What are you reading right now?

[costa_oscura]

I recently finished Agency by William Gibson.  It was good, but I didn't like it as well as the first book in the series, The Peripheral.

Currently reading both Tad Williams' Empire of Grass, the second book in his Last King of Osten Ard series, and The Secret History by Donna Tartt.  I think I started The Secret History when it was first published back in my college days and didn't finish reading it because it never really hooked me.  My memory could be off, though, and I might be remembering a different book.  I like The Secret History well enough so far, so I'm continuing with it.  Apparently the book has accrued cult status popularity with the dark academia crowd, of which I was unaware... so, hey, look at me, trying to appeal to the 'edgy' subculture bunch. 

[Lisnaholic]

^ Books and authors both, I'm afraid I recognise absolutely zero of those names you mention, costa.

Actually, I'm here to continue a chat about Anthony Trollope, on which score, I owe AT and Marie something of an apology:-



I'm halfway through this book which I first read in about 1993, and this time round I am more sympathetic to old AT. He was clearly a decent guy who had a tough start in life, and by his own efforts overcame difficult circs and a sense of inferiority. All that is to his credit, of course, but in doing so, he turned himself into a bit of a stuffy bore, imo.
From about 100 pages in, he is mainly describing his life as an established literary figure: books writ, fees received, clubs joined (The Athenaeum, etc.), magazines contributed to (The Pall Mall Gazette, etc.), literary friends (Thakeray, etc.).  For relaxation/excitement he liked to go fox-hunting, and his other main topic is his work for the Post Office, which remains a little mysterious - not in an intriguing way, but in a not-properly-explained way.

So, a bit of a stodgy read, imo, although let me make clear 2 things in defense of AT's autobiography:-

i) I haven't read any of his thirty-odd novels, so AT's little glimpses behind-the-scenes of his inspiration were of limited interest to me. (And yes, in connection to the stuff Marie and I were talking about, almost every novel mentioned is introduced with info about how much he sold it for.)
ii) the Autobiog was not so much written for publication as it was written for the benefit of his son, as a kind of record of "this is what your dad did". One effect of this is that some of the big chunks of Trollope's more dramatic adventures (overseas, for example), are dismissed with the phrase "which I have written about elsewhere".

TL:DR: If anyone is tempted to read Trollope's Autobiog, don't expect some scandalous kiss-and-tell blockbuster confessional, ok ? - which, come to think of it, you can probably work out for yourself from a glance at the book's cover !

[SGR]

^ Books and authors both, I'm afraid I recognise absolutely zero of those names you mention, costa.

The only one I recognized was Donna Tartt, but that's only because my brother is a big fan of her. Just to irritate him, as a good older brother should, I always refer to her as "Donna Fart" 

[Janszoon]

The only one I recognized was Donna Tartt, but that's only because my brother is a big fan of her. Just to irritate him, as a good older brother should, I always refer to her as "Donna Fart" 

You should've gone with "Gonna Fart".

I love her books by the way. 

[SGR]

Still plugging away at this biography of Grant. I'm ~350 pages in, and it's been mostly a joy to read so far. One of the things that really caught my eye is how bloody and gruesome the Civil War could be. It almost feels like a distant or fading national memory - I think part of how we still remember how bloody and awful WW1, WW2, Vietnam, etc were is because we had a large amount of photos/video, and in terms of cultural influence, we've had many, many shows and movies made about them, but not so much about the Civil War. Here's a passage from the Grant biography I found equally compelling and disgusting - it's describing the Battle of Shiloh, during the first night (after a battle had been waged):

In this nightmarish landscape, thousands of wounded men lay writhing and moaning in drenching rain, their contorted figures lit by sporadic lightning. The ground was slick with blood and carpeted with torn limbs and decapitated heads. Wild pigs rooted among petrifying bodies, their snorts audible to the dying soldiers...many soldiers died of exposure that night while the living found no shelter as they slept in puddles. "This night of horrors will haunt me to my grave," swore a Confederate soldier.

[Mindy]

I just read the first chapter of the Kybalion
Weird how I knew a lot about everything in chapter one, but never read the actual book until now. Some things I obviously didn't know but the biggest lesson for me in chapter one was, "The lips of wisdom are closed, except to the ears of understanding". The emphasis on secrecy.

