Thursday, 12 August 2021

Top 100 Review #4 - Book 6 - 1984

SPOILERS AHEAD

I can't say I enjoyed reading 1984, not after the first quarter or so of the book anyway. It started off with such promise, an interesting concept, and while a little slow, after about page 60 I thought it was starting to go somewhere. 

But then it didn't. 

To me it just seemed like an excuse for philosophical musings rather than a properly-realised narrative. Problems I had with this book include:

1) a sexy young woman falling in love with an overweight middle aged man she'd never spoken to before seems more male fantasy than realistic;

Why does Hollywood always slim down tragic characters? First Winston, then Quoyle...

2) the sexualised violence fantasy didn't endear the main character to me either;

3) also didn't buy that said young woman would laugh off Winston's 'I wanted to sexually assault and murder you' comment. Talk about psychotic;

4) having two long chapters of a textbook was a lazy mechanism to provide backstory. I found it so difficult to get through these very dry sections;

5) Winston doesn't really DO anything about rebelling against society. All he really does is talk to a man in a pub. Both O'Brien and Julia approach him. Things happen to him rather than him actively trying to bring about change instead of just thinking about it;

The disappointing narrative angered me for more than two minutes.

6) the narrative seems like it's going somewhere then suddenly loses steam and descends into torture porn. It's a very unsatisfying narrative arc;

7) I didn't buy that the old shopkeeper was a spy the whole time, nor that he wasn't really old either. Was he really just waiting for Winston to randomly come into his shop? Seems so farfetched;

8) as if you wouldn't check the room for a mic or telescreen?! And the realisation that it was behind the painting just seems to spontaneously come out of nowhere. It's like Orwell ran out of ideas and just decided ok they're captured now because reasons. No daring infiltration or subterfuge like has been foreshadowed by the meeting with O'Brien. No, just in their usual tryst spot they get arrested SWAT-style; and

9) I didn't like the ending. I didn't believe that Winston had changed his mind about big brother and the scene where he follows Julia is awkward and weird.

Yes, I know, predicting the future, North Korea, blah blah blah. But Orwell should have written a bunch of essays rather than trying to build a narrative around it. Too bad this wasn't as well-developed as Animal Farm.

Saturday, 18 May 2019

Top 100 Review #3 - Book 63 - The Road



(From 24 December 2017)

It surprises me that I enjoyed this book, because in the past I have had an aversion to books and movies that don't have a traditional plot structure or happy ending. I'll unpack that in a moment, I just want to reiterate that this review is not based in research or anything other than my personal opinions and thoughts. I'd imagine there's a lot of academia out there about this book but that is not my aim here.

Coming into this, I had almost no knowledge of the book or story. I knew that there was a movie with Viggo Mortensen, but I haven't seen it (I am keen now though to see how they interpreted the book and what scenes and elements they chose to translate into a film version). As I started reading, it did remind me of some other books and stories (or probably those other ones were influenced by The Road), but other than that, I feel that I was able to approach this one with a rather clean slate.

The language of the book is one of its strongest points. The introduction described it as "at once brutal and beautiful", which is such an apt description. It is strange to think that McCarthy could summon such poetry from a wasteland setting, but perhaps it is that contrast that makes it work so well.

One thing that bothered me more than it probably should have was the fact that the characters weren't named. It was annoying to read 'the boy' over and again. Not sure why the author did this (yep I haven't researched anything yet). For universality? Very cute. For me, not giving someone a name is somewhat demeaning, and personally I felt less connected to the characters because they were nameless.

Despite being the protagonists, the main characters are never named. Neither are any of the other characters in the book or movie version.

I, of course, felt sorry for The Boy, but I'm not sure that I bought him as a believable character. This is my main criticism of the book. If I recall correctly, the unnamed apocalyptic event happened when he was still in the womb. Therefore we're talking about a kid that's grown up on the other side of civilisation. This post-apocalyptic world is all he's known. It's demonstrated by the kinds of questions he asks his father, by the lack of knowledge he has of the world, such as what a 'state' is. With this in mind, I just didn't believe that he would be so vulnerable, so frightened, weak and sad all the time. For him, the world is what it is. Why would he be sad comparing life to a world he never knew? Why would he be constantly frightened when he'd grown up with danger all around him? Kids can be pretty resilient. Take for example Clementine and AJ from the Walking Dead universe. They are some tough cookies, and AJ, who was born after the zombocalypse, in many ways simply accepts the way the world is. I think this potrayal of AJ in contrast to 'The Boy' is much more realistic.

