h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

At the beginning of the year, I got a brainstorm: why not sift through the Internet for lists of books that everyone ought to read? As opposed to what I've actually been reading since I retired in 2010, i.e. a steady diet of murder mysteries and whatever looked good on display at the local library or bookstore.

I found a list of highly-regarded books from 2012 in the Boston Globe, and a couple of lists of books regarded as the best of the 21st Century to date.

I've worked my way through 50 or 60 of these, but lately the ones I've been tackling are so long that I can't make much headway. For instance: "Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell" is 800 pages long. Jonathan Franzen's "The Corrections" is almost 600 pages. Haruki Murakami's "1Q84" is about 1,000 pages.

At this rate, I will likely always be behind in my reading. What is it about the arbiters of literary excellence that makes them equate great length with high quality?

I sometimes find "Infinite jest" put forward as the best book of the last 30 years. How did such enthusiasts ever manage to finish it? The book is 1,100 pages!

Not that some books of 400 or 500 pages aren't worth every page. Many are, and I'm happy to stick it out. It just makes me wonder why authors don't rein in their prose a bit more.

In haste before going on me holidays:

You need to ask yourself - why do I want to read this book, what can I gain from it ...

Things you can do:
a) learn to flash read
b) read up study guides / summaries / reviews
c) If you are more interested in the author and his/her works (as genre) then read about the author, find out what the author was interested in, what were their influences, their legacies etc.

This is literary criticism / theory.

I agree. If they aren't getting paid by the word, they should learn to be more concise. Unless they're planning to advertise the book as a doorstop...

I met a young woman, back when I was a student, who commuted to work every day. She bought her books by the pound. She said she wanted a book to last for a month of commutes, with a half-hour read each way. Maybe that's why they do it.

last book I read was 2001 space odyssey, about 2 years after watching the film

Many of the classics (dickens, hardy, ...) were written for weekly, fortnightly, monthly "magazines" ... before comics ... so texts with maybe illustrations. Later on they were combined and sold in "novel" form. I have read Proust In Search of Lost Time ... quite quickly plus supplemented it with reading reviews and part study guides ... until I developed an understanding (maybe) of his points and major conclusions etc. James Joyce .... well that's another story ... but I at least think I understand what he was trying to achieve (Ulysses & Finnegan Wake) ... different authors ... different experiences etc.

"You need to ask yourself - why do I want to read this book, what can I gain from it ..." [Stone Aart]

The project turned out to be more complex than I expected . When I was a librarian, I read thousands of reviews but not much more twenty books a year, due to not having much energy left after the work day was done and the errands were completed. I watched, fascinated, as patrons with leisure time available checked out up to a dozen books at a time, then came back the next week for another pile. My grandmother read four or five books a week in her 80s and 90s.

Now that I have the leisure time, I find that it's much harder than I thought to make that much headway.

"a) learn to flash read"

I read the first 50 or 60% thoroughly, then basically skim the rest.

c. I am not that interested in the author.

I try to read reviews as well as the books themselves.

Anyway, thanks for engaging with my ruminations.

The upside of it all is that I see a forthcoming movie adaptation of "10,000 Saints," which I finished reading last month. Ethan Hawke will play Les, which is perfect casting!

I often start in the middle, wherever so ething catches my eye, the flash back for explanations if I have questions.

"At this rate, I will likely always be behind in my reading." [paulh]

It used to frustrate me muchly when I was young that I would never be able to read all the good books in this world (and actually I still get that feeling from time to time )
So much in fact that I considered refusing to read *any* of them at all!
There probably is a medical term for that. At least there should be

I refused to read the same book more than once when I was young. Why would anyone do that? It would take up the time to read a new book!
But later on I have actually read some book more than twice. H2G2 is of course one of them

I think it's a great idea to start reading "the best books ever" - or at least pick what looks interesting from a list like that.

At the moment I am working my way through Terry Pratchett's Disc World novels - chronologically. But I am frequently taking time off from that to read different books. The last one was Stephen "Pastey" Dunkley's "Endangered Creatures" (read my review in my journals - there are no spoilers)

"When I was a librarian, I read thousands of reviews but not much more twenty books a year, due to not having much energy left after the work day was done and the errands were completed"

I know exactly how you felt. Reading for 8 hours every day at w*rk was quite enough reading for me while I was still in the w*rk force. I hardly got to read more than 2 books per year

In contrast I read up to 7 books per week when I was a boy

Now I'm on book reading rehabilitation

Metaliterature?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Basic_Plots

I think they left one out, though: A newcomer comes to town.