! about competitive cooking.
Oooh, very pretty book, Heather.
Elizabeth Bishop is the motherfucking man (I'm fairly sure Jen will back me up on this)
Hells yes.
Then again, I'd back you up if you were walking backwards into a fire, because I dig you like that.
But I really do like Elizabeth Bishop quite a lot.
Speaking of poetry, I swear the recommendations list is coming up. Fair warning that it will be strongly skewed towards 20th century Americans and Canadians.
Two things:
On AMAZON, you can remove purchased gift books from affecting your recommendations. And I started getting good recommendations after I rated several books I own and marked all recs that I already owned as such.
I made an earlier post that linked to the Great Books Project of the Great Books Foundations and they list several different lists that have been compiled of "canon". I think Alice Walker - The Color Purple is on there, but I am not sure. If you google Great Books Foundation you can find all the info.
And when people say they think something already is canon, are they referring to an actual list like that or somthing more abstract?
Apropos
of stuff that went down a long time ago …
It becomes clear to me why I don't want to analyze literature. It is like knowing details about an actor or actresses' life. It does nothing to improve my appreciation of
Buffy
To know that Alyson and Alex were hooked up in real life. Digging into the thought processes of an author? Same deal.
What is on the page/screen is the real deal.
Taxonomy of literature? More of the same deal. I suspect that people who actually commit literature are entirely unaware of the distinctions, having more to do in their lives related to defeating that blinking cursor standing between them and what they need to say.
Heather, that book is gorgeous. Is that a slipcase it's in? What edition is it? I suspect that may be worth a few kopins.
What is on the page/screen is the real deal.
Gus, you are such a New Critic. Cleanth Brooks would be so proud!
My book is not 1893. It is 1887. I have a book that is 117 years old. I'm boggled.
Hmm - I think stuff outside of "what's on the page" can greatly increase your enjoyment. In fact it does - and not just of written work. Think about how much your enjoyment of firefly was enhanced by familiarity with Western and Science Fiction tropes and tell me me that only "what was on the screen" counted. Not that you couldn't enjoy Firefly without that information - but it really gave you access to whole layers of fun that would not have been there otherwise.
It becomes clear to me why I don't want to analyze literature. It is like knowing details about an actor or actresses' life. It does nothing to improve my appreciation of Buffy To know that Alyson and Alex were hooked up in real life. Digging into the thought processes of an author? Same deal.
Yeah, but that's not necessarily required in discussing literature. You can spend a lot of time talking about a text without once mentioning the author's life or her relationship with her mother.