Because of the world he lives in, AJ from The Walking Dead (TellTale) is mature beyond his years and doesn't constantly pine for the world that existed before.

[ENDING SPOILERS]
The ending was sad and not very conclusive, but I had kind of anticipated that. The writer in me was thinking about how the book would finish and the most likely scenarios were death or coming across a community. Surprisingly though, I didn't feel like throwing the book at the wall once I had finished it in frustration over the unhappy ending, and I think this goes to the general sombre mood of the book as a whole. Life is hard and full of death. It makes the father's death in the end more palatable as it makes sense in the context of the world. Death is a frequent part of life, it's all around the characters, they are constantly being reminded of it. So while it is sad, I think having the unhappy ending (but with a dash of hope) was appropriate.

EDIT: I have, since originally writing this review back in 2017, seen the Viggo Mortensen movie and was surprised at how closely it followed the book. Given the themes and general story of the book it could have been translated in quite different ways, but I suppose the director/producer decided to stay close to the book in narrative and atmosphere. I really enjoyed both the movie and the book.

Saturday, 4 August 2018

Top 100 Review #2 - Book 20 - Frankenstein



For the next Top 100 Challenge book, I chose Frankenstein. I read Frankenstein in High School as part of English and most of my memories were of feeling sorry for the monster.

Well I've done an about-face. On finding life is difficult, the monster becomes an absolute twat and uses 'the world has been cruel to me' as an excuse to go on a murderous rampage. Buck up, buddy. Yeah life is hard, and it freaking sucks sometimes, but that doesn’t mean we go around killing whoever we want. I can definitely picture the monster moving amongst society, wearing some kind of mask, long sleeves and pants. He’s extremely intelligent and might have contributed to society in many ways. This is evidenced by his relationship with the blind man. Instead he decides to throw a tantrum like a child.

 Rembrandt once babysat Frankenstein's monster.

Frankenstein’s selective amnesia over the existence of his creation was also a little hard to swallow. There’s no way an editor would let a writer get away with something like that these days. For months and months he barely even casts a thought on the monster, and he is all but forgotten. While I understand that’s a large part of why the monster hates the creator, it doesn’t feel sufficiently justified how he so easily forgets the whole ordeal. It is also quite a miracle that Frankenstein’s first attempt at the creation of alchemical life is not only successful, it is also superhero-like. One would assume the first attempt would end in some Alien Resurrection-like deformity gyrating in a corner murmuring ‘Please, kill me…’

In its context as speculative fiction, there is something lost on the modern day audience in terms of terror through believability. In 1818, the year of Frankenstein’s publication, the FIRST successful blood transfusion was performed. There was no vaccine for cholera, tuberculosis or the flu. The understanding we have of the workings of the human body, and that of the deceased body, is far greater today, such that the believability of digging up a corpse for reanimation is less science-fiction and more fantasy.

I have however always admired the gothic narrative-through-documentation device. I’ve been mulling over how I could achieve some kind of modern day equivalent, perhaps through multimedia or ARG.

In short, I actually found Frankenstein to be quite a frustrating read. I do think Shelley truly achieves horror, if not through the actual creation of the monster, then certainly through the callous serial-killer behaviour of the monster.

Wednesday, 27 April 2016

Essay: Joe Cinque’s Consolation



Joe Cinque’s Consolation: approaches to narrative structure in non-fiction

The communication of theme and meaning in non-fiction can be affected by the author’s narrative approach. In Joe Cinque’s Consolation by Helen Garner (Garner 2004), the narrative is both helped and hindered by the author’s structural choices. Garner’s approach is examined in comparison with other non-fiction crime novels.

