eightbitsamurai, StJohn, DiamondLou86, AnSionnachRua, _refugee_, minimum_wage, flagamuffin, fuffle, b_b, hugitout, JakobVirgil, zebra2, AdSeriatim, mk, thenewgreen, SufficientGrace, ecib, kleinbl00, cliffelam, hootsbox, lil, rezzeJ, cgod, blackbootz, onehunna, AshShields, BLOB_CASTLE, insomniasexx, kuli, cowboyhaze, louderwords, Floatbox, maynard, hiss, NikolaiFyodorov, Meriadoc, wasoxygen, BlackBird, jayfixkleenit, crimsonlight, Kaius, spearhard
@eightbitsamurai@, @StJohn@, @DiamondLou86@, @AnSionnachRua@, @_refugee_@, @minimum_wage@, @flagamuffin@, @fuffle@, @b_b@, @hugitout@, @JakobVirgil@, @zebra2@, @AdSeriatim@, @mk@, @thenewgreen@, @SufficientGrace@, @ecib@, @kleinbl00@, @cliffelam@, @hootsbox@, @lil@, @rezzeJ@, @cgod@, @blackbootz@, @onehunna@, @AshShields@, @BLOB_CASTLE@, @insomniasexx@, @kuli@, @cowboyhaze@, @louderwords@, @Floatbox@, @maynard@, @hiss@, @NikolaiFyodorov@, @Meriadoc@, @wasoxygen@, @BlackBird@, @jayfixkleenit@, @crimsonlight@, @Kaius@, @spearhard@
I know we're a week late, but here's the second discussion of week two. Unfortunately I haven't been able to keep up, despite this being one of the best books I read in 2013 (last year!)
I hope you all enjoyed it! I don't have the list of who leads the club next, but if you're one of them and want to lead this round, come forward in the comments as well!
Flag, Meriadoc and humanodon: I'm down. My wife just finished a book that she couldn't put down and keeps telling me I have to read. I probably should have listened so I remembered the name ;p -Don't tell her. I'll find out what it was tomorrow. Other than that, it's long but the most entertaining read I've had in the last 5 years was Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell -So good. But it's long. I might suggest some Vonnegut. People love Vonnegut and even if it meant re-reading his work, I'd be down. Meriadoc, maybe you should make a post? Do we know who wanted to go next as moderator?
I was also going to suggest fantasy/sci-fi as a 'break' from the heavy stuff we've tackled lately. Jonathan Strange was a bit long, you're right. Odd book. Vonnegut ... I dunno if I need a reading group to read Vonnegut. Can sit down and read almost any of his books in three hours. Just my two cents. We'll need another big thread to decide anyway. EDIT: I think I was slated to make the next round of posts but I might be making that up.
I'm totally okay with you being the ring master. All valid criticisms of my choices. I like the idea of sic-fi too but you're right, we need a larger discussion to decide. Bring it on. I'd suggest shouting-out to past participants.
humanodon I really want to keep going, but we do need to boost participation, and I think a good way would be something easy and fun that lots of people would be into, so I'm going to suggest a very effective tactic one of my college English professors employed: we should do a graphic novel. Something good and literary, but simple and fun, enough to bring back a lot of the people and bring in new people, and maybe be a good break from the heavy literature and a good segue into something else. Thoughts?
Personally, I love graphic novels and read them fairly often. I have posted things about graphic novels and comics in the past, but they haven't gotten much interest for whatever reason. While I like the idea, another obstacle does come to mind, namely, availability. My local library doesn't carry them, though I imagine a small selection might be available via inter-library loan. I know that university libraries tend to carry more of them, particularly if said universities have strong art or design programs. However, barring that, graphic novels are not exactly cheap and I doubt that buying them would appeal to someone who doesn't already buy them. I do like the idea, and will endorse it if interest can be generated, but I think that the availability thing might be an issue. That said, there are some really, really great graphic novels out there and even very literary comic book series that have been collected into trade paperbacks, for example, Brian Azzarello's 100 Bullets or Neil Gaiman's Sandman. I agree that the stuff we've been reading is dense and heavy and I can certainly see how people who don't seek that kind of stuff on their own, would quickly drop it, so yeah, whatever it is we move on to, fun or pleasure should be a main feature.
Availability and price are problems, however I have no qualms with finding magnet links for .cbr files of them or the like. They're always available, but again who knows if it will bring people in. I'll make a post soon and get a feel for what the people think.
I wouldn't mind; there are some interesting titles on that list we compiled. At this point, I'm out of ideas on how to boost participation. It really seems like the biggest issue is variations in reading speed, followed by remembering to actually read the book. I get that people have stuff going on though. Especially you student types. That said, I am in the middle of reading something, but if deciding on what to read takes even half as long as it has in the past, it shouldn't pose a problem.
Oh, about the guys that won the Nobel in economics a few years ago, right? That seemed like a really interesting story, I'll have to take a look. Secret War is interesting, probably biased but I haven't gotten too far yet. He writes with clarity.
