Printable View
You can say that again. Some of my friends don't read at all, ever. If just doesn't strike me as healthy. Surely brains need exercise too?Quote:
Originally Posted by Docboy
(This from a man who could do with more than a little non-intellectual exercise.)
adam
I just finished The Curious Incident of the Dog at Midnight whilst sitting here waiting for stuff to load. I do however find I can't relax my mind either, so sometimes I envy people that can turn off. If I am sitting idle I start thinking what I have to do, what I need to do, what I could be doing etc.
a buddy gave me the book about a year ago and i really enjoyed reading it (on hols),
i have to say that the thing has grown legs in the last 12 months and at this stage is wildly over-hyped.sure its a good read but people are actually building their holidays around retracing the steps made by characters in the book. :eek:
the book is a clever interweaving of fact and fiction that is written in a "cliff hanger" type style at the end of each chapter which will keep you turning the pages.at the end of the day though :rolleyes: its far from a classic.
p.s. try anything by harlan coben for a good read
Great book.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth
Do you think so? I'm about the only person who didn't like it, as far as I can see. The main character just annoyed me - didn't feel any empathy with his at all. The writing style was very wooden - I know it's that way to suit the character, but that doesn't make it any better - and the humour was pretty non-existent. The overuse of curse words gave me the impression that the book was trying to act big - liberal cursing in writing is something which really annoys me for some reason (which is strange, 'cos I'm not above a bit of cursing when I talk! :) ) Also read The Curious Incident of the WMD in Iraq, which was a very similar, annoying, style.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
Yeah, interesting you say that. I found myself absolutely fascinated at the historical aspect (some of which I was aware of to an extent, some of which I intend to research more; I'm obviously not taking the whole book as gospel, if you pardon the pun!), but once it got into thriller area, I wanted it to get back to the historical parts again. I think though a lot of thrillers follow the same standard path - read maybe ten or fifteen and you've read them all, which is why I read more factual books these days. At least this book has opened up some more interesting avenues for further reading...Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth
On the characters solving the clues so quickly, though, I must object. Even I solved a couple of them (the bank aco**** code springs to mind, even before it wa mentioned that it was a ten-digit code). Maybe you're just annoyed you didn't solve any of them? ;)
Actually I'll take that back and say that I thought it was a very good book. However that's partially because it had been built up a bit by recommendations from my family, which led to a slight disappointment. It sounds odd but if it hadn't been built up so much, I might have categorised it as "great".Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Another factor here is that I read an awful lot of standard fare detective/mystery/thriller books, by authors like Lee Child, Harlen Coben, Michael Connolly, James Lee Burke, etc; and while I think a lot of those books are "great", I wouldn't put them in the same category as books like The Curious Incident of the Dog at Midnight, or Flowers for Algernon, or The Flamingo Rising.
That's not to say those writers aren't amazingly clever, brilliant story-tellers, but somehow it's different, somehow they're in a different class. I like to experience that difference occasionally.
adam
That is kinda my point. I am not firstly reading a book to solve a half baked reflection puzzle or somesuch. I found that in the story of a 1000 years of secret history of an organisation, I found it ridiculous to think 20 seconds of thought solved their inner most secrets!!! It was either the puzzle was so silly or the leap made from point A to point B was based on a thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I read it in a day. It is a very simple easy little book to read. I enjoyed it. I would class it in that genre of book that anyone could read and will either love or hate. I was going to make a point on the style of writing. I thought it was perfectly atuned to the book. As for the mention of cursing, I don't really think it was a big deal plus I doubt the authro was looking to be grabbing attention through the cursing. Rather the story I'd imagine. There was around 20 curses in a book of 280 pages.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
i didnt think Ratzinger was that old :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by niamh
so, the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy...
Damn it, now you blokes got me wantin' to read it. Will, after I finish Moore's latest and will decide whether I and I am in the moron category, Adam!!!
The threads are kind of crossing each other a little, here, but I felt that the various points re. Moore were "fair and balanced" (ouch, sorry about that, couldn't resist it).
I never liked the term "hero" and while I agree with most of what Moore says, doesn't mean he has - or his work - to be worshipped. Same goes for Da Vinci author. :)
i'd reccomend Angels & Demons first. its a better book, so Da Vinci Code's similar yet not quite as good storyline wont make you enjoy A&D any less.Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhamish
i think it was a graat book and very griping once you pick it up you cant put it down but i was dissapointed with the other 3 books each book basically has the same plot ie you have an idea what will happen next
Will take that advice, GavinZac, cheers and thanks. Sorry about the stupid question but doesn't the Da Vinci Code start the whole series. Reason I'm, asking is because I read the Lord of the Rings before The Hobbit and it just wasn't the same, know what I mean? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by GavinZac
i think if you take each book indiviually, then A&D is a bit better, but yes, if you read one, the plots & style can be very similar. if you'd read A&D first you'd be disappointed with the otehr 3 unless you left off reading them for a while.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry Phelan
no, as far as i know, A&D came before DVC. its not specified and the stories dont overlap, but if you read DVC after A&D theres some small hints that A&D comes first.Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhamish
if you do read DVC, try to get a copy of the hard back with pictures (i'll loan ya mine if you like, but you're up the coun try arent ya? :D), its a lot better to see what hes talking about (various paintings/artefacts) than just to read them.
Kind bloke, you are, GavinZac, if you do manage to get it to me, promise to return it - will have to arrange with scouts so the Injuns let it through. "Up the country"??? Born in Holles Street, Hospital, so I was, so I was - like Colin Farrell's paramours, there's a little bit of Dublin in me!!! :D :D . And you're also most welcome to my Roger Whittaker collection (dead serious, I have three of 'em - think it was something I was smoking at the time - mistook him for Jethro Tull's Ian Anderson). :D :D
drop me a PM and we'll sort it outQuote:
Originally Posted by sirhamish
thats private mesage, not parlimentary figurehead. ;)
Thanks a million, GavinZac. By the way, if your'e interested in any Michael Moore DVD/books - have nearly all of them. You're more than welcome to 'em. Got a bunch of stuff by Al Franken and other "far left bombthrowers" (quote Bill O'Liley, FNC ). Will be in touch. Cheers. :)
A&D is definatly ment to be read befor DVC because A&D introduces you to langdon it says so on danbrown.com too