Theodore A. Rees Cheney in (Cheney 1991, p. 129) states that ‘structure is what gives overall coherence to a piece’. In fiction, linear chronology is the most common form of structure. The non-fiction author however will typically open with a ‘hook’: a scene which gives the reader a summary of the central event or climax – in crime this is generally the events or discovery of the crime – within the first few pages of the book. This trend differs greatly from fiction, wherein the climax will usually occur towards the end of the story.

The hook is an interesting device: usually the content of the hook can be discerned from the book’s blurb. It acts as an equaliser, putting all readers on the same footing[1] in terms of their knowledge of the true events, so that all readers have the same expectations throughout the rest of the narrative. The hook also provides an incentive for the reader to continue reading the book. The most exciting part of the story has been presented first in hopes that the reader will not put the book down. In Writing Creative Nonfiction, Theodore A. Rees Cheney observes that: ‘nonfiction articles often being in medias res, in the middle of things, of some action, some event’ (Cheney 1991, p. 13). ‘In a good piece of nonfiction, if life doesn’t get somewhere in the opening lines ... readers will not wait long’ (Cheney 1991, p. 12).

This non-fiction structure is the opposite to that of fiction: in fiction the reader must read most of the book, learning about the characters, following the build-up of the narrative, before reaching the climax. This difference arises from the fact that non-fiction tends to turn on an event; the examination of the surrounding circumstances and the psyche of the perpetrator becomes more important than the event itself. In Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood (Capote 2008), the hook is given succinctly in two sentences within the first few pages:

At the time not a soul in sleeping Holcomb heard them – four shotgun blasts that, all told, ended six human lives. But afterwards the townspeople, theretofore sufficiently unfearful of each other to seldom trouble to lock their doors, found fantasy re-creating them over and again – those sombre
explosions that stimulated fires of mistrust in the glare of which many old neighbours viewed each other strangely, as strangers. (Capote 2008, p. 17)[2]

Garner’s work has a more extended hook – beginning with a transcript of the emergency call from the murderer and then a third person narrative of the ambulance arriving on the scene. Unlike Capote’s hook, however, Garner’s hook is not reflexive of the rest of the book in style or focus. It therefore has a misleading effect on the reader. The hook is told in a third person, omniscient narrator style which is commonly found in creative non-fiction, engaging the reader by immersing them in the action. The rest of the book however is quite dissimilar. Following the hook, the narrative switches back to first person, to Garner’s account of how she came across the story; a retelling of the events predominantly through the device of the court system and heavily influenced by the author’s opinion. Garner uses ‘the usual range of techniques available to a first-person narrator: positive or negative readings of characters' attributes and actions, qualification or not of their dialogic contributions, suggestive symbolism, and the direct expression of her own thoughts and feelings’ (Eggins 2005, p. 129). While Garner does forewarn her reader about the nature of the book: ‘This is the story of how I got to know (Joe Cinque)’ (Garner 2004, p. 3), the reader’s expectations of the narrative style that can be found in a non-fiction book, or reportage, is misplaced as the narrative is more of an account of an author writing a book rather than an account of the crime that took place. As Suzanne Eggins observes:
In the end, Garner does find a form. Or, rather, she evolves one from the forms that characterize (sic) much of her creative non fiction work: she writes a meta-narrative. She uses narrative devices to write the story of herself researching and writing the story of Joe Cinque's life and death. (Eggins 2005, p. 128)

Garner’s inconsistent use of style in the hook hinders the communication of meaning by misleading the reader about the narrative’s purpose.

In Joe Cinque’s Consolation, the focus on Garner’s story, rather than the crime, is perpetuated through the author’s choice of narrative approach. The events of the crime itself: the chronology, when the scenes occurred in relation to the crime, and the ‘characters’, can be hard for the reader to keep track of as Garner uses the devise of the court investigation to report on the events. This may have been more successful if the author had chosen to write in a chronological manner in relation to the crime, switching certain court room scenes around for the benefit of the reader. Instead the events are related to the audience with reference to how the author came across them. The character of the author becomes central to the story in this way as we are learning about the events through the eyes, the criticism and the subjective comments, of the author.

