Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

All New *All Singing/Dancing* London Bookgroup Welcomes New Members thread

Hollis said:
My collected thoughts on Nana todate are provided below:

"Well I've started it and am enjoying both the 3rd person narrative and subtle interplay of the characters."

"I am also intrigued in Zola's attention to light in describing scenes. I wonder if this is a refection of what was happening in French painting at the time. It will"

"Well, so far my favourite character is that sleezy banker."

"I recommend perservering with Chapter two.. it gets better.. err, yes.."


"This book is great. Zola is so subtle. You think nothings happening.. but then you realise its all happening. More episodic than linear."

Only ever read germinal.
 
At last night's bookgroup (which was very enjoyable by the way, despite lots of you losers not turning up) we were discussing the idea of having a 'book of year' as well as a book for each month. This would be a long book of the sort that couldn't be read in one month. Those who aren't interested in reading stupidly long books need not join in, but those of us who like something that takes some commitment and is too long to be read all at once can have this second book in the background that we'll all be reading.
The year is to run between bookgroup anniversaries, and since we've just had one the book we set now will be the book for the next year.

The suggestion that emerged last night was Richard Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy, which is kind of pricey to buy at the moment but is available in various places online, such as here:
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/10800

What do people think of the idea? Worth doing?
 
For those of you know nothing about it, here's amazon's synopsis of AoM:

"One of the major documents of modern European civilisation, Robert Burton's astounding compendium, a survey of melancholy in its myriad forms, has invited nothing but superlatives since its publication in the seventeenth century. Lewellyn Powys called it 'the greatest work of prose of the greatest period of English prosewriting', while the celebrated surgeon William Osler declared it the greatest of medical treatises. And Dr Johnson, Boswell reports, said it was the only book that he rose early in the morning to read with pleasure. In this surprisingly compact and elegant new edition, Burton's spectacular verbal labyrinth is sure to delight, instruct, and divert today's readers as much as it has those of the past four centuries. "
 
Brainaddict said:
At last night's bookgroup (which was very enjoyable by the way, despite lots of you losers not turning up) we were discussing the idea of having a 'book of year' as well as a book for each month. This would be a long book of the sort that couldn't be read in one month. Those who aren't interested in reading stupidly long books need not join in, but those of us who like something that takes some commitment and is too long to be read all at once can have this second book in the background that we'll all be reading.
The year is to run between bookgroup anniversaries, and since we've just had one the book we set now will be the book for the next year.

The suggestion that emerged last night was Richard Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy, which is kind of pricey to buy at the moment but is available in various places online, such as here:
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/10800

What do people think of the idea? Worth doing?

I have no opinion on this at all, except that I won't be reading it.
 
Pickman's model said:
also, the tenative proposal for the october book is jim mcgregor's 'if nobody speaks of remarkable things' - though that may be revised.

That book was fucking heartbreaking - I loved it. Actually - I'd happily re-read it.

I can't be arsed with Louis de Bernieres so I'll sit that one out I think.
 
Hollis said:
I have no opinion on this at all, except that I won't be reading it.
Am I right in thinking that you wouldn't read the kind of book that requires months/years at all? zora said the same thing and I think other people will too, but that's fine. some people liked the idea though so i think it might be worth pursuing.
 
i'll read the book of the year.. i reckon the college library will have a copy.

are we agreed the bookgroup year runs from july to july? so that we ought to have read this by next summer's curry meeting?
 
PieEye said:
I can't be arsed with Louis de Bernieres so I'll sit that one out I think.

You're missing out there PieEye.. The War of Don's Nether Parts is a hilarious, farcical account of life within an imaginary South American country. The characters are delightful and exude sexuality, humour and vigour. The plot is extremely finely crafted. There are terrorists, wars, insurgiencies, politics and plentyful liasons that are stitched together in the finest threads of situational comedy.

Without doubt this book is one of the funniest I have ever read, knocking Tom Sharpe well off his perch.
 
Hollis said:
I demand specifics. :mad:
okay, as an example consider the theatre producer Bordenave, the banker Steiner or the journalist/playwright Fauchery.. they are all fairly major supporting characters but what do you know any of their characters and why they might do the things they do or act they way they act? I couldn't find any clues about what they were thinking.. and i got the impression that they and many (most / all??) of the other people in the book just did as required by Zola to keep the book moving.. but when you get to feel like that you aren't involved and the whole thing seems pointless taken as a whole.

undeniably he is quite good at set-pieces and ensemble scenes.. the dinner party at nana, the day at the races, etc, etc, and also does a good job of capturing some of the minutae of unfolding emotions.. nana's child-like glee on first arriving at her country home and Georges & Nana's 'love' scene that follows or Muffat's rage/jealously/confusion/grief at his wife's infidelity.

but i can't bring myself to care very much about the book taken as a whole because it lacks plausibility, plot or point!
 
citydreams said:
You're missing out there PieEye...

