Happy Friday! Here's some links.

I haven't done a link post in a while, both because I haven't found any good links and because I haven't had the time to look. Here are a few that tickled my fancy the past couple of days:


IO9 presents the best science-fiction published in 2008. Have any of you read these titles? Any recommendations? (For after I've completed my reading resolution, naturally!)

Speaking of my reading resolution (and of sci-fi), I've returned to DailyLit, as Accelerando, one of my RR titles, is available. I've added it to GoogleReader, so I don't have to slog through via email. The last time I tried DailyLit, I quit after a few days, so hopefully the added incentive of finishing a RR title will push me through.

Now here's an interesting idea: psychologists say Victorian novels helped us evolve into better people. What do you think? I can't speak for the Victorians, but surely Rock of Love Tour Bus is helping me evolve somehow, right? Right?

Speaking of evolution....HOLY SHIT!!

And finally, I'm glad to see someone else can relate to minds and memories that have invented their own memories. A lovely poem for your Friday.

Is knowing better than feeling?

What makes a good book, well, good?

Recently, I wondered whether knowing a book is good is better than feeling a book is good. What is better in the grand scheme of "good books"? Is one better than the other? Or are both elements necessary when judging the value of a book?

Which is more important to a book's being "good": intellectually recognizing its merits (but remaining emotionally unaffected by it) or being emotionally moved by it (despite its lacking intellectual, "literary" merit)? Or are both elements necessary to making a book "good"?

What do you think?

For shame!

The Guardian has just posted a books quiz of 2008 that gauges how well you've been following this year's book news. I took this quiz with a swagger, confident I'd pull out an ace score.

Unfortunately, I was wrong.

Out of a possible 33, I scored a 17. I am deeply ashamed.

To see how you fare, click here, then return and let me know how you've done. Hopefully you fare better than I did.

A Boon of Books

Joy to the world -- a boon of books is mine this Christmas! Not surprisingly, I have no idea where to start, but start I will, even though it means ignoring the seven or so other titles I've already got underway. I'm good at juggling -- I can hack it.

Below are the titles I received yesterday (and a few I won't receive until next week). Please leave your thoughts as to those I should read first.


From husband:

From mom:

From gift certificates:

Any thoughts on which title I should honor by reading first?

Font this

Recently, The Millions posted a thought-provoking piece by Garth Risk Hallberg, who discussed the effect of the font on the text he's reading. I've noticed myself that some newer publications have chosen more modern, funky fonts than the usual standbys. Hallberg finds some font choices distracting, and I happen to agree, although I'm hard-pressed to name a title now when it matters.

Still, Hallberg raises some interesting points, and I'd like to know your thoughts.

Specifically, I'd like you to answer two questions: (1) As a reader, do you find uncommon fonts distracting? and (2) As a writer, which font do you prefer to use?

Filling leisure intelligently

Bertrand Russell said that "To be able to fill leisure intelligently is the last product of civilization, and at present very few people have reached this level."

At first I automatically lumped myself in with the proud and few, as I spend much of my leisure time reading. Then I remembered how many hours I waste perusing Oh No They Didn't! and realized that perhaps boasting about my highly evolved nature was a bit premature.

Readers, I'd like to hear how you spend your "intelligent" leisure time -- apart from reading good books and Bibliolatry, of course. How do you fill leisure intelligently?

Favorite literary villains

In lieu of a review (I'm swamped over here), I offer you a link I've been sitting on for awhile.

The Telegraph has compiled a list of the 50 greatest villains in all literature -- a subjective list, as all such lists are (including the last one, which involved those classics not to read before you die).

Go here to read the full list; then, consider your own favorite villains.

Some of my favorite literary villains are Dracula, the nurse from The Turn of the Screw, the pigs from Animal Farm, HH from Lolita (some may argue Quilty is the true villain but this is my list, dammit, so step off), and Montresor from Poe's story "The Cask of Amontillado."

