Book 17: Length in Novels.

I have no problems reading novels that are lengthy. If I had a problem with length, then I never would have made it through the Outlander series in 2009. There are other big works of fiction that I also hold dear to my heart, like the Harry Potter books. Their length helps rather than hinders the story, so I have no problem reading them.

I also love short books. I like being able to sit down and go through an entire story in one sitting lasting an hour or so, as long as the story is told well. Two of the books I have already read for my odyssey have been short novellas-Ethan Frome and The Old Man and the Sea. Both of those novellas were well done; the characters were developed, the plot was detailed enough, and the story left me thinking.

So it really bothers me when the scope of a work does not fit with the length. Simple plots and characters don't need as much time to develop as elaborate schemes. Harry Potter condensed into 7 300 page books would be a completely different story. The world that J.K. Rowling created would not be as deep or detailed.

In reading Sons and Lovers, I am finding that I am annoyed with Lawrence's use of page space and how the story is developing. To be quite honest, the first 50 or so pages have nothing to do with the rest of the story. Yes, the description of his mother and father and their early life does provide nice background, but it could have been given in another way. And while I appreciate that Lawrence is setting up the character of Paul Morel and his relationship to his mother, I find it completely aggravating. There is too much language and too much exposition for my tastes.

(I am not saying that I don't enjoy description, because I do, but I hate when the description is overbearing. On with the story, you know?)

And since my edition of Sons and Lovers is 370 pages long, there is a lot of time that I know will be wasted trucking through Lawrence's description and what he deems to be important to the story. I am hoping that when it is finished I will feel differently, but I don't think I will.

It is incredibly hard to like a book that drags on and on with only little spurts of excitement. Dull and monotonous writing bores the reader and this reader is bored with Lawrence. I really hate to be so negative, especially towards a book that I had high hopes for, but I can't help it.

Mind, this is not as bad as when I had to force myself through Great Expectations, but this is still pretty bad.

I know I cannot force myself to like a book and I know there will be other books on this list that I will also dislike for various reasons. Obviously not everything will appeal to me and I have been lucky so far that I have enjoyed pretty much everything I've read, but let me ask you this; Why are all the books I dislike the longest ones? It sure seems like they are!

So here are some questions for you, dear readers:

1. What length of book do you prefer and why?
2. Are there books you have avoided because of their length? If so, what titles?

Thanks, and happy reading!

Book 10: FINALLY Finished.

I finally finished Great Expectations last night. I was so happy to be done with it, simply because it seems as if Dickens took over my life for awhile.

So, what did I think of it?

The first 350 pages are all exposition (the setting up of the story). You meet the characters, Pip comes into his wealth, some small problems pop up, and next thing you know, you’re 350 pages in and nothing has really happened. Yes, it is all important. You learn a LOT about the characters so that by time the action does happen, you understand why they do what they do. But still, 350 pages?

The last 100 pages are where the action is. Magwitch reveals himself, Pip realizes what a whiner and idiot he is, and things resolve themselves. Finally all those little details Dickens throws in seem to matter.

So.

Here are my thoughts.

Had the book been half the size, I think it would have been a lot easier to read. Dickens is known for being wordy. Why? Because when he first published his novels he released them in a serial format. A chapter or two a week would be printed in a magazine. Every week the next chapter or two would come out. Obviously people would have to buy all those magazines if they wanted to read the entire story. What makes more money; a 200 page novel or a 500 page novel? Obviously Dickens padded his works to make more money, and you can’t really fault him for that.

However, now reading it in novel form, it is just too much. Too much description, too many details, too many things that just don’t need to be there to make it an effective story.

Besides all that, I did like the story. The premise of it is interesting. Pip is poor and an orphan. He’s adopted by his older sister and her husband, who bring him up in hopes he will be an apprentice to Joe and also be a blacksmith. However, he soon has a few encounters with some mysterious characters (Magwitch and Ms. Havisham) who alter his future. He is told that he has a benefactor, a person who wants him to become a gentleman and he goes off to London to learn more.

Through all of his learning, he becomes rather snobby towards his beginnings and assumes he knows everything. It is only after he learns the truth that he realizes that having expectations does not mean a better or more successful life.

