I started Taylor's "A Secular Age," but it's quite long so I'll see how long it takes me. I do find such historical treatments interesting though, and I agree with the thesis that "modernity is just sloughing off superstition and cutting away useless custom" explanations of the emergence of secularism leave much to be desired.



One of my favorite!



Is it any good? I have liked some of DBH's books, others I found a bit plodding.

I read The Invention of Morel earlier this year. It's great, and surprising in a way I can't reveal without spoiling the story. — Jamal

Cool. I am on a Latin American streak, currently reading The Obscene Bird of Night by Jose Donoso. Will look for this next.

Is it (Bentley Hart's latest) any good? I have liked some of DBH's books, others I found a bit plodding. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Well, to be honest, I'm finding that he's rehearsing many arguments that I've been having here, so at the moment, early stages, it's a bit ho-hum. I really do like DBH but then I also get the sense he's mainly preaching to the choir a lot of the time. But, I'll persist.

I started Taylor's "A Secular Age," but it's quite long so I'll see how long it takes me. — Count Timothy von Icarus

I've also got that massive doorstop of a book. I've never read all of it. I think it's useful to dive in for some themes that he explores - like his idea of 'the buffered self'.

Cult X by Fuminori Nakamura

Bleak House by Dickens.
A return to fiction after a long hiatus.

Dead Souls by Nikolai Gogol — Jamal

I really think Penguin have done a disservice to Gogol with this cover. It perfectly aligns with the stereotype of Russian literature so often thrown around by people who have read none of it (or have read one or two Dostoevsky novels and feel qualified to speak about the rest). The title, and covers like this, were enough to put me off for a long time.

In fact, Dead Souls is a comic novel, mostly bouncy and light in tone, not ponderous and depressing. The descriptions and similes are exuberantly weird. I particularly liked the apparently undisciplined digressions into irrelevant detail, which would these days be called maximalism. Also fascinating is Gogol's metafictional defence of his own literary style and motivations, within the narration itself. Sometimes it seems that he is writing about writing as much as about the Russian countryside, bureaucracy, hypocrisy, etc.

Ultimately though — and this is where personal taste comes in — I found the sarcasm heavy-handed, the satire obvious, the hyperbole awkward, the characters merely sketched, and the lengthy rhapsodic evocation of "Rus" tedious (even when ironic). This is partly because of the anticlimactic fifty pages of narration after Chichikov has already left town, and partly because much is lost in translation. I expect to come back around to liking it down the line, when I might try a different translation.

I expect to come back around to liking it down the line, when I might try a different translation. — Jamal

I had the virtually same reactions to this breezily sardonic novel a couple of years ago - same edition. I wondered three things - was my ambivalent reaction a cultural matter, a problem of translation or had the bloody thing simply dated?

All of the above I suspect. But I should give it time; I sometimes misjudge a book in its immediate aftermath.

The Obscene Bird of Night by Jose Donoso — SophistiCat

Looks interesting. How is it?

One of my favorite! — Count Timothy von Icarus

As you can see above, I have mixed feelings about it. I like the Petersburg stories a lot more.

Next, probably one of these:

• The Reefs of Earth by R. A. Lafferty
• We Have Always Lived in the Castle by Shirley Jackson
• Not Wanted on the Voyage by Timothy Findley
• Darconville's Cat by Alexander Theroux

have read one or two Dostoevsky novels and feel qualified to speak about the rest — Jamal

Hey, I resemble that remark.

I really do like DBH but then I also get the sense he's mainly preaching to the choir a lot of the time

For the most part, although his book on universalism got some pretty firey criticism from the ol' infernalist crowd :rofl:

I skipped ahead in Taylor's book an I think he makes some very good points about the "authenticity" and "anti-conformist" movements' ultimate failings and co-option by market capitalism, or the essential emptiness at the center of Brooks' "bobos" (bohemian bourgeoisie). I know he is quite old now and probably enjoying retirement, but I do wonder how Taylor looks at the core bobo group, tech workers, increasingly coming to be a vocal element in the alt/nu-right and their embrace of "traditionalism."



