Which Classic Writer Am I Reading Now (or) Which One Should I Read Next

[Teresa Edgerton]

OK, it seems to me that some of us (myself included) have allowed ourselves to dominate the monthly reading threads quite a bit lately with our discussions of Walpole, Gautier, Flaubert, Dunsany, and so forth. Let us take pity on our poor fellow forum-ites who merely want to know what everyone is reading this month, while we, on the other hand, are going on and on about which of Mérimée's stories a person ought to read next, or what we think of Dunsany's novels as compared to his short fiction.

I slap my own hand in reprimand, and I hope that some of you are slapping your own, too, as you are reading this.

And so I create this thread in the hopes that we will not trespass again on the patience of others ... or at least, that we will not do so again soon.

Did I mention that about the same time that I started reading The Castle of Otranto I received in the mail The Supernatural Tales of Fitz-James O'Brien, Volume One: Macabre Tales, and that I briefly put Otranto aside to devour those of O'Brien's stories I had not yet read? No? Well, I should have mentioned it.

I mention it now.

Also, JD, your discussion of Mérimée has filled me with a lust to acquire some of his tales. It appears that some of them are online. How fortunate that the printer at my elbow has a nice new ink-cartridge.

 

[j d worthington]

I have a rather different take on this matter, myself, as I haven't tended to make a great deal of distinction between the different branches of literature in that sense; classic or contemporary matters little; what I am looking for is good literature, something which both entertains and enriches... so I would see no need to split these off from the reading thread, at least as far as noting what I'm reading. A lengthier discussion, yes; but then that should be true of anything else, really. As it is, I have strong reservations about segregating this sort of thing, as to me it: a) continues to contribute to the feeling that such literature should be separated out, either because it is "highbrow" or "literature with a capital L" and therefore not entertaining, or not of interest to the average reader; b) because -- in part due to just that sort of fairly common view -- people who might be introduced to such works and enjoy them are more likely to not look into a thread so prominently labeled "classic", as that has come more and more to be a term of dubious connotations these days.

So, while I applaud a move to discuss these writers, I'm not at all comfortable with a move made to set them off from the more general literary discussions, I'm afraid....

 

[Fried Egg]

Shouldn't you lot be debating this in some kind of moderator's private forum or something?

 

[j d worthington]

It wasn't intended as opening a debate; simply setting forth my reason for abstaining from such a thread....

 

[Connavar]

Must they be SFF ?

I like the idea of general disc thread of classic authors you are reading that only some of us might know,read.

 

[J-Sun]

I have a rather different take on this matter, myself, as I haven't tended to make a great deal of distinction between the different branches of literature in that sense; classic or contemporary matters little; what I am looking for is good literature, something which both entertains and enriches... so I would see no need to split these off from the reading thread, at least as far as noting what I'm reading. A lengthier discussion, yes; but then that should be true of anything else, really. As it is, I have strong reservations about segregating this sort of thing, as to me it: a) continues to contribute to the feeling that such literature should be separated out, either because it is "highbrow" or "literature with a capital L" and therefore not entertaining, or not of interest to the average reader; b) because -- in part due to just that sort of fairly common view -- people who might be introduced to such works and enjoy them are more likely to not look into a thread so prominently labeled "classic", as that has come more and more to be a term of dubious connotations these days.

So, while I applaud a move to discuss these writers, I'm not at all comfortable with a move made to set them off from the more general literary discussions, I'm afraid....

I see your point of view, but this whole website segregates writing by design. I don't consider Flaubert SFF. And I think Teresa Edgerton was talking about a distinction between contemporary and non-contemporary, rather than high and low brow. (I don't think many people count Walpole as high brow. ) I may well pay attention to both threads but I've often felt that it would be nice to have a thread where people only discussed current SFF stuff so that I can get a sense of "the genre today". As is, the "now reading" thread would still be a little too loose. But that does raise the issue of where the line between "current" and "classic" is. (I'm thinking somewhere in the ballpark of the 20th-21st centuries but to be actually "today" would be only the last decade or so.)

And aside from the definitions of then/now, high/lowbrow, I think the main thing is that, while a bare list of books would be boring and not particularly informative and the books mentioned on the main thread should be described a little and spark conversations, when those conversations go from a quick interesting exchange to taking on a life of their own, they may merit a thread of their own and splitting out the living conversation to keep the main thread within a certain range of "on-topicness" might not be taken amiss.

 

[j d worthington]

To prevent further derailment of the thread (sorry, Teresa -- such was not my intent), if anyone else has further responses to my post, please send me a PM; I'll be happy to answer there. That way, the thread can be put back on course....

 

[Pyan]

I've been using the thread exactly as the title implies - just posting what I'm reading at that moment, which is why Dorothy L. Sayers is making, possibly, her first ever appearance on a SFF site.

But surely there's plenty of room for threads discussing all types of literature.
Why not two threads, What are we reading? (SF&F) and What are we reading? (Other Genres)?
Then people can post in either one, depending...

 

[Connavar]

Im reading Lord Dunsany Time and Gods Fantasy Masterworks collection. The Sword of Welleren and now A Dreamer's Tales.

Its really interesting how spiritual the stories in Sword of Welleren was after the first story. Alot about souls,faith,paradise,death it was about. Even a 6 page story can be good. When you get 15+ pages story its a blast.

I do wonder of long-time Lord Dunsany fans if all his short stories in the other collections are 6-7 pages,10-15 pages long ? He can do alot with few pages that you wonder if he wrote longer short stories in the range 30-40 pages.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I've been using the thread exactly as the title implies - just posting what I'm reading at that moment ...

Exactly.