[Lucem Ferre]

You occultist, you.

[Chris1]

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry – Citadel.
Not everyone is destined to understand this book, but everyone can try.

[Buck_Mulligan]

Still plugging away at this biography of Grant. I'm ~350 pages in, and it's been mostly a joy to read so far. One of the things that really caught my eye is how bloody and gruesome the Civil War could be. It almost feels like a distant or fading national memory - I think part of how we still remember how bloody and awful WW1, WW2, Vietnam, etc were is because we had a large amount of photos/video, and in terms of cultural influence, we've had many, many shows and movies made about them, but not so much about the Civil War. Here's a passage from the Grant biography I found equally compelling and disgusting - it's describing the Battle of Shiloh, during the first night (after a battle had been waged):

Europeans often think Americans "oversell" the significance of the civil war, given that absolute losses were much higher in the world wars. I point out that it was the first time in recorded history where one race of people went to war among themselves over the fate of a different race. And a young country at that. I doubt any European country then or now would do likewise.

[SGR]

Europeans often think Americans "oversell" the significance of the civil war, given that absolute losses were much higher in the world wars. I point out that it was the first time in recorded history where one race of people went to war among themselves over the fate of a different race. And a young country at that. I doubt any European country then or now would do likewise.

Other Europeans here will have to comment on that, I can't speak for how Europeans in general view the American Civil War, but it's fair to say that there are a lot of things Americans do oversell - but the Civil War wasn't one of them in my eyes. It resulted in the deaths around ~620,000 Americans - the bloodiest war in US history. That was about 2% of the US population at the time. When adjusted for the total population today, 2% would be around 6,800,000 Americans. And this death toll was accrued nearly 200 years ago, long before the common usage of things like machine guns, drones, and bombing raids.

[Lisnaholic]

As you are re-mentioning that Grant biog, SGR, I think it's ok for me to re-mention my recommendation on the Civil War:-

I find military campaigns more interesting than politics, and that interest sustained me through my deepest dive into US history:-



I learnt a lot of fascinating info about the long-drawn-out tragedy that was the American Civil War but, although I still have the books on my shelf, I 'm not sure that I'll ever reread them. Recommend them, though, I certainly would.

As for Buck Mulligan's point about how Europeans view the American Civil War, as a European, I'll contribute my own ignorant, even childish, view if I may:

Me and my friends never focused on comparing numbers dead so much, but we did dwell on the horrors of trench warfare in WWI. For some reason, seperately and independently, several people I knew became fascinated with WWI, as indeed I did myself. I think some of the macabre lure was reading about the long, ghastly winters of flat, windswept northern France and Belgium. Every European knows what cold and miserable weather is like, so adding war to that mix is clearly Hellish.
In contrast, partly thanks to all those old cowboy movies, death in the USA seemed to take place with a merciful swiftness, and in spectacular sunny scenery as well. So, yeah, why are Americans making such a big deal of it?! Well, I certainly left that attitude behind when I read The Army of the Potomac : what a grinding, brutal misery the American Civil war was ! Reading about the infamous cornfield at Antietam or the multiple missed opportunities, at Gettysburg and elsewhere, were enough to make me weep. 

[SGR]

As you are re-mentioning that Grant biog, SGR, I think it's ok for me to re-mention my recommendation on the Civil War:-

As for Buck Mulligan's point about how Europeans view the American Civil War, as a European, I'll contribute my own ignorant, even childish, view if I may:

Me and my friends never focused on comparing numbers dead so much, but we did dwell on the horrors of trench warfare in WWI. For some reason, seperately and independently, several people I knew became fascinated with WWI, as indeed I did myself. I think some of the macabre lure was reading about the long, ghastly winters of flat, windswept northern France and Belgium. Every European knows what cold and miserable weather is like, so adding war to that mix is clearly Hellish.
In contrast, partly thanks to all those old cowboy movies, death in the USA seemed to take place with a merciful swiftness, and in spectacular sunny scenery as well. So, yeah, why are Americans making such a big deal of it?! Well, I certainly left that attitude behind when I read The Army of the Potomac : what a grinding, brutal misery the American Civil war was ! Reading about the infamous cornfield at Antietam or the multiple missed opportunities, at Gettysburg and elsewhere, were enough to make me weep. 