You make a good point. I never felt that War and Peace quite fit the mold of "Russian literature," either. Anna Karenina and the Death of Ivan Iylich do more. Master and the Margarita is another one that, while dark in some ways, breaks the "mold" in being quite playful at times.

I am a big fan of Viktor Pelavin, a contemporary Russian author who writes a similarly playful yet serious "magical realism."

You make a good point. I never felt that War and Peace quite fit the mold of "Russian literature," either. Anna Karenina and the Death of Ivan Iylich do more. Master and the Margarita is another one that, while dark in some ways, breaks the "mold" in being quite playful at times. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Yep.

The bleakest work of Russian literature I've read is probably Life and Fate by Grossman. Or maybe it's harrowing, rather than bleak, since it's fundamentally optimistic and non-nihilistic. Anyway, it's great.

Viktor Pelavin — Count Timothy von Icarus

Cool, I hadn't heard of him.

Just finished "The Big Sleep" by Raymond Chandler and now starting his "Farewell, My Lovely."

The bleakest work of Russian literature I've read is probably Life and Fate by Grossman. Or maybe it's harrowing, rather than bleak, since it's fundamentally optimistic and non-nihilistic. Anyway, it's great. — Jamal

I get why you say it is non-nihilistic but it changed the shape of my nightmares forever.

It perfectly aligns with the stereotype of Russian literature so often thrown around by people who have read none of it (or have read one or two Dostoevsky novels and feel qualified to speak about the rest). — Jamal

Dostoevsky can be quite funny. Acerbic, yes, but also just plain funny. Take his Village of Stepanchikovo - his take on Tartuffe (and a dig at Gogol). A minor work, compared to his masterpieces, but a sheer comic delight.

In fact, Dead Souls is a comic novel, mostly bouncy and light in tone, not ponderous and depressing. — Jamal

Yeah, whoever picked that painting for the cover clearly had no idea what they were illustrating - just going off "bleak Russian novel" stereotype.

You make a good point. I never felt that War and Peace quite fit the mold of "Russian literature," either. — Count Timothy von Icarus

You know who is never funny? Tolstoy. Even the characters and situations that he satirizes just aren't funny. Not that you necessarily miss it in his writing - there's plenty there, even without funny-ha-ha.

The Obscene Bird of Night by Jose Donoso — SophistiCat


Looks interesting. How is it? — Jamal

I like it, so far (I am a slow reader, so bear with me). It's not a crowd-pleaser, but it's strangely engrossing.

Just finished "The Big Sleep" by Raymond Chandler and now starting his "Farewell, My Lovely." — Jafar

After Watching a couple of movies based on Chandler‘s work, a few months ago I decided to read some of his novels along with some by Dashiell Hammett. I was surprised at how different they were from the movies. Much more convoluted and, I thought, unconvincing plots and uninteresting characters. Maybe you should take that with a grain of salt given that my favorite Chandler movie is the “Long Goodbye” by Robert Altman. That was widely criticized as being far from the standard vision of Philip Marlowe, but it’s one of my all-time favorites.

On somewhat related note, there is a TV show on Netflix right now, “Spade”, that is also a revisionist presentation of Hammetts main character. I only watched one episode, but I thought it was done very well.

Maybe you should take that with a grain of salt given that my favorite Chandler movie is the “Long Goodbye” by Robert Altman. That was widely criticized as being far from the standard vision of Philip Marlowe, but it’s one of my all-time favorites. — T Clark

It's a magnificent film and, as a revisionist noir, with a twist and directed by a genius, it's hard to ignore. I quite like the world weary Robert Mitcham Farewell My Lovely (done as a period piece 2 years later). I think the books are all about dialogue and mood. The plots are incidental. I just reread The Lady in the Lake and thought it was pretty good. The problem with Chandler is that he did it so well he has been copied continuously since the 1940's and by now the situations and characters are worn out. Hence Elliott Gould in 1973.

