Davina Mcall hasn't read 1984...

[DotCommunist]

I can't actually remember if I've read The Hobbit, or not, now. But I lost the will to live trying to get to the end of The Lord of the Rings, because it just got so dull.

Felt the same about the films, too. (Well the last one definitely!)

I watched the extended versions on dvd back to back on an all nighter (tbf I was dabbing speed)

The Hobbit is written for children-it has lot's of little asides to the reader that are popular in kids fic because they convey an idea that the narrator is telling you a story- you and he are both in on the tale iyswim.

was a bit that my mate struggled-literacy is important imo.

 

[butchersapron]

Everyone on this thread has been very clear that they only think Davina McCall should have read the book because of her connection to Big Brother. They're really not being snobby at all.

She should have read the book now should she? Why? Because she fronts a show that has pretty much nothing at all to do with the book?

And, again, i wasn't talking about Davina bloody Macall, when i mentioned sniffy attitudes i was talking about the people responding to the poll linked to above, and their motivations for lying about reading 1984.

 

[Voley]

1984's the only one I've read off that list, too.

 

[_angel_]

1984's the only one I've read off that list, too.

Yes same here.

 

[Voley]

Actually, no, I've read Midnight's Children and most of The Bible, thinking about it. Really recommend Midnight's Children. The Bible's pretty good too but you really have to suspend your disbelief.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I haven't read any of them. I've read bits of a few and almost all of Brief History Of Time, but I skimmed the last few chapters.

What gets me is that so many people have lied about having read War And Peace. Why? Nobody believes you if you've said you've read War And Peace.

 

[DotCommunist]

Actually, no, I've read Midnight's Children and most of The Bible, thinking about it. Really recommend Midnight's Children. The Bible's pretty good too but you really have to suspend your disbelief.

Midnights Children is one I've been meaning to tackle-even though Rushdies books seem more about wordplay and prose-poetry to me I enjoyed The Moors Last Sigh and Satanic Verses.

As for the Bible there's some gold in there. Revelation is ace as is Job.

Old Testament has the best stories though.

 

[Voley]

That surprises me, FM. I can be sniffy towards you now.

 

[DotCommunist]

What gets me is that so many people have lied about having read War And Peace. Why? Nobody believes you if you've said you've read War And Peace.

The 'oh I tried but I have the penguin edition with the miniscule text so gave up' defense works every time. It's better than the 'really didn't give a shit about the aristotwats' defense

 

[Voley]

Midnights Children is one I've been meaning to tackle-even though Rushdies books seem more about wordplay and prose-poetry to me I enjoyed The Moors Last Sigh and Satanic Verses.

Reckon you'd like it then, DotC. It's his best book imo. I'm not a big fan of magic realism, by and large, but as Midnights Children's set in India (where people routinely believe in multi-headed elephant gods and whatnot) it doesn't seem out of place.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I've read every single L Frank Baum Oz novel though, of which there are fourteen, though none of the ones by other authors.

 

[cesare]

Everyone on this thread has been very clear that they only think Davina McCall should have read the book because of her connection to Big Brother. They're really not being snobby at all.

I wasn't. I was just being disparaging about her I don't think I even made the connection with 1984

 

[scifisam]

She should have read the book now should she? Why? Because she fronts a show that has pretty much nothing at all to do with the book?

I don't really think she should, personally. Didn't you notice that I was talking about other people's posts?

And, again, i wasn't talking about Davina bloody Macall, when i mentioned sniffy attitudes i was talking about the people responding to the poll linked to above, and their motivations for lying about reading 1984.

What sniffy attitudes? Are we reading different threads?

 

[bouncer_the_dog]

I haven't read War and Peace. Well i've read the first chapter. And I had a good stab at Anna Karenina. I listened to the radio adaption of War and Piece, so have got the basic idea. But then again I haven't spent the last ten years presenting a TV programe called 'Ruskie Autocrat' where members of the public are invited to dress as 19th century Russians and get horribley blown up and lose their fortunes in return for eternal tabloid exposure (and possible televised cancer death).