Thanks for the reminder Lisna! I've now got this on my Amazon wishlist. I don't know the polite way to say it, as the Civil War was a horrible sequence of events, but I do very much enjoy reading and learning more about it. I'm still trying to primarily achieve my goal (that I've had since my college years) of reading at least one biography of every US president. For very important/consequential presidents, I'm likely to read more than one, so next up for me is likely the celebrated and widely read (or at least widely purchased) Doris Kearns Goodwin' Team of Rivals (yes, yes, I know, it's not a "proper" Lincoln biography, but I'll get there). After finishing this biography of Grant, all the context should be fresh enough in my mind to make it a relatively easier read.

In terms of the 'brutal misery' of the American Civil War, I'll include another passage from the Grant biography I'm reading, about the Battle of the Wilderness:

After an early afternoon lull, the fighting resumed at 4:15 p.m. as Lee mounted a furious attack against Hancock. Within an hour Hancock had repulsed the movement, but not before a terrifying event intervened: the woods started burning again. Exploding shells ignited dry brush and pine needles, heating the forest into a raging infenro. Adding to the conflagration were wooden Union breatworks, which blazed up with stunning speed. Wounded men were roasted alive on the forest floor, their agonized cries audible everywhere; many committed suicied rather than burn to death. Swirling smoke asphyxiated soldiers on both sides and Porter remembered how "the wind howled through the tree-tops, mingling its moans with the groans of the dying, and heavy branches were cut off by the fire of the artillery, and fell crashing upon the heads of the men, adding a new terror to battle." Blood-smeared, hideous garments clung to bushes, and many survivors said the scene approached as near to scenes of hell as they could ever picture. Stanton would christen the Wilderness "the bloodiest swath ever made on this globe."

[Lisnaholic]

Thanks for the reminder Lisna! I've now got this on my Amazon wishlist.

Hey, that's good, SGR ! Let me know if it goes from Wishlist to Shopping Cart.

The Battle of the Wilderness sounds terrible, and that description made me think of the fire-storm caused by the bombing of Dresden in WWII. That's a feature of the American Civil War: that its participants were faced with new levels of horror in war that would repeat again in wars to come.

On a lighter note, I admire your long-term project with those Presidential biogs. When you reach the end you'll be in a good position to comment on this idea that I came across in the book I'm currently reading:-

Generally speaking, Americans like their presidents to have no more than two vowels. Truman. Johnson. Nixon. Clinton. If they have more than two vowels (Reagan), they can have no more than two syllables. Even better is one syllable and one vowel: Bush. Had to do that twice.

^ That quote is from a well-written book by an author I'm not familiar with:-



It's a novel about a Greek family, from their emmigration to the USA, circa 1920, to the modern era. Something of note, and the reason for the title I suppose, is the narrator's personal journey, as they move from girlhood, as Callie, to manhood as Cal.

[Meatwad]

Hey, that's good, SGR ! Let me know if it goes from Wishlist to Shopping Cart.

The Battle of the Wilderness sounds terrible, and that description made me think of the fire-storm caused by the bombing of Dresden in WWII. That's a feature of the American Civil War: that its participants were faced with new levels of horror in war that would repeat again in wars to come.

On a lighter note, I admire your long-term project with those Presidential biogs. When you reach the end you'll be in a good position to comment on this idea that I came across in the book I'm currently reading:-

^ That quote is from a well-written book by an author I'm not familiar with:-



It's a novel about a Greek family, from their emmigration to the USA, circa 1920, to the modern era. Something of note, and the reason for the title I suppose, is the narrator's personal journey, as they move from girlhood, as Callie, to manhood as Cal.

Middlesex was good. "The Virgin Suicides" was also a good read from Eugenides. One of the better book to movie adaptions.

[Lisnaholic]

^ Hey, thanks for the comment, Meatwad! It's not often that I hit on a book that another SCD member has read. Yep, I'm enjoying the book because the writing is well-crafted: he puts in a few literary flourishes to keep us amused and interested, but doesn't forget that first and foremost he's telling a story.