Really, it is a good story. It just could have been shorter. A lot shorter.

In any case, I am glad to be done with it and moving on to something I will hopefully enjoy more.

1 Dickens down, 6 to go.

Book 5: Reading Shakespearian Plays.

Reading a 300 page romance novel is not the same as reading a 300 page document on the history of the Phillips screwdriver; just as reading a 700 page novel by Charles Dickens is not the same as reading a 700 page Harry Potter novel. Just because a book is longer does not mean it is automatically more difficult to read. Instead, it’s about the content and the time period of the piece that determines the difficulty of the reading.

For a more personal example, I stayed up all night and read the last Harry Potter book in one sitting the night it came out. It took me roughly 7 ½ hours to get through it. And I know for a FACT that it would take at least twice that to read through a novel by Dostoevsky simply because of difficulty. Since many of the books on this classics list are written in a completely different time period, they require much more concentration than if I were to pick up the latest Nora Roberts book (which my mom surely has). I am sure that you can all relate to an experience in high school where a certain book or piece just took forever to get through because of the complexities of language.

This brings me to Shakespeare and plays in general. Obviously, reading a play is far different that reading a novel. In a novel, the author gives the read cues as to emotion, etc. In a play, all you really have to go by is dialogue and the few stage directions.

Here is an example:

“Why are you always leaving me?” she cried, stomping her feet like the immature teenager she is whilst tears streamed down her cheeks, “Am I not enough for you? Just tell me now so I don’t have to pretend anymore.”

In this first example, you, the reader, have some clear clues to go by. First, you know that the speaker is a she and she is undoubtedly crying. She also seems to be speaking to a partner of some sort who is “leaving her.” You can also tell that she feels inadequate and insecure by how and what she is saying to the unknown speaker. These feelings might be an indication of her age, which is that of a teenager. These are clear clues that paint a picture in your head of the scene taking place.

Now, here is another example:

“I will live in thy heart, die in thy lap, and be buried
in thy eyes—and, moreover, I will go with thee to thy uncle’s,” (v.ii. 87-88).

First, the language is completely different (this is from “Much Ado About Nothing”) and that has to be first deciphered like this:

“I will live in your heart, die in your lap, and be buried in your eyes—and, moreover, I will go back with you to your uncle’s.”

Well, that seems a little better now that I got rid of the “thy” and “thees.” But from these lines, who is speaking? Just looking at the dialogue you can’t tell if it’s a man or a woman, how old they are, or to whom they are speaking. It’s slightly trickier than the scene above. The playwright is counting on the performance to deliver these words in the manner they deserve. On a simple read through, it is hard for the read to find the passion in the words alone. They reader, or viewer, is meant to see and feel the passion through a performance.

I say and explain all this in hopes of making a few points.

First, that a play is meant to be performed rather than read.

Second, that Shakespeare’s plays are truly difficult to understand and read because of the language.

Third, anyone who can read a Shakespeare play straight through and understand all the nuances and emotions of the characters and tells you so, is most likely lying (and you can tell them I said so).

Luckily for people who want to read Shakespeare (not so much for other plays), many publishing companies are finding ways to help the reader. I own a complete set of his plays, which are all just straight versions of the dialogue, but there are editions that have the play on one page in its original text and “modern speech” on the opposite side to decipher the meaning. I own an edition that has footnotes to explain puns and out of date slang so that I can fully understand what is being said.

I’m not going to lie, reading Shakespeare is hard. Not only are you forced with the basic challenges of trying to ascertain emotion and passion from only dialogue, you are also contending with a different kind of English than what you speak today.

I think that is the main reason why people find Shakespeare difficult. When I taught “Romeo and Juliet” to ninth graders, I had to explain everything because of the language gap. To many, it just seems like another language entirely and even words like “you” seem to complex to comprehend.

So, if you are looking to broaden your horizons and read some Shakespeare, try one of the new versions of the play of your choice that has a breakdown of outdated words and modern translations. While some “book snobs” might tell you that’s cheating, its not. It simply makes a very difficult text more attainable.

Have at it!