Refusing to Read

[Grack21]

I haven't read Iggulden myself and have certainly read other comments about his books being bad examples of historical novels.

However, it is not at all necessarily inaccurate of him to mention "corn fields" in ancient Rome since he is a British author. "Corn" is one of the words which has a different definition in British English than it does in American English. In the USA, we only use the word "corn" to describe the North American plant where kernels grow on a cob. In England, the word "corn" is often just a synonym for "grain". To a British writer, oats, wheat, rye, barley, etc., are all forms of "corn", and if he wanted to refer specifically to what we call "corn" in the USA he would have said "maize".

I stand corrected! (Still think the writing is awful :P )

[wolverine]

I stand corrected! (Still think the writing is awful :P )

He is horribly historically inaccurate in his Ghengis Khan novels. And he does it in ways that make no sense at all. The changes he makes to history are not done to make a better story they just make him seem like he does not know what he is talking about.

[Gabriele]

He is horribly historically inaccurate in his Ghengis Khan novels. And he does it in ways that make no sense at all. The changes he makes to history are not done to make a better story they just make him seem like he does not know what he is talking about.

Same goes for his Caesar books. He's a lousy researcher who failed to grasp the 'historical' of Historical Fiction. ;)

[Guest Raids]

I'm sick of religion as a theme and/or force in literature in fantasy. It doesn't bother me overly much in historical fiction since it's accurate, but too much faith in my fantasy, sci fi, spec fic, whatever, annoys me.

For instance, I just put down Harkwood's Voyage when the Prelate comes on the scene about 40-50 pages in.

I will pick it back up because I like everything else about the book so far, but it was enough to make me want to read the other book I downloaded at the same time first.

[kuroishi]

Close to the subject of this thread, France just cancelled the commemoration for the 50th year since the death of Louis-Ferdinand Céline, great novelist and dedicated anti-semite.

It's nearly fifty years since the death of one of France's greatest 20th century novelists: Louis Ferdinand Auguste Destouches, more commonly known under his nom de plume, Louis-Ferdinand Céline. And yet there will be no officially sanctioned celebration for the author of Journey to the End of the Night and North. It has been decided by the Culture Minister, after strong protests from France's Jewish community, that Céline will not be commemorated in the official French cultural celebrations for 2011.

the President of the Association of Sons and Daughters of Deported French Jews (FFDJF) , Serge Klarsfeld reacted immediately: "It would be an honourable act, if the Culture Minister were to remove Céline from the list immediately, as we have been requesting." He went on to comment that: "His (Céline's) authorial talent should not make us forget that this was a man who called for the murder of Jews under the occupation. If the Republic celebrates him, it will bring shame upon itself."

Henri Godard, one of France's leading Céline scholars, greeted Mitterand's announcement on Friday with dismay, saying that he felt "completely trapped by this about turn" and added sardonically "I thought that we had changed, that the ghosts had been laid to rest. The term of celebration is mistaken. This is not a question of a hagiography, or arranging a memorial, but about using this anniversary in order to look at Céline's writing, which is more and more widely read, afresh."

Céline has always been a touchy issue, he's considered a great writer and his novels are still widely read, but at the same time nobody would ever defend his political views. As they don't really appear in his most well-known books (I've only read Voyage au bout de la nuit), the public opinion is acting as if there is a total dichotomy between the man he was and the books he wrote.

I don't really know what to think of the cancellation. I don't really care for the kind of political correctness I can feel behind this sort of decision, but at the same time, I can't deny that celebrating the man would be weird. Maybe they could hold some sort of celebration on the anniversary of one of his books' publication.

[Kraken]

I've never read him, but I think in the case of dead authors, it's silly to get hung up on their personal views. Especially if said views are not heavily influencing their work. He and his beliefs have nothing to gain whereas the reader could have something to gain from an important work.

It's not like living authors whom you would be actively supporting with your money and potentially indirectly empowering their views by giving them more clout through popularity/exposure or money to use to further their goals.

[palimpsest.]

Hyperion aside, Simmons does not do well on rereads (I say this with great regret, as he was once one of my favourite authors evar and I love to reread).

I found Terror to be as enjoyable on the re-read as it was the first time I had read it, and while I've not yet re-read Drood, I loved it on the first read.