Well, it's a book club, but we're having some trouble with participation at the moment. Come to think of it though, hubski itself is a bit like a book club, in that we mostly discuss various articles and then go off on tangents (my favorite part). Anyway, if you want to join (I sold it so well, I know) or if you have any ideas, don't be shy.
Ok cool! We have a rotating "leadership", so either Meriadoc or flagamuffin can add you to the shoutout list when we start taking suggestions for the next round. As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, we're looking for something fun and manageable for the next round, so once again, if you've got any ideas, please mention it here or in the next #hubskibookclub post that comes out. Edit: now that I think of it, I'm not on the list either!
Yeah, a while ago. I think I should have written something up while it was still fresh. I remember I didn't really care for the ending, what with the kid dying in the can (am I remembering that right?). I remember thinking that it's odd that there were so many names of characters in that band of scalp hunters, but that in the end it's really only the judge and the kid that matter. I'm not really sure how much I got out of that book honestly. I'd be willing to give it another read at some point in the future.
I had a similar feeling regarding the ending, I wasn't thrilled with it but given the rest of the book I didn't really expect to be -meaning I knew it wouldn't be a "happy" affair. What I got out of reading BM was more about style than anything. Don't get me wrong, it had substance too but it was written in a way that no other book I've ever read has been. It took a while before I felt totally comfortable with the lack of punctuation but eventually I was cool with it. However, I do think there were times when I wasn't clear on who was speaking. Anyone else? The Judge is evil incarnate. Spooky literary character. If this were Stephen King, he would be Flagg. I don't have much else to say about the book but I will say I'm glad I read it. I've had Cormac McCarthy on my list for a while now. I'm up for another round of book club though if ya'll are....?
I was really fascinated by the ending, actually. The way the Judge set the Kid up as a Judas, very heavy on the biblical (or satanic) imagery during that conversation in the cell. This felt almost like a dark myth at times. Weird book. I truly feel like McCarthy discovered this Judge character in his head one day and created a place for him to exist in equilibrium, and that place was Blood Meridian.
I agree with this . . . but not with this. One reason, is that for the whole narrative, McCarthy builds up the mystery of why the Judge meticulously documents things and then destroys them, while alluding to his superhuman abilities of speaking any language he needs to, his fiddle playing and numerous other skills. Also, I don't think equilibrium is the word, since this book is pretty clearly about what happens when equilibrium is lost. The Kid is not a foil to the Judge: The Kid seems to represent the everyday evil that is complicity. thenewgreen, I definitely feel like this book was more style than substance (which I sometimes don't mind) but in this case it left me feeling like I've missed something. That said, I don't feel compelled to work out what that is.I truly feel like McCarthy discovered this Judge character in his head one day
and created a place for him to exist in equilibrium, and that place was Blood Meridian.
To me it merely seems that the world adapts to shape the Judge rather than vice versa. Say not 'equilibrium', but 'his natural state'. If, as you both seem to agree, the book is more style than substance, I may be misreading/reading too much into this -- but I'm not sure I agree with your assessment. For one thing, McCarthy has some definite ideas about humanity, war, the place violence has in nature, so on. For another, the Judge's monologues seem to be all substance and no style (in the sense that you get also with Ayn Rand when the belief behind the narrative briefly overcomes the narrative in a way that doesn't flow or make sense contextually). Ultimately it depends on the author's sincerity.
I'm having trouble remembering the details of the environs of the book. I remember they were in the mountains with snow and in the desert, but not exactly what was going on around/within those scenes. When the mercenaries enter the towns and cities, it goes from civilized to debauched in a matter of sentences, but I can't say I recall an instance where I centered that change on the Judge. This was one of those books that seemed to be a vehicle for the author to talk about human nature, like 2666. The characters aren't really characters at all, but figures positioned to comment on one thing or another, or to illustrate it. However, I don't feel (from what I remember) that the Judge's monologues really accomplished any direct commentary. It feels like it was supposed to illustrate the kinds of rationales used by individuals who end up being deemed "evil" but without any real exploration of it. Every piece of writing depends on the writer's sincerity, even if it's a piece of satire or entirely a joke. No doubt McCarthy had ideas about what this story might evoke in a reader, but I don't feel like the book and I succeeded in discovering what that might be.To me it merely seems that the world adapts to shape the Judge rather than vice versa. Say not 'equilibrium', but 'his natural state'.
For another, the Judge's monologues seem to be all substance and no style (in the sense that you get also with Ayn Rand when the belief behind the narrative briefly overcomes the narrative in a way that doesn't flow or make sense contextually).
Inre: first part. The environs aren't so much important as is the extremely lawless aspect of the time and place. The Judge has characteristics that couldn't exist in a lot of other places. McCarthy decided to write a book where war could indeed be god, and he set it in a place where that was often true. I said at the outset that this reminded me a ton of 2666. Same setting, same non-characters like you say. Same commentary on humanity (though done worse in 2666).