So, my question to you: Who are your favorite literary villains?

What would you add?

Last week, the Times Online published the 10 Books NOT to Read Before You Die. I have to agree with many of these choices: I could never endure James Joyce, and I can't say much for Jane Austen, either.

I'm tempted to add Conrad's Heart of Darkness or Woolf's Mrs. Dalloway, both of which I found rather stifling. Same with DeLillo's White Noise, which is praised up and down but just doesn't do anything for me.

What would you add or take away from the list?

It's that time again...

Anyone who reads this site with any regularity knows that the fall is my favorite time of year, since I love nothing more than all things spooky.

With that in mind, I'm gearing up for this year's Halloweeny reads. I love to fill the months from September to November with dark, disturbing, and even scary reads to welcome the fall. This year, I need your help. My spooky stacks are painfully undernourished. That's why your recommendations are a must.

So far, I've lined up

Heart-Shaped Box, by Joe Hill

The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon, by Stephen King

Rebecca, by Daphne du Maurier

Asylum, by Patrick McGrath

Unfortunately, four titles does not a season fill. What spooky reads can you recommend? I'd prefer titles as contemporary as possible, since I've already made my way through classics like Dracula and their ilk. But any and all recommendations are more than welcome -- they are absolutely necessary.

Thoughts, please

Any readers enjoying Stephen King's "N." (the new story being presented in daily episodes)? If so, I'd love to hear your thoughts on it -- leave 'em in the comments, please.

If you haven't yet started watching, it's not too late. Episodes will be appearing each week day through the end of August, so you can easily catch up. Watch "N." here.

Weekly Geeks 12:Catching Up

This week’s Weekly Geeks theme allows Geeks to catch up on those books that have been read but not yet reviewed.

I’m actually pretty good about reviewing what I’ve read; even if I don’t always do so immediately, mostly everything I read gets reviewed. There have been, however, two exceptions to this rule, and I find that they are both classics: I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings (by Maya Angelou) and A Clockwork Orange (by Anthony Burgess).

I think my hesitation to review these books stems from a lack of having anything new to say about them. They're both classics, they're both amazing, neither is particularly easy to read, although for different reasons -- but still, what else can I say about them that hasn't already been said?

Enter Dewey's WG theme, which will provide a handy way for me to solve this problem.

To participate in this theme, I will:

1. List books I’ve read but haven’t reviewed yet.

2. Ask readers to ask questions about these books in the comments section of this post.

3. Later, I'll take these questions and use them in a post about each book. Like Dewey, I’ll probably turn mine into a sort of interview-review, and I'll link to everyone whose questions appear (which will probably be everyone who asks a question).

So, readers, you have your assignment! Leave your questions about either I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings and/or A Clockwork Orange below, and be on the lookout for the answers to come!

Which of the 10 best online stories of 2007 is your favorite?

While I'm busy scribbling away at a myriad of reviews, I thought I'd leave you a nice way to spend a Monday, especially if you're stuck in an office. The following link will provide you with lots of reading to occupy your time.

Jason Sanford, editor and publisher of storySouth, has chosen the top ten online short stories of 2007, and until July 17, you can vote for your favorite. The winner will receive $300, and all the stories are available online.

The following stories come from a variety of online literary mags, and a variety of genres are featured.

You may click here to go to the list.

If you have time, come back and leave your favorite in the comments. As soon as I've made my way through all of them, I'll do the same.

Happy reading!

Le Guin and the Omelas

I've been on a cleaning jag lately, and while organizing some papers I found a note to myself to read a short story by Ursula Le Guin. Hoping it was available online (and, quite frankly, looking for a reason to take a break), I found myself in luck -- and stopped cleaning immediately to read it.

The story, "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas," was short but very powerful, and I'm still thinking about it now, almost 24 hours later. Omelas is, in a sense, a utopia, although Le Guin ultimately proves that the only place a utopia can be found is no place at all.

