I've always been an avid reader and, like as for films, I've kept a list of all the books I've read since 1970. (Films seen since 1964).
I last read George Orwell's seminal work in 1983, recalling that I wanted to re-read it then before the actual title year came around. I'd first encountered it seven years before that, so this was my third reading - and what a rewarding experience it was! This book has substance. After so many mediocre thrillers, replete with grisly murders, throwaway plots, laughable dialogue, unconvincing scenarios, it was a true pleasure to get back to a writer who knew how to write. (Though I must cite an exception in having recently read John Grisham's 'A Painted House' - Very impressive, and totally different from his usual contemporary courtroom dramas.)
I'd remembered '1984' well, of course. The book was and is still unique in its scary description of a future totalitarian society, which other authors have tried to emulate though none have yet equalled. Then, of course, there was also the John Hurt/Richard Burton film released (but only just) still in the year of the book's title - maybe worth watching on its own terms, but coming so far short of the reading experience itself that once is quite enough.
Even though in the novel I vaguely remembered the point happening at which Winston Smith was uncovered as a traitor to the system and 'Big Brother', and who had betrayed him, reading it again still sent a breath-stopping chill through me. This is what writing should be like!
False memories had misled me into thinking that long passages detailing society and its laws and prohibitions ('a novel within a novel') were borderline-boring and over-extended. This time I did not find them so - and though pages long, they were not as lengthy as I'd thought I'd remembered. I even read the novel's entire appendix ('The Principles of Newspeak') which I'd skipped on my earlier readings.
I'm glad I did this. It's given me faith in good writing again - and at a mere 250 pages it's concise as compared with many of today's bloated offerings. I've taken out 'Animal Farm' (a super-attractive 120 pages long) also for a third read, the last time being 23 years ago, but I think before that I might prefer to dust off an old Thomas Hardy again while I've still got eyes to read.
Looking forward to trawling through more classics. I find that in re-reading books it's quite likely that one can enjoy them at least as much as the first time, maybe even more. A new(ish) world has (re-)opened up!
Ohhhh Ray, you have spurred me on. I have just finished reading Emma, Jane Austen. I have her other books but I was going to read some of the Bronte sisters. maybe I need to read this again.
ReplyDeleteWe still don't have a television. We cant agree on what size or if it should be one of these new curved screen ones. it is too much on offer and too little funds. I keep watching dvds on my laptop.
Maybe you should do a read along? you list the books and others read them and then the comments should be good... makes it all more enjoyable?
Sol, Austen was one of those writers whom I didn't 'get' until middle age - when I discovered that the fault was mine in trying to read her too fast. She writes in language to be savoured and rolled around in the brain - and she is now one of my very favourite writers of all.
DeleteI've read all her novels at least twice and they make for excellent re-reads. Difficult to pick out just one but her final one, 'Persuasion', does take some beating for sheer beauty of prose, if nothing else.
Of course all this admiration of her writing talent was put into uestion a few years ago when it was revealed (or theorised) that a lot of the credit given to here should also be accorded to her publisher who edited and corrected her grammar and spelling and added more than a few touches of his own in expanding descriptions of various characters. But I'd rather not think too deeply about that. All the Austen's are certainly on my 'bucket list' to read again - and I'll make sure they pop up here in postings as and when I read them (as will the Brontes).
It hadn't occurred to me that you might not have a TV. I got a cheapo big-screen one (an LG, then about £250) about 3 years ago but it's done me well, though I can't play DVDs - and can't even play them on this old computer either.
In your last para "read along" - did you mean "read-athon"?. Whatever, as I say to Paul (below) I'll probably do a posting of each of the 'classics' I re-read as I finish them.
I've also found that in re-reading some of these (now in my later years) that there are fragments and nuances that were missed the first time round. Or, perhaps, age gave me more insight.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely, C. More than with films, I think that re-experiencing books nearly always brings to the surface qualities one hadn't appreciated on an initial read. That first time probably the plotline was the most important thing. But once that expectation has been removed it's like seeing with fresh eyes. Though I also agree that the added years one has experienced must alter one's own perspective, usually for the better, certainly affording greater insight.
DeleteI remember reading this book in concert with Brave New World. Both were chilling in their own way.
ReplyDeleteI've been looking for the Aldous Huxley for a re-read but can't place my hand on it. I only ever read it the once, a good 40 years ago, and felt then that it wasn't really of the same excellent quality as the Orwell. But I could well change my mind if I can find it - or buy another used paperback of it.
DeleteThe only other Huxley I've read was 'Eyeless in Gaza', which I remember as quite heavy-going.
I haven't entered a movie theater in almost two months. There is nothing there that interests me. That is not to say that I haven't seen any movies - I have, but on television. I saw Larry Krammer's heartbreaking "The Normal Heart" and oh, what a punch it packed! I'm glad that it was entrusted to HBO (who gave us "Candelabra") as they are the only ones who could do it justice - not having to worry about filling movie theaters and trying to please the homophobes. Although it was shown on television in the US, I hope it is brought to you across the pond on the big screen so you can experience the brave people who fought to bring the reality of the disease to an uninterested people.