I just don't seem to be finishing any of the books in time at the moment so I'm going to sit out of BG for a bit I think and come back when I think I'll have a chance of completing them in time. It frustrates me when I can't have a proper talk because I don't know the sodding ending.....I've been a useless member these past few months!
 
or another possiblity we discussed last night is that maybe the point is that he concentrates on the microcosm, that it is a painterly book in that it only wants to portray what it sees and not explain, judge or analyse that. certainly all the historical detail feels authentic..(which paris streets had what type of prostitutes, what the green room and dressing rooms smelled like in Parisian theatres etc.)

and it is just one book in a massive sequence.. maybe knowing more about the others would give a better perspective

and to be fair, it seems a radical and scandalously frank exposé of some of the sexual mores of the era.
 
PieEye said:
I just don't seem to be finishing any of the books in time at the moment so I'm going to sit out of BG for a bit I think and come back when I think I'll have a chance of completing them in time. It frustrates me when I can't have a proper talk because I don't know the sodding ending.....I've been a useless member these past few months!
i think very few of us finished this month's pieeye but we still had a good discussion about it - we'll miss you if you don't come :(
 
Sorry onemonkey.. I can't read your post as I aint finished the book yet. I have the last 2 months books to finish aswell.. :rolleyes:
 
Brainaddict said:
i think very few of us finished this month's pieeye but we still had a good discussion about it - we'll miss you if you don't come :(

Hollis wouldn't :mad:

I'll Be Back - just not next month I don't reckon.
 
Maybe we should all just agree to question each others commitment to the bookgroup at the moment... Although I'd agree choosing, at the first opportunity, a night on the piss with Jess does seem a particularly feeble excuse for non-attendance. :(
 
citydreams said:
You're missing out there PieEye.. The War of Don's Nether Parts is a hilarious, farcical account of life within an imaginary South American country. The characters are delightful and exude sexuality, humour and vigour. The plot is extremely finely crafted. There are terrorists, wars, insurgiencies, politics and plentyful liasons that are stitched together in the finest threads of situational comedy.

Without doubt this book is one of the funniest I have ever read, knocking Tom Sharpe well off his perch.

Yes, but it's so, well, obvious - can't we pick books that no one else is likely to have read? The last four books chosen (my suggestion included admittedly) I've read already and had not that much desire to read again.
:(
 
Hollis said:
Maybe we should all just agree to question each others commitment to the bookgroup at the moment... Although I'd agree choosing, at the first opportunity, a night on the piss with Jess does seem a particularly feeble excuse for non-attendance. :(

ok - you can question mine.
I'll question Brainy's
Brainy has to query Orang Utan
OU gives the monkeyman hell
monkeyman can sic Zora
and Zora can hassle everyone else because she's german and efficient with it.

And I would turn down a night of unbridled lust with Simon Pegg for one on the piss with Jess.

You lot are no contest.
 
PieEye said:
and Zora can hassle everyone else because she's german and efficient with it.

Sorry I'm not joining in this childish stuff - from my lofty perch of 25 out of 26 bookgroup attendences. :p
 
Orang Utan said:
Yes, but it's so, well, obvious - can't we pick books that no one else is likely to have read?

No-one else had read it that turned up to the group.

All books are obvious once you have read them.

Did you enjoy it?

To be more constructive, we thought that chosing two books at a time should allow some more choice within the group. Perhaps we should chose one book online and one offline.
 
citydreams said:
To be more constructive, we thought that chosing two books at a time should allow some more choice within the group.

Fucking great idea that.. Pure bloody genius.

:cool:
 
PieEye said:
And I would turn down a night of unbridled lust with Simon Pegg for one on the piss with Jess.

You lot are no contest.

Very glad to receive this clarification. When are we meeting the lovely Jess?

:)
 
Orang Utan said:
Yes, but it's so, well, obvious - can't we pick books that no one else is likely to have read? The last four books chosen (my suggestion included admittedly) I've read already and had not that much desire to read again.
:(
name a few books & let's see if anyone's read them.

also, it does help if you turn up to the bookgroup so you have some small influence on the choice.
 
citydreams said:
No-one else had read it that turned up to the group.

All books are obvious once you have read them.

Did you enjoy it?

To be more constructive, we thought that chosing two books at a time should allow some more choice within the group. Perhaps we should chose one book online and one offline.
I enjoyed it, very well written with engaging characters, but a soupcon of cynical potboiling about it, like his others - you need to read the other books too.
 
Pickman's model said:
name a few books & let's see if anyone's read them.

also, it does help if you turn up to the bookgroup so you have some small influence on the choice.

Sorry, didn't mean to come across as sour, though I'm sure it appeared that way. I suggested JG Farrell's Troubles earlier. Would also like to try out Dostoyevsky's The Idiot, David Madsen's Memoirs Of A Gnostic Dwarf, Nigel Slater's Toast.
And The Da Vinci Code!
 
Back
Top Bottom