But some of us (I blush to disclose) have been using it for ongoing discussions of various authors, and I think such discussions -- whether the authors are current or not -- belong elsewhere. I have accordingly created a place for those discussions, where we may ramble on at will without any cause for a blush, and since it happens that the authors are invariably older authors (and often 18th or 19th century) I put it in the Classic SFF forum.

The question of putting discussion of older books and authors in a forum devoted to such authors had, I thought, been settled a long time ago. And we have these divisions so that the very people who might be interested in a certain type of discussion will be able to find it, rather than hiding the discussion away in a place they may never look. Nevertheless, I certainly did not mean to imply (nor do I think I did imply) that merely mentioning such books in the monthly reading thread was undesirable, any more than mentioning that one is reading an author who already has his or her own forum here is undesirable. But if every time someone used that thread to mention that they were reading Martin or Erickson or Gemmell it turned into a lengthy discussion of that author's works I am sure people would start to say, "Take it to the appropriate forum." I have simply tried to do the same thing with the discussions that (I thought) have recently been taking up more than their share of the monthly thread.

And aside from the definitions of then/now, high/lowbrow, I think the main thing is that, while a bare list of books would be boring and not particularly informative and the books mentioned on the main thread should be described a little and spark conversations, when those conversations go from a quick interesting exchange to taking on a life of their own, they may merit a thread of their own and splitting out the living conversation to keep the main thread within a certain range of "on-topicness" might not be taken amiss.

Yes, this was my thinking and my intent. Although if we were splitting off different bits several times a month it would be a lot of work for the moderator. And since it happens that at this particular time all such lengthy exchanges have something in common and an entire sub-forum devoted to that very thing they have in common, why not divert them in that direction?

****

So, to get back to using the thread as I meant it to be used --and thank you Connavar for providing an opportunity).

I think as you read other collections of Dunsany's work, you will continue to find that a large number of his stories are very short. It seems he had the integrity to keep his stories, short or long, at the length that he thought suited them best, which is saying a lot for an author who was probably being paid by the word.

Apart from his novels, I don't remember any of his stories that were much longer than 15 pages or so, but others with better memories might point you toward some that are.

 

[Connavar]

15 pages of his are like others authors 30 pages. So im glad reading the "long" 15 page stories. He can sure tell alot in those few pages.

Just to be safe though i will be getting a novel of his as soon im done with the six collections collection.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Just to be safe though i will be getting a novel of his as soon im done with the six collections collection.

In that case, I think The King of Elfland's Daughter would be the logical next step. The prose is right up there with his best and there are some very powerful moments throughout the story.

 

[Connavar]

In that case, I think The King of Elfland's Daughter would be the logical next step. The prose is right up there with his best and there are some very powerful moments throughout the story.

It was actually a hard choice for me i thought hard about getting his first novel Don Rodriguez: Chronicles of Shadow Valley or going for other short story collections like Fifty-one Tales or Tales of War.

Its rare for me to read fantastic authors i like who wrote many quality short stories. Its something nice about reading a collection,going in and out of short story after another. Those kind of SFF collections has made me enjoy,respect the short story alot more than i use to.
Thats why i wasnt sure about The King of Elfland's Daugther. I ended up getting it.

Its pretty amazing how easy its to get in print works of Lord Dunsany. I browsed several publisher sites before ordering The King of Elfland's Daugther. Wildside press,Hippocampus Press,Del Rey,Nightshade books,Penguin etc

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I think there's been sort of a Dunsany revival. Not a huge one, but enough to bring a lot of his books back into print. I hope you enjoy The King of Elfland's Daughter. It's had an influence on many later writers, so parts of it may seem familiar at first, but that will change as you read on.

 

[Fried Egg]

I'm sure that "The King of Elfland's Daughter" was a major influence on Neil Gaiman's "Startdust".

I'm contemplating one of the following two for my next Dunsany aquisition:

 

[dask]

I'm currently trying to read THE SUNDERING FLOOD by William Morris, but I dunno. His style is a barrier I find it hard to break through. Not sure how far I'm going to make it.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Fried Egg -- If you do get The Blessings of Pan I would be very interested in your opinion of it, since I almost bought it myself, and would like to know whether I ought to give into the temptation the next time it presents itself.

dask -- Yes, Morris's prose can be hard going. I've never been able to stick with it myself.

 

[Connavar]

I think there's been sort of a Dunsany revival. Not a huge one, but enough to bring a lot of his books back into print. I hope you enjoy The King of Elfland's Daughter. It's had an influence on many later writers, so parts of it may seem familiar at first, but that will change as you read on.

His writing style and stories,imagination is so different experience to me that most likely i wouldnt remember if the things he writing about is familiar or not when im reading him. My last stories of him Like The Hurricane,The Lord of the Cities was about the Hurricane wanting to destroy humans for what their cities are doing to the nature,the other where the river,the road talked to eacother,a spider. He is like Jack Vance he can write about anything i wouldnt care what it is.

About his revival i was expecting him to be out of print enough that i was already fearing the shipping cost for the second books of his works. It was a great surprise seeing i can get almost every work of his in new books, almost too good to be true.

 

[dask]

dask -- Yes, Morris's prose can be hard going. I've never been able to stick with it myself.

When my wife and I went out for coffee tonignt I left THE SUNDERING FLOOD at home and took a bunch of comics.

 

[Connavar]

I'm sure that "The King of Elfland's Daughter" was a major influence on Neil Gaiman's "Startdust".

I'm contemplating one of the following two for my next Dunsany aquisition:

Are you sure about Fifty-one tales dodo press version ? Its only one dollar cheaper than the wildside press paperback who is 38 pages longer.