The book’s use of vignettes – a characteristic style of Garner’s[3] – are not grouped into traditional chapters. Garner uses typesetting for dramatic effect, with pauses and larger breaks to highlight certain points.[4] However sometimes it is difficult to determine why the author has made certain breaks,[5] the result becoming a reflection of Garner’s own scattered thoughts during her meandering research,[6] strengthening the narrative tendency towards the focus of the novel being on the author.

Some scenes feel artificially constructed to suit the author. On Garner’s first day in court – during a trial that has already begun – Garner walks into the room to find Anu Singh’s father conveniently providing a summary of the life and upbringing of his daughter. Similarly, the final section of the book in which the victim’s mother and the author are watching a video of Joe when he was alive, is supposed to have occurred several years after the trial. The scene feels more like an attempt to pull at the heartstrings of the reader one final time before ending with an innocent-looking picture of Joe and the line: ‘We gazed in silence on her undefended son’ (Garner 2004, p. 328). Part of the reason this sits uncomfortably with the rest of the story is because the narrative focus has been on the author rather than Joe. Garner has shaped the narrative in a way that takes the reader along for the ride on Garner’s emotional journey in researching the book. By following her thoughts in this way, the author is more likely to be able to enlist the reader into her way of thinking, providing a commentary throughout, giving her opinion and remarks about the events unfolding. Were the text in a more linear fashion, chronological with the crime in question, this sort of opinionated criticism would probably have been unsuccessful.

In Cold Blood is in stark contrast to this author-centric approach. The murder of the Clutter family and the circumstances surrounding it are predominantly in a linear narrative with complete omission of the author – despite his role in the events of the time. This was a deliberate decision of the author so as not to endanger the integrity of the narrative.

In Peter Lalor’s Blood Stain (Lalor 2002), the narrative weaves between a telling of the murder, investigation and trial interspersed with the background and psyche of the murderer. This varying temporal narrative allowed the author to convey to the reader a certain understanding of the motivations of the killer as well as sympathy for the victim. Garner’s book fails to do so, despite Garner’s attempts to make the book fair and impartial, the result is clearly far from that. Garner herself admits that this is not the result because she has failed to interview either Anu Singh or Madhavi Rao:

The women won’t talk to me. Suddenly I felt very tired. Here I was, back at the same old roadblock. My fantasy of journalistic even-handedness, long buckling under the strain, gave way completely. (Garner 2004, p. 269)

However, I find this to be a weak excuse; a good writer should be able to overcome this by looking to other sources to get to the character’s motivations, such as making more of an effort to interview more friends and family of Sigh and Rao who were not involved with the trial. Garner certainly makes the effort on behalf of Joe, for example talking with his ex-girlfriend (Garner 2004, pp. 321-325), but does not attempt to do so for the other point of view. It is as if Garner has already made up her mind about presenting a biased view. Garner was criticised for her similar approach in her earlier novel, The First Stone, in which ‘she aligned herself with one side of the case before researching it’ (Eggins 2005, p. 124). Garner is unable to achieve an even-handed account due to ‘her demands for a congruence between law’s judgement and her vision of justice’ (Pether 2007, p. 45). Furthermore, when Garner interviews Singh’s father and Judge Crispin, attempts to explain Singh’s behaviour are derided by the narrator. For example, Garner overuses exclamation marks in her recount of her conversation with Singh’s father, with the effect that his words seem trivial or over-exaggerated. In doing this, Garner is ridiculing what Singh’s father is saying, and not giving it the same consideration that she gives to Cinque’s parents.

The way in which Garner has chosen to narrate and structure this book, including the insertion of herself into the narrative as a character, does not allow room for even-handedness in the same way that other non-fiction crime novels do. When writing non-fiction, it is important for the author to consider how structure will affect the narrative and the reader’s ability to understand meaning.