 

[electrogirl]

I'm confused about what we're talking about now.

 

[Geri]

It's often set for GCSE english lit in schools so it can't be considered all that hard to read.

That's interesting, I did not know that. People of my age and above did O levels and I don't think it was one of our set books for that.

I could be wrong though as my memories are very vague - I can only remember having to read Catcher in the Rye and Macbeth.

 

[electrogirl]

TBF I thnk Animal Farm is more often set as a GCSE text, I've never heard of 1984 being used.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Considering the way society has gone, Brave New World would be a more interesting GCSE text. Books that strongly critique socialist totalitarian may well be considered a lot safer to thrust on kids than books that criticse extreme consumerism.

 

[DotCommunist]

yeah, but good ideas aside, brave new world isn't terribly well written.

And huxely was the most disgustingly arrogant anti-semite. Loathsome specimen.

 

[butchersapron]

yeah, but good ideas aside, brave new world isn't terribly well written.

And huxely was the most disgustingly arrogant anti-semite. Loathsome specimen.

...also a total elitist snob too.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

TBF I thnk Animal Farm is more often set as a GCSE text, I've never heard of 1984 being used.

I'm pretty sure it is - iirc last night I googled and got some course notes for it.

Considering the way society has gone, Brave New World would be a more interesting GCSE text. Books that strongly critique socialist totalitarian may well be considered a lot safer to thrust on kids than books that criticse extreme consumerism.

That's definitely done at GCSE.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

yeah, but good ideas aside, brave new world isn't terribly well written.

And huxely was the most disgustingly arrogant anti-semite. Loathsome specimen.

No, it's not actually. Which after having it recommended to me so much, was a bit of a shame. Island is better written IMO and some of the more utopian ideas did quite grab me (whilst some are a bit ). Though the last chapter when he's on mushrooms mainly just amused me.

Didn't really know anything about Huxely as a person apart from the psycedelics obsession. Learning that makes me kinda sad.

 

[isitme]

i remember in newcastle library 1984 was in the 'teen' section

 

[Agent Sparrow]

That's definitely done at GCSE.

That's my theory out then.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Brave New World does read rather like a "teen" novel these days. Don't think 1984 does though (er, I've already admitted that I've not read it all the way through, but I've read big chunks okay?)

 

[DotCommunist]

No, it's not actually. Which after having it recommended to me so much, was a bit of a shame. Island is better written IMO and some of the more utopian ideas did quite grab me (whilst some are a bit ). Though the last chapter when he's on mushrooms mainly just amused me.

Didn't really know anything about Huxely as a person apart from the psycedelics obsession. Learning that makes me kinda sad.

check out some of his essays. When he's not busy doing max_freakout trippy dippy shit styled as criques of better thinkers than he, he's hating on
jews and black people. His astonishingly arrogant and racist essay about jazz music cemented my dislike of the man.

 

[_angel_]

yeah, but good ideas aside, brave new world isn't terribly well written.

And huxely was the most disgustingly arrogant anti-semite. Loathsome specimen.

I didn't rate Brave New World at all.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

I read BNW in a day I think - the writing style definitely means you don't have to/want to linger over parts to extract deeper meaning. In a way it felt consumerist in itself to read; pick it up, devour it, disgard it. Don't get me wrong, I did like it and there were good ideas, but other books have had a more lasting impact on me.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

check out some of his essays. When he's not busy doing max_freakout trippy dippy shit styled as criques of better thinkers than he, he's hating on
jews and black people. His astonishingly arrogant and racist essay about jazz music cemented my dislike of the man.

Try "When The Sleeper Wakes" by H G Wells. A fairly unknown piece of heavily political early science fiction - possibly related to Mr Wells' portrayal of our cousins in Africa near the end.

 

[isitme]

I think brave new world is very good in terms of what it predicted

I think he was very close to getting youth culture right