On the other hand, I struggled with Ilium, never finished Olympos, and Song of Kali, too, was nothing much. I don't really know where to put Simmons - he wrote some very good books, he wrote some pretty bad books. For some time, I was sure he was one of my favourite authors, too; now I'm not so sure anymore. :dunno:

[Liadin]

I don't really know what to think of the cancellation. I don't really care for the kind of political correctness I can feel behind this sort of decision, but at the same time, I can't deny that celebrating the man would be weird. Maybe they could hold some sort of celebration on the anniversary of one of his books' publication.

From the bits you quoted they'd be commemorating the person, not the books.

[Grack21]

Same goes for his Caesar books. He's a lousy researcher who failed to grasp the 'historical' of Historical Fiction. ;)

If that guy did any actually research, I'll give you 10 imaginary internet dollars. He probably saw a history channel episode once. And the last half at that.

Caesar and Brutus growing up on a farm together.....ugggggggg.

[kuroishi]

From the bits you quoted they'd be commemorating the person, not the books.

Yeah, that's why there's a problem with this situation.

[Liadin]

Yeah, that's why there's a problem with this situation.

Right, and I see absolutely no problem with people protesting/cancelling a commemoration of an author based on the fact that he held certain repugnant views. Any more than I see a problem with their protesting or cancelling an event honoring a politician, artist, etc., for the same reason. You can read the books, view the paintings etc. without having to hold a celebration of that person.

(Of course, not honoring someone based on reasons such as anti-Semitism or racism faces a slippery slope--go back far enough in time and nearly everyone held views we'd find repugnant today. This guy was 20th century though, so that's not really a problem.)

[Old Nan]

Life of the artist + 70 years is the metric I usually use for when the stain of evil lifts off a person, shamelessly lifting from copyright law. At that point pretty much everyone who was directly wronged by the artist is dead, just as they would've been otherwise, so there's no real room to complain.

[Gabriele]

If that guy did any actually research, I'll give you 10 imaginary internet dollars. He probably saw a history channel episode once. And the last half at that.

Caesar and Brutus growing up on a farm together.....ugggggggg.

If his books are representative of the level of the US History Channel, I have to say the German version is slightly better. ;)

[Grack21]

If his books are representative of the level of the US History Channel, I have to say the German version is slightly better. ;)

The History Channel has gone to total shit in the last few years. Non stop shows about 2012 and Nostradamus. Oh and Freemasons. I mean, I'm talking stuff so ridiculous you can find info to discredit it on WIKIPEIDA. It's that bad.

[Gabriele]

The History Channel has gone to total shit in the last few years. Non stop shows about 2012 and Nostradamus. Oh and Freemasons. I mean, I'm talking stuff so ridiculous you can find info to discredit it on WIKIPEIDA. It's that bad.

What's so special about 2012? Another Apocalypse? :P

[Grack21]

What's so special about 2012? Another Apocalypse? :P

People think the worlds going to end because they read an article in a tabloid once. It's insane and stupid and humanity is doomed.

[SkynJay]

Wait, did someone endorse the movie over the book Starship Troopers? That movie was terrible, the strange football game where the front flip is a strong move? An unnecessary coed shower? Laser butt bugs? Denise Richards allowed screen time? Man i hated that movie.

Where as i always thought the book provided a realistic world. I didn't agree with the mans worldview, but the government setup was grown in a believable way. And i love the mech suit combat.

[Grack21]

Wait, did someone endorse the movie over the book Starship Troopers? That movie was terrible, the strange football game where the front flip is a strong move? An unnecessary coed shower? Laser butt bugs? Denise Richards allowed screen time? Man i hated that movie.

Where as i always thought the book provided a realistic world. I didn't agree with the mans worldview, but the government setup was grown in a believable way. And i love the mech suit combat.

Starship Troopers was actually it's own film before the film company bought the rights to the book and told Verhoven he was making a Starship Troopers movie now. Basically all they did was change the names of the characters to those from the book, and add a few planet names. Even the bugs smash earth with a asteroid was in the original script I think. (That might have been added later). If you watch the movie knowing that it makes a lot more sense.

And speaking of separating the work from the person, I have kinda a problem with that with Dahl sometimes. I mean, his books are great, BFG for the win, but man, that guy was a Class A anti-Semite.

[Galactus]

Wait, did someone endorse the movie over the book Starship Troopers? That movie was terrible, the strange football game where the front flip is a strong move? An unnecessary coed shower? Laser butt bugs? Denise Richards allowed screen time? Man i hated that movie.

Where as i always thought the book provided a realistic world. I didn't agree with the mans worldview, but the government setup was grown in a believable way. And i love the mech suit combat.

The movie was a fun cheesy comedy.

The only way the book was realistic is that it would show how a person completely buys into propaganda.