Endnotes
[1] Some readers may have lived during the time of the events and be familiar with what occurred, whereas other readers may not have heard of the events prior to picking up the book.
[2] See page 8 of Chloe Hooper’s The Tall Man (Hooper 2008) for another example of a succinct hook.
[3] For example, Garner uses a similar style in her novel, Monkey Grip (Garner 1977).
[4] See for example page 30 – the typical ‘chapter’ layout, however on page 33 the same setting is used but the ‘chapter’ is only 10 lines long (Garner 2004).
[5] This, in parts, seemingly random arrangement of prose reminded me of Delia Falconer’s The Lost Thoughts of Soldiers (Falconer 2005), in which the layout did not always have an apparent formula.
[6] This style could also stem from Garner’s background in journalism, where bite-sized narrative is the norm.

Bibliography
Capote, T. 2008, In Cold Blood, Penguin Group, Australia.
Cheney, T.A.R. 1991, Writing Creative Nonfiction: how to use fiction techniques to make your nonfiction more interesting, dramatic and vivid, Ten Speed Press, California.
Eggins, S. 2005, ‘Real stories: ethics and narrative in Helen Garner's Joe Cinque's Consolation’, Southerly, vol. 65, no.1, pp 122-131.
Falconer, D. 2005, The Lost Thoughts of Soldiers, Picador, Sydney.
Garner, H. 2004, Joe Cinque’s Consolation, Pan MacMillan, Sydney.
Garner, H. 1977, Monkey Grip, McPhee Gribble, Melbourne.
Garner, H. 1995, The First Stone, Picador, Sydney.
Hooper, C. 2008, The Tall Man, Penguin Group (Australia), Melbourne.
Lalor, P. 2002, Blood Stain, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
Pether, P. 2007, ‘The prose and the passion: Penny Pether searches for an Australian ‘constitutional epic’ in our recent literature and cinema’, Meanjin, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 43-48.

Saturday, 28 September 2013

Top 100 Review #1 - Book 21 - Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS.

For the first book of my Top 100 Challenge I read Philip K. Dick's science-fiction novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?



It took me a while to get through since I've been so busy lately, but the book is actually quite short at under 200 pages in the version I read.  Although published in the 60's, the language is still very readable.  I imagine this is probably because it was published for the masses rather than as a literary work.  With some books I have encountered from that era, the narrative style can be a little jarring in comparison to modern writing.  I did not have that problem with this book at all.

The main plot of the book follows bounty hunter Rick Deckard's mission to 'retire' a number of androids - a total of 6 who have come to Earth from Mars illegally.  It is not fully explained to the reader why the androids must be killed, that is, why it is illegal for them to be on Earth, until quite late in the book.  I found this confusing at first, as I felt like I was missing important information.  I suppose I immediately felt sympathy for the androids and therefore wanted to know why they had to be put to death rather than just deported.  However the late reveal was probably done to mirror Deckard's initial nonchalance in terms of his task at hand -  the reasons aren't important, it is simply his job.  

Eventually Deckard does start to rethink his mission, and this reflects the major theme of the question - the value of life.  The way in which the author has made animals the most valuable commodity in a post-apocalyptic society where animals and the environment have barely survived, creates a good juxtaposition to the protagonist questioning the value of the androids' lives.  This is a particularly difficult thesis as the androids are almost identical to humans, except that they lack empathy.  It can be so difficult to tell an android apart from a human that it can only be verified 100% via certain methods, such as a bone marrow analysis.

I did feel that the androids were far too easy for Deckard to kill.  Perhaps this was done on purpose, to show that the androids really are very close to humans.  But I felt that, as this is fiction, I wanted a little more action.  A little more cat and mouse.  After all, the pop cultural understanding of robots is that they are generally very strong and faster than humans.  From memory, I think Blade Runner delivered a bit more of that, at least when Harrison Ford is trying to take out the final two androids.  So perhaps part of my expectations came from my memory of the movie.  This sense of action-deficiency was the basis for my first mini-challenge, being a rewrite of one of the scenes in which Deckard kills an android.