ReplyDeleteI have also been doing some re-reading. I am now enjoying Whitman's "Leaves Of Grass" again, coupled with Walt Whitman: A Gay Life" (thanks to blogger, Stephen for informing me of this book)
I recently watched "Barrymore" with Christopher Plummer. and that inspired me to take my biography of John Barrymore off of my bookshelf and re-read it.
I am delighted that you are posting about books again. It should inspire some some lively discussions.
Paul, it's been a fairly arid time at the cinema, though still with the occasional quality release. It'll get very flat when the long school hols start here in about 6 weeks time.
Delete'The Normal Heart' was on TV here just last night, BUT only on satellite, which I don't have, and also on very late (for me) in any case, so I probably wouldn't have watched it. It's not being given a theatrical release here. If it's repeated on one of the more accessible channels at a more reasonable time then of course I'll give it a view, not least because of the sizzling presence of Mark R.
I did actually see the play on the London stage with Martin Sheen about 30 years ago. The entire climate around the subject has changed dramatically since then (that being the heartless Reagan era) though it must still carry a punch, which I guess will be more than just an historical one.
Earlier this year I finished 'Leaves of Grass' for the third time, reading one poem per day. I must say that on each reading W.W.'s putting down in words what dared not be said aloud re same-sex attraction, even though understandably veiled by today's standards, was an extremely courageous thing to do. However I do find that rather too many of his poems contain 'lists' which seem to be something of a self-congratulating display of knowledge, dulling the impact of what he's trying to say.
I know very little about the author as a man, apart from his being reviled in some quarters, those same people who today would demand that he be removed from public libraries. I'd be interested in putting more flesh on what I know about him so thank you for suggesting that book that had been recommended to you.
Likewise I know very little about Barrymore, even less than I do for W.W. The Plummer film/programme has, as far as I know, not surfaced here.
I'd often though about posting reviews of books as I do for films, after I've finished them. But there's a lack of topicality on the subject which cinema does have. (I can't afford to buy newly-published books while they are still 'hot' and talked about.) But I can certainly post about my re-reads of 'classics' as each one is ticked off. I'm pleased that this particular post has had such a positive response.
I bought an e-reader (Kindle) less than 3 years ago and discovered that many of the classics are free. So, I started doing the same thing. I just finished re-reading "1984" a few months ago, and found it powerful, interesting, and a bit too reality based. I've yet to pick up Animal Farm (I'm not sure if it's free on Kindle; so I may have to pay for it).
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you should have found '1984' too reality based. It was written in 1947/48 just after the horrors of WWII when knowledge of what had really been going on behind the Third Reich's facade became generally known and before the West got to know the truth about Stalin's Russia when it still had major high-profile champions on this continent and in America. If what you say is true - and it might well be - it must mean that we don't learn our lessons.
DeleteI've been sorely tempted to buy a Kindle but it's not just the initial cost that's put me off but I'd need instruction on how to download books being still, despite the possession of my current contraption, pretty much computer illiterate. But you make a strong case for it.
buy a kindle Ray. Seriously, I had a kindle and then I got a paperwhite a month ago. The paper white is excellent. it is fantastic to read at night with. My father really gets on well with his. You can change the font size and even listen to it, read the book out to you.
ReplyDeleteIt is very easy. if you can save to your desktop and drag things around you can put things on a kindle.
I think last time I looked there are 3000 free to download titles.
I have found lots of self published ebooks by some people who blog exceptional. so well written and all on things I am really interested in.
Try one in a shop like currys etc. the staff will show you how to work it
Points noted, Sol. All I need now is the money, With no exaggeration, it really is a day-to-day hand-to-mouth existence for me. If my TV or my computer went down anytime (the latter getting increasingly likely) I'd have to survive without those until God knows when. At the moment a Kindle is a luxury too far, particularly as it's not a necessary addition to my life, but I do pick up your enthusiastic recommendation for which I thank you.
DeleteI enjoyed my second read of that novel a couple of years ago. I found it online for free and read it on my desktop screen. Since I was in high school when I read it first, There was much detail I had forgotten (or didn't really understand then) and I'm really happy to have read it again. What is really chilling to me is how much of that "fiction" seems to fit today's reality.
ReplyDeleteYes, it's a good, solid read, Walt - and even though I'd only first read it on becoming adult, and in spite of another read later, I found that third time round I'd already been planting false memories of the book. Good to have them corrected - but will my mind revert to creating or resurrecting more false memories? I think that a lot of people 'suffer' from this syndrome, though it's not nice to admit to having it.
Deletethe book is chilling in its depiction of a tyranny which is, in reality, not that far away for any of us, despite the fall of Communism (well, largely anyhow) and large-scale international fascism. But I think anyone who thinks it only alludes to these is deluding him/herself.
I'd like to read it yet another time - if the fates allowed me to.