If you haven't yet had the pleasure of reading "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas," then you may go here to read it in full.

I'd love to hear your thoughts after you've read the story. What did you think of the terrible paradox of Omelas? Could you live with this "terrible justice of reality"? Or would you be among those who "walk ahead into the darkness"?

Where is human nature so weak as in the bookstore?

The Millions posted an interesting question recently: When it comes to the books you collect, New, Used, or Antiquarian?

My answer is not as simple as it once would have been. The me of a few months ago would unequivocally answer "new!" while sneering at the idea of a lowly, used book.

The me of today isn't so sure.

Of course, there is nothing like a new book; as Beecher knew, human nature is never so weak as in a bookstore. (I assume he meant a bookstore specializing in new books -- if he didn't, then forget him.) I love the feel, the smell, the promise of a new book. Unfortunately, when I spend my heard-earned dollars on a new book that ends up being -- to put it rather bluntly -- a major piece of shit, I get angry, which, of course, leads me to consider purchasing used books.

However, I don't really like used books. I won't totally avoid them, so long as they are in good condition; I don't like to see creases or other people's writing. Basically, if I can pretend it's new, used is okay.

And as for antiquarian? Yeah, right. I have neither the money nor the space.

Speaking of both money and space, I've had to come to terms with the fact that I've been spending way too much on books as of late. While I'm not a big spender when it comes to clothes and shoes, that doesn't mean I can make up for it with books, especially when my limited book-space is becoming increasingly endangered. For this reason, I've taken to -- don't keel over, now -- the library. I'm still getting used to the idea -- I don't like having to part with a good book once I've read it, but I also can't afford to buy and store everything I read, especially when not every read is worth the expense.

So, to finally answer the question: I prefer new, but used is also acceptable, and library books are appearing in my hands more and more.

What do you prefer, New, Used, or Antiquarian?

HELP

I need your help.

See, I love to read. I also like to shop. And I reallly like to shop for stuff to read.

Put them together and what do you get?

The Amazon Kindle.

I want a Kindle. I need a Kindle. First, it will help me read and shop. Lots. Only -- and this is nice -- I won't have to find storage space for all the books I'd buy in paper form. (I'm running out of bookshelf room, as I've already filled three large bookcases and have not room for another.) Even better still, the Kindle's sneaky: my husband would never know that I spent another [insert dollar amount here] on books. I'd be spending less anyway, not only because Kindle books are cheaper but also because some sites even offer free e-books.

True, I wouldn't be able to get the feel of the book, and I wouldn't have pages to turn. I also couldn't write in the book, although the Kindle does allow you to make notations (which I don't often do anyway, at least not in the book itself). The biggest drawback is the lack of a hard copy to add to my library, a physical manifestation of all the reading I've done over the years. True, I don't own every book I've ever read, so to ignore the Kindle over something like that is a bit silly.

Right: my lover beckons

To tempt me even further, Amazon recently dropped 50 bucks off the price. The siren call of the Kindle has been sounding even louder in my ears for the past two days. I've some money saved, and it's burning a big ol' hole in my pocket. Of course, patience is a virtue too.

So what's a girl to do?

I leave it to you, dear readers. Advise me. Lead me. Guide me. If you love your Kindle, I'd love to know why. If, however, you view the Kindle as a scourge upon the heart and soul of literature, an evil that further corrupts an already technology-dependent culture, then I implore you to save me from myself.

What would you do?

Via Three Percent, I came across this interesting article regarding Nabokov's last, unfinished work.

Nabokov expressly ordered that this unfinished work be burned. And yet, according to his son, charged with carrying out his father's orders, this last work "would have been a brilliant, original, and potentially totally radical book, in the literary sense very different from the rest of his oeuvre."

I'd never be able to burn it, no matter how much I can understand Nabokov's wishes. I'd set it loose upon the world, errors and inconsistencies be damned.

What would you do?