I was quite surprised by how effected I was by the scene where the android Pris cuts the legs off a spider.  I'm not a big fan of spiders.  I probably don't hate them as much as I hate cockroaches but I am scared of them nonetheless.  Therefore you would think that I wouldn't care about somebody 'dismembering' a spider.   I suppose it's the way in which it was done - Isidore, a human, is in anguish because spiders are very valuable and he feels bad for the spider.  Pris decides to cut its legs off because she doesn't understand why it has 8 legs.  Figuring it only needs 4, she casually snips the legs off with clippers.  Later when the spider just sits there after being disfigured, another android puts a flame near it to make it move.  It made me very uncomfortable to read.  I suppose this for me was one of the most memorable scenes of the book, because it reflects the themes of life and empathy.
 
Yikes! Well if I've learned something from this book it's that I'm not an android because geez ... look how freaking terrifying this thing is.

There are a lot of other things that I could go into in terms of analysing the book, on which I'm sure there have been many essays written, but suffice it to say I would certainly recommend it to anybody who enjoys science fiction and/or possibly even detective fiction.  Overall I was quite satisfied with the book and it's a shame there aren't more Philip K. Dick novels on the list as I quite enjoyed his pulpy-yet-somewhat-literary style.  I think I will pick a fantasy novel next to mix it up.

Friday, 9 August 2013

Top 100 Challenge

The other day a friend on Facebook linked a Top 100 Science-Fiction & Fantasy Books list: a reader-voted compilation.  I was appalled to discover that I've only read 6 of them (not counting movies I've seen based on books or books I started but didn't finish), despite the fact that I consider fantasy to be my favourite genre.

So I've decided it's time to really get to know my genre, not just stick to my 4-5 beloved fantasy authors.  As soon as I've finished my current book (which is terrible by the way, and I will tell you why in another blog), I'll start cracking that 100 list.  I'm actually really looking forward to it.



I'll be reading them in no particular order, as I will start with books I have at home that I've been meaning to read, like 'I, Robot' and also re-read others that I have read in the past, like 'Brave New World'.  From then I hope to scour some cheap book stores, itunes or dust off the old library card to find the rest.
You mean ... they let you just take books for free?
 
In case the original site goes down, as the list is a couple of years old, I'm reproducing the list here:

