What are you reading in general?

[Iolanthe]

I'm reading (or rather listening to) "Murder before Evensong" by the Reverend Richard Coles, who many years ago was in the Communards with Jimmy Somerville. He's also doing the reading, not very well, and the book is nothing special. Nevertheless, I'm enjoying it.

[peter]

With my eyesight diminishing far faster than I'm happy with, it will not be long before I'm forced to begin trying out audiobooks as an alternative way of continuing to enjoy books. (I have cataract development that is in its early stages, but not operable, yet at least. My optition tells me that the glasses I have are the best prescription that I can have, but are not going to make my vision one hundred percent by any means.) I have listened to stories read on YouTube on occasion and don't mind it too much - but find it a different experience to actually sitting down and holding a book. Hard to actually qualify how that difference manifests itself, but, although subtle, I do find it significant.

Still, on Io's observation of the Reverend Coles' book, I'm liking the sort of soft praise. There is much to be said for enjoyment of this type that is mellow and lazy (but in a good sense) rather than full on and in your face. Compare it, if you like, to the pleasures of doing nothing: underplayed in this world, but important nevertheless.

[Cord Hurn]

Currently reading East of Eden by John Steinbeck.

[Iolanthe]

Still, on Io's observation of the Reverend Coles' book, I'm liking the sort of soft praise. There is much to be said for enjoyment of this type that is mellow and lazy (but in a good sense) rather than full on and in your face. Compare it, if you like, to the pleasures of doing nothing: underplayed in this world, but important nevertheless.

Peter, if you like Dickens, I recommend you try listening to Martin Jarvis reading one. He is fabulous. I've just listened to Oliver Twist, which I have never read before. Also Dombey and Son, again completely new to me. I can't knit and read a book, but I can knit and listen to a book. I've been through all the Dickens, Trollope, Elizabeth Gaskell, Jane Austen, George Elliot and many more. My latest are the Witcher books. Never seen the telly version but finding the books very enjoyable, and a great narrator too.

[Cord Hurn]

Now reading Emma, by Jane Austen.

[aliantha]

Austen is always a good choice, Cord Hurn.

Just started Braiding Sweetgrass by Robin Wall Kimmerer. Apparently it got super popular during the shutdown, but I'd never heard of it 'til I read an article about it a few weeks ago. It's very good so far. The author is a botanist and a member of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation.

[sgt.null]

Now reading Emma, by Jane Austen.

I spent a few days trying to read Austen.

Could not do it.

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

Science of Logic by G.W.F. Hegel (tr. Miller)





… along with …

A Commentary to Hegel's 'Science of Logic' by David Gray Carlson

Update: Just passed the halfway-mark a few days ago.

I've read some of the ostensibly hardest books in Philosophy and Theology. Books from Deleuze, Derrida, Kant, JPII, Lonergan, Schelling, Przywara, etc. But, my God!, none of them have had anything on Science of Logic.

Normally it would take me 3, maybe 4, weeks to finish an 800+ pp book. True, Hegel's Phenomenology (500+ pp) took me 3 months. It was also a tough nut, but then again, I read that one without a net. However, even with the crutch of the attendant Commentary, I'm currently pushin' the 4 month mark on the SoL, largely due to its unremitting density and high level of abstraction. Every page, every paragraph, is a labor. I shudder to think how long it would take me to finish (if at all) without said crutch.

Brutal.

[Fist and Faith]

I've had that problem with Nagel's Mind and Cosmos.... I have to figure out what, it seems, every sentence means, before I can move on to the next. But by the time I figure out what the next one means, I have to go back and refresh myself on what the previous one means.

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

I've had that problem with Nagel's Mind and Cosmos.... I have to figure out what, it seems, every sentence means, before I can move on to the next. But by the time I figure out what the next one means, I have to go back and refresh myself on what the previous one means.

Sounds like it was worth the push. You're no longer a Reductive Empiricist/Materialist, amirite?

Ironic part is that Hegel is the polar opposite, viz., a Reductive Idealist/Spiritualist (which FTR, I am decidedly not).

[Fist and Faith]

Nagel was irrelevant. It was all Z.

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

Nagel was irrelevant. It was all Z.

Hat-tip to Z.

[Fist and Faith]

Indeed

[Linna Heartbooger]

Aww, fun conversation to drop in on the tail end of!!
...Wos asking Fist "You're no longer a Reductive Empiricist/Materialist, amirite?" followed by Fist saying, "It was all Z."


I'm reading "Anna Karenina" right now.

And the 3rd book in Naomi Novik's "Scholomance" series, "The Golden Enclaves."

Also, "Bold Love," which I call my sociopath book, though it's actually about the wrestling match that is any relationship with another Flawed Human Being.
(but it does specifically confront questions of 'how one would deal with someone who might answer to the description of a "sociopath"?' head-on. not a super-common feature of lotsa stuff you find!)

[Cord Hurn]

Now reading Emma, by Jane Austen.

I spent a few days trying to read Austen.

Could not do it.

I struggle with it, I admit, as there is lots and lots of pages of the characters talking about each other, but very little action, dramatic or otherwise.

[duke]

We just did 'Boy' by Roald Dahl for a book club I run. A surprisingly candid memoir of his childhood. He describes boarding school and corporal punishment, and some fun adventures. Simple true life adventure stories very well told. Dahl wrote back to his Mum weekly all through his boarding school years, and continued this tradition on until the end of his mother's life. It is a children's book, but it is still fun and interesting even though I'm no longer a child. Recommended.

[Avatar]

One of my favourites as a kid. If you're interested, there is a sequel called "Going Solo."

--A

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

Science of Logic by G.W.F. Hegel (tr. Miller)



… along with …

A Commentary to Hegel's 'Science of Logic' by David Gray Carlson

Update: Just passed the halfway-mark a few days ago.

I've read some of the ostensibly hardest books in Philosophy and Theology. Books from Deleuze, Derrida, Kant, JPII, Lonergan, Schelling, Przywara, etc. But, my God!, none of them have had anything on Science of Logic.

Normally it would take me 3, maybe 4, weeks to finish an 800+ pp book. True, Hegel's Phenomenology (500+ pp) took me 3 months. It was also a tough nut, but then again, I read that one without a net. However, even with the crutch of the attendant Commentary, I'm currently pushin' the 4 month mark on the SoL, largely due to its unremitting density and high level of abstraction. Every page, every paragraph, is a labor. I shudder to think how long it would take me to finish (if at all) without said crutch.

Brutal.

Done. Finally.

Ten months. Ten looong months.



〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰

And now, onward.

Elements of the Philosophy of Right by G.W.F. Hegel



… along with …

Routledge Philosophy GuideBook to Hegel and the Philosophy of Right by Dudley Knowles

[Avatar]

Just read Chuck Palahniuk's Snuff last night, (a work colleague wanted my opinion on it) and I was actually pleasantly surprised. I hadn't expected to like it, and I started off thinking "this is too obvious" and then when they "confirmed" what was obvious, thought, "it's obviously not this" and then that it was too overwrought. But apart from the really cheesy ending, the last few chapters really pulled it back and I ended up enjoying it more than I had expected to.

--A

[Rigel]

Just read The Great Gatsby for the first time since high school, and it's a really good book. As my dad would say, "Whodathunk!"