It's a magnificent film — Tom Storm

For me, Marlowe in the “Long Goodbye” was, in spite of his goofy, sloppy appearance, a man with a fierce moral center. It’s ironic to me that the main character in “Heart of Darkness” was also named Marlow, and also a man of moral strength in a jungle of corruption. I’m sure that’s a coincidence, but I wish it weren’t.

Read Philosophy of the Home: Domestic Spaces and Happiness recently, by Emanuele Coccia.

I reviewed it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXRGXX6y-fM&t=2s

It is a very easy read with a few nice little thoughts to play with.

It's not a crowd-pleaser, but it's strangely engrossing. — SophistiCat

My kind of book!

I get why you say it is non-nihilistic but it changed the shape of my nightmares forever. — Paine

Aye, it's no picnic.

Let us know what you think of it when you're finished. — Jamal

I just finished reading the book. :smile:

My thoughts:

I) The first 20 pages of the book describes the scenario and perception of the ambient with great precision. I like how Casares goes with the rhythm of the music played by the guests —Valencia and Tea for two— and the footsteps in the upper floors. I searched on Internet and I found that these plays influenced writers and artists once, and Herman Hesse also reffered to Valencia while living dreamlike vivid experiences.

II) The woman (Faustine) with the colourful scarf who is sitting on the rocks, watching the sunset. Although I believed in her existence since the first time she appeared in the book, her enigmatic presence puzzled me. I even thought that maybe the protagonist actually dreamt about her, and everything was a product of his imagination.

III) The role and persona of Morel are obscure. I don't attempt to criticise this character, but following the dialogues, it is clear that he has hidden something since the first time he showed up in the story. Like most of the characters, he looks like a shadow reflected in the wall.

IV) When I was getting to the last pages of the book, I came to this conclusion: The museum and people inside it existed once, and due to Morel's invention, they are getting repetitive in an endless grasp of time. They look like a vivid portfolio or photograph. But I highlight that this is not an invention per se; those strange inhabitants of the island were normal people once.

A fantastic and very well written novel. The title is tricky, like The Dream of Heroes. Invention and Dream are used in a metaphorical or rhetorical sense. It is hard to see where the line of dreams and invention actually starts. What is real or a product of our imagination, etc. Casares was a master of this.

The Other Name: Septology I. by Jon Fosse.

Nice.

The title is tricky — javi2541997

Yes. When I read it I thought, why didn't they translate it as "Morel's Invention," since that is the surface meaning. Then I realized it has a double meaning: Morel as he appears has been invented too, in a sense (am I remembering it correctly?).

Then I realized it has a double meaning: Morel as he appears has been invented too, in a sense (am I remembering it correctly?). — Jamal

Yes, you remembered it correctly!

Yes, you remembered it correctly! — javi2541997

That is a relief.

The Reefs of Earth by R. A. Lafferty — Jamal

Now a new favourite author. Very odd and very entertaining. Writing that appears at first to be sloppy but is actually masterful. Fun on multiple levels. Superior to most books you see on top 10 science fiction of all time lists, and maybe could be classified as fabulist literary fiction. Also short enough to read in a day.

EDIT: Also, in a spooky coincidence, there's a scam going on in the novel perpetrated by someone described as a Pavel Ivanovich, a reference to Gogol's Dead Souls.

Mystery Cults in the Ancient World by Hugh Bowden: https://youtu.be/GMXgb2EIi7o

Pretty good reference book packed with information covering ancient Greece and Rome. Not recommended if you are seeking some fantastical nonsense. It just provides facts.

Not recommended if you are seeking some fantastical nonsense. — I like sushi

Why do fantastic themes have to be senseless? Maybe some readers want to read facts and historical events with accuracy, but I would not call the Iliad —for example— a nonsense fantasy tale.