1. The Lord of the Rings - J.R.R. Tolkien
2. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams
3. Ender's Game - Orson Scott Card
4. Dune - Frank Herbert (the original list says 'the Dune chronicles', but I think they're still writing those books (?) so I'm just going to stick to re-reading the first one by Frank Herbert)
5. A Game of Thrones - George R.R. Martin (another 'series' still being written that I will restrict to the first book)
6. 1984 - George Orwell
7. Fahrenheit 451 - Ray Bradbury
8. The Foundation Trilogy - Isaac Asimov
9. Brave New World - Aldous Huxley
10. American Gods - Neil Gaiman
11. The Princess Bride - William Goldman
12. The Wheel of Time - Robert Jordan (limiting to the first one)
13. Animal Farm - George Orwell
14. Neuromancer - William Gibson
15. Watchmen - Alan Moore
16. I, Robot - Isaac Asimov
17. Stranger in a Strange Land - Robert A. Heinlein
18. The Name of the Wind - Patrick Rothfuss
19. Slaughter House Five - Kurt Vonnegut Jr.
20. Frankenstein - Mary Shelley
21. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? - Philip K Dick
22. The Handmaid's Tale - Margaret Atwood
23. The Dark Tower - Stephen King
24. 2001: A Space Odyssey - Arthur C. Clarke
25. The Stand - Stephen King
26. Snow Crash - Neal Stephenson
27. The Martian Chronicles - Ray Bradbury
28. Cat's Cradle - Kurt Vonnegut Jr.
29. The Sandman Series - Neil Gaiman
30. A Clockwork Orange - Anthony Burgess
31. Starship Troopers  - Robert A. Heinlein
32. Watership Down - Richard Adams
33. Dragonflight - Anne McCaffrey
34. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress - Robert A. Heinlein
35. A Canticle for Leibowitz - Walter M. Miller
36. The Time Machine - H.G. Wells
37. 20,000 Leagues under the Sea - Jules Verne
38. Flowers for Algernon - Daniel Keyes
39. The War of the Worlds - H.G. Wells
40. The Amber Chronicles - Roger Zelazny
41. The Belgariad - David Eddings
42. The Mists of Avalon - Marion Zimmer Bradley
43. The Mistborn Trilogy - Brandon Sanderson
44. Ringworld - Larry Niven
45. The Left Hand of Darkness - Ursula K. Le Guin
46. The Silmarillion - J.R.R. Tolkien
47. The Once and Future King
48. Neverwhere - Neil Gaiman
49. Childhood's End - Arthur C. Clarke
50. Contact - Carl Sagan
51. Hyperion - Dan Simmons
52. Stardust - Neil Gaiman 
53. Cryotonomicon - Neal Stephenson
54. World War Z - Max Brooks
55. The Last Unicorn - Peter S. Beagle
56. The Forever War - Joe Haldeman
57. Small Gods - Terry Pratchett
58. The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant - Stephen R. Donaldson
59. Vorkosigan Saga - Lois McMaster Bujold
60. Going Postal - Terry Pratchett
61. The Mote in God's Eye - Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle
62. The Sword of Truth Series - Terry Goodkind
63. The Road - Cormac McCarthy
64. Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell - Susanna Clarke
65. I Am Legend - Richard Matheson
66. The Riftwar Saga - Raymond E. Feist
67. The Sword of Shannara Trilogy - Terry Brooks
68. Conan the Barbarian - Robert E. Howard and Mark Schultz
69. The Farseer trilogy - Robin Hobb
70. The Time Traveler's Wife - Audrey Niffenegger
71. The Way of Kings - Brandon Sanderson
72. A Journey To The Center Of The Earth - Jules Verne
73. The Legend of Drizzt Series - R.A. Salvatore
74. Old Man's War Series - John Scalzi
75. The Diamond Age - Neal Stephenson
76. Rendezvous With Rama - Arthur C. Clarke
77. Kushiel's Dart trilogy - Jacqueline Carey
78. The Dispossessed - Ursula K. Le Guin
79. Something Wicked This Way Comes - Ray Bradbury
80. Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West - Gregory Maguire
81. The Malazan Book Of The Fallen series - Steven Erikson
82. The Eyre Affair - Jasper Fforde
83. The Culture Series - Iain Banks
84. The Crystal Cave - Mary Stewart
85. Anathem - Neal Stephenson
86. The Codex Alera - Jim Butcher
87. The Book of the New Sun - Gene Wolfe
88. The Thrawn trilogy - Timothy Zahn
89. Outlander Series - Diana Gabaldon
90. The Elric Saga - Michael Moorcock
91. The Illustrated Man - Ray Bradbury
92. Sunshine - Robin McKinley
93. A Fire Upon the Deep - Vernor Vinge
94. The Caves of Steel - Isaac Asimov
95. The Mars trilogy - Kim Stanley Robinson
96. Lucifer's Hammer - Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle
97. Doomsday Book - Connie Willis
98. Perdido Street Station - China Mieville
99. The Xanth Series - Piers Anthony

100. The Space Trilogy - C.S. Lewis

Wednesday, 24 July 2013

William Collins

Ode, Written in the Beginning of the Year 1746

How sleep the brace who sink to rest
By all their country's wishes blest!
When Spring, with dewy fingers cold,
Returns to deck their hallow'd mold,
She there shall dress a sweeter sod
Than Fancy's feet have ever trod.

By fairy hands their knell is rung,
By forms unseen their dirge is sung;
There Honour comes, a pilgrim grey,
To bless the turf that wraps their clay;
And Freedom shall awhile repair,
To dwell a weeping hermit there!

- William Collins

The man who proved indolence and great 
poems can go hand in hand.


I first came across this poem when I was in high school, working on an English assignment.  We had to find a number of poems representing different forms and then write several poems of our own.  I found Collins' ode probably because it has 'ode' in the title and I needed an example of an ode!  But I always liked the imagery in this one, the 'dewy fingers', the 'turf that wraps their clay'.  I don't think I really understood what it meant but I liked the way it was written.  I even ended up using the line 'By forms unseen their dirge is sung' as the title of my mini-compilation.  Since then it has always stuck in my head.