love

Author Topic: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread  (Read 29144 times)

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 12075
  • "The life we build, we never stop creating.”
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #180 on: January 29, 2013, 02:00:06 PM »
Audiobooks don't count as reading either.

/FLY

FLY! You're relegating me to the illiterate zone. Who's got consistent time to sit and read a book? You're going to have to cut me some slack on this one. :D

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28785
  • I am trying to impress myself. I have yet to do it
    • Processed Grass
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #181 on: January 29, 2013, 02:03:47 PM »
All I read are plays anymore, though I imagine if I took the two hours I spend in bed each night playing with my Vita I would get through some books. Probably not though. Long live theatre!

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23082
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #182 on: January 29, 2013, 02:17:25 PM »
Bondo, for loving female perspective so much, you're really missing out with these three:

To Kill a Mockingbird
Pride and Prejudice
Jane Eyre


Yes, but I've seen two dramatized versions of TKaM, at least that many of Pride and Prejudice and one of Jane Eyre. I know movies aren't the same as books but at some point those are stories I know and am not sure I need to know further.

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 12075
  • "The life we build, we never stop creating.”
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #183 on: January 29, 2013, 02:26:04 PM »
@ FLY

Yes! Long live theatre! I had to look up what Vita meant.  :D


@ Bondo

I can't argue with movie watching. It looks like you've got it covered. :)

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26795
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #184 on: January 29, 2013, 02:29:07 PM »
What?! :D

I don't see a difference between that and audio books.
Well, there are a number of factors:

1-Just hearing a Biblical text in Sunday School/church often runs the risk of decontextualizing the passage from the chapter, the book, and possibly the entire Bible.

2-You're often getting people's interpretation of the text in church, and not necessarily the space given to reflect upon the text.

3-Like studying any text, a consideration of context is very important, the time, the place, the culture, the intended audience. Some people are good at doing this in a sermon, most aren't. With a 2000+ year old text, this is particularly important.

4-I find reading at your own pace is very essential for taking on something like The Bible. Being able to spend as much or as little time is important when dealing with certain passages. I've spent an hour on just a few verses, while other chapters I've only dwelled on a couple of minutes.


Audio books, well I won't slam them. I think for certain kind of texts they are fine. If you're reading something informative or maybe something that isn't particularly artfully constructed, I don't think there's a big difference, but, for instance, I'd never want to listen to an audio book version of a Dickens story. I love mulling over his word and re-reading paragraphs just to soak in a construction of sentences. But for someone like C.S. Lewis, who I also love, I'd be find listening to audio versions (and have for his Narnia series).



Also, books and movies are so very different. Saying you got the story of a artfully crafted book, like Jane Eyre is just ignorant of how the two mediums express things, especially given how much Jane Eyre is a book about the interior of the character, which is something films are terrible at expression.

oneaprilday

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 13746
  • "What we see and what we seem are but a dream."
    • A Journal of Film
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #185 on: January 29, 2013, 02:31:35 PM »
Yes, but I've seen two dramatized versions of TKaM, at least that many of Pride and Prejudice and one of Jane Eyre. I know movies aren't the same as books but at some point those are stories I know and am not sure I need to know further.
/obligatory oad reactionary response

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26795
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #186 on: January 29, 2013, 02:41:07 PM »
I guess this also gets to a different between Bondo and I. I don't care that much about the story, I find how it's done far more interesting. Hence seeing a film version of Jane Eyre just doesn't seem like it could ever capture what makes the book wonderful. Sure, there will be a similar story, but I doubt my reason for liking one will be the same reason I like the other.

For example, the reason I love Blade Runner as a film is vastly different from the reasons I like Do Androids... because they are two vastly different ways of going about exploring similar ideas. Honestly, the story in both is pretty forgettable.

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23082
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #187 on: January 29, 2013, 03:52:58 PM »
Yes, but I've seen two dramatized versions of TKaM, at least that many of Pride and Prejudice and one of Jane Eyre. I know movies aren't the same as books but at some point those are stories I know and am not sure I need to know further.
/obligatory oad reactionary response

Again, I operate in a world with finite resources such as time. If I have x hours to spend reading, a new story is often going to be a better use than an enriched version of an old story. This guilt tripping type response at not having read every book and watched every movie ever, or of settling for second best or incomplete tellings (giving up if things aren't proving satifying), is just so out of touch with reality.

*continues reading Cloud Atlas, of which he's seen a film adaptation*

oneaprilday

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 13746
  • "What we see and what we seem are but a dream."
    • A Journal of Film
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #188 on: January 29, 2013, 04:46:00 PM »
Yes, but I've seen two dramatized versions of TKaM, at least that many of Pride and Prejudice and one of Jane Eyre. I know movies aren't the same as books but at some point those are stories I know and am not sure I need to know further.
/obligatory oad reactionary response

Again, I operate in a world with finite resources such as time. If I have x hours to spend reading, a new story is often going to be a better use than an enriched version of an old story. This guilt tripping type response at not having read every book and watched every movie ever, or of settling for second best or incomplete tellings (giving up if things aren't proving satifying), is just so out of touch with reality.

*continues reading Cloud Atlas, of which he's seen a film adaptation*
???

Also, oh dear, I wasn't in the slightest trying to guilt-trip you. :(  Also, huh? based on that one very vague thing I said, I'm out of touch with reality? :(  Bondo, really? :(

To clarify, then, since I seemed to have so stepped in it: I was just being a bit wry (and I guess I should have included the ;) I assumed you'd read into my reply); as a lit instructor, of course, I want you to read the book and taste of its words and its medium rather than just watch a version of the plot in film form - wouldn't you assume that about me?   As Sam said above, a book, for me, is not just about its plot or story - it's so much more than that, in part, the simply very aesthetic experience of the words themselves, an experience cannot be put on the screen.  I in no way expect you or any other person to want to experience a book for him or herself, but I love these books so much, I would love you to, too.  My experience of them is something I would love everyone to have. That's all.  No judgment from me on your choices, my friend, and what you decide to do with your time.

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26795
Re: Top 100 Books 2012 discussion thread
« Reply #189 on: January 29, 2013, 04:51:34 PM »
I figured he was calling me a guilt tripper, because I'm guilty of doing that a lot.  ;D