Books I won't read

[Ricordanza]

My list starts with Sarah Palin's forthcoming memoirs.

[jbuck919]

My list starts with Sarah Palin's forthcoming memoirs.

I'll restrain my urge to make a comment (though I have a nifty one in mind) and point out that perhaps this is just asking for it on a board that should not be an extension of the Pub.

Which leads me to wonder whether there is something I would not read for reasons other than that it is on the "wrong" side of a political controversy. Well, my sister, who is college educated no matter what you may think from this anecdote, is currently working with speech impaired children. She has found that so-called graphic novels are a help, and more than once she's tried to get me to read one to see for myself what they have to offer. I'm not sure that's "reading" in the first place, but I don't feel any desire to do it.

[IcedNote]

She has found that so-called graphic novels are a help, and more than once she's tried to get me to read one to see for myself what they have to offer. I'm not sure that's "reading" in the first place, but I don't feel any desire to do it.

I've only read one in my life...and it was extraordinary.



"Watchmen" by Alan Moore.

If you want a change of pace, I highly recommend it.

-G

[jbuck919]

She has found that so-called graphic novels are a help, and more than once she's tried to get me to read one to see for myself what they have to offer. I'm not sure that's "reading" in the first place, but I don't feel any desire to do it.

I've only read one in my life...and it was extraordinary.


"Watchmen" by Alan Moore.

If you want a change of pace, I highly recommend it.

-G

I am probably perversely nurturing a thread with the opposite of a theme I would favor (we need an expression for that, don't we, something along the lines of "carrying coals to Newcastle"?), but here is the latest one my sister has recommended, in case anyone has heard of it:

[Madame]

I am probably perversely nurturing a thread with the opposite of a theme I would favor (we need an expression for that, don't we, something along the lines of "carrying coals to Newcastle"?), but here is the latest one my sister has recommended, in case anyone has heard of it:

It fits this theme for me ...

[IcedNote]

My list starts with Sarah Palin's forthcoming memoirs.

-G

[Madame]

My list starts with Sarah Palin's forthcoming memoirs.

-G

This is polluting this forum -- it belongs on the Pub.

[Corlyss_D]

Oh, goody! Another Palin bashing thread started and fostered by insecure pseudo-intellectual males. Get over yourselves, guys. I suggest therapy.

Madame is right, this doesn't belong in the Book Review, which is designed for books one reads, not about current politics. That's what the Pub is for, especially when they are supercilious rants about a recent former candidate.

[living_stradivarius]

She has found that so-called graphic novels are a help, and more than once she's tried to get me to read one to see for myself what they have to offer. I'm not sure that's "reading" in the first place, but I don't feel any desire to do it.

I've only read one in my life...and it was extraordinary.



"Watchmen" by Alan Moore.

If you want a change of pace, I highly recommend it.

-G

I've seen the film. Great cinematography and underlying message, but it was convoluted and cheesy along the way.

[keaggy220]

Oh, goody! Another Palin bashing thread started and fostered by insecure pseudo-intellectual males. Get over yourselves, guys. I suggest therapy.

Madame is right, this doesn't belong in the Book Review, which is designed for books one reads, not about current politics. That's what the Pub is for, especially when they are supercilious rants about a recent former candidate.

We may need to come up with PDS to replace BDS. The liberals always need a boogeyman, in this case a boogeywoman who has no influence over policy. It's so pathetic. All of this ridicule for a former Alaskan governor.

For the record, I won't be reading her book either, unless it is miraculously filled with uncommon insight or if I receive it as a gift.

[jbuck919]

Oh, goody! Another Palin bashing thread started and fostered by insecure pseudo-intellectual males. Get over yourselves, guys. I suggest therapy.

Madame is right, this doesn't belong in the Book Review, which is designed for books one reads, not about current politics. That's what the Pub is for, especially when they are supercilious rants about a recent former candidate.

Ahem!

Well, at least I'm free to make my suggestion that at least a Sarah Palin memoir could serve a dual usage if it were placed in a strategic position within the home. And thanks for trying to kill the discussion with a pre-characterization of any who would post to it, Corlyss. I'm already thinking up what phrases I can use similarly to pen-poison the next thread where I can anticipate a typical Corlyss comment. There's plenty of material to work with, God knows.

[david johnson]

Books I won't read -

Anything that appears preachy about the virtues of agnosticism and/or atheism.

dj

[Cosima__J]

Can anyone possibly want to read 707 pages of "The Clinton Tapes" by Taylor Branch?

[JackC]

Can anyone possibly want to read 707 pages of "The Clinton Tapes" by Taylor Branch?

I was curious about the Branch book, but then just remember what this is about - tapes of a interviews that Clinton gave to Branch on an ongoing basis. No doubt it was just Clinton's attempt to build up his image in the history books on the various issues he was facing. There has never been a President who loved to talk and BS more than Clinton.

Some of the excerts regarding Lewinsky have already leaked. It's typical Clinton manipulative BS. Lot's of stuff about how he cracked under the pressure of the mid-term election losses, etc etc but nothing about how he could justify lying to the nation for 9 months, which did as much to destroy the political fabric of the country as anything in recent memory.

[Ralph]

"ULYSSES"

[Guitarist]

My list starts with Sarah Palin's forthcoming memoirs.

Add to that Glenn Beck's new book.

[Corlyss_D]

There's some threads I won't waste my time on too.

[Steinway]

I'll buy the Palin book and anything written by Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter as well.

It saves me the necessity of buying all those comic books I usually read.

[Agnes Selby]

"Mein Kampf" - a definite NO.

[JackC]

"Mein Kampf" - a definite NO.

I saw the movie - WWII - it has a different ending than the book.

[Cosima__J]

But if more people had read Mein Kampf before WWII cranked up, they'd have known what Hitler was going to do.

[jbuck919]

But if more people had read Mein Kampf before WWII cranked up, they'd have known what Hitler was going to do.

My impression is that they did but dismissed it (let's face it, his program is disarming in its frankness). Germany has a "tradition" of leaders telling the awful truth about exactly what they intend to do. Bismarck did the same thing (though his program was not as extreme or horrific as Hitler's, he did state, for instance, the need to start and then win at least one war). We're just used to our monster dictators being men like Stalin or Saddam Hussein, who don't bother to "pre-memoir" themselves.

[Guitarist]

"Mein Kampf" - a definite NO.

Glenn Beck's new book is a rewrite of it, replete with an SS-esque cover.

[Corlyss_D]

"Mein Kampf" - a definite NO.

Glenn Beck's new book is a rewrite of it, replete with an SS-esque cover.

Actually, I thought it was obvious: it's a Soviet era Russian uniform, as part of his send up Obama's affection for czars.

[Madame]

"Mein Kampf" - a definite NO.

I saw the movie - WWII - it has a different ending than the book.

I don't think that part ended ... tragically ...

Not sure whether it should be read ... too painful for survivors ... too dangerous to put into the minds of those who would embrace it. I am neither ... I read it once ... and wanted to throw up. It's not for sissies.

[Madame]

But if more people had read Mein Kampf before WWII cranked up, they'd have known what Hitler was going to do.

My impression is that they did but dismissed it (let's face it, his program is disarming in its frankness). Germany has a "tradition" of leaders telling the awful truth about exactly what they intend to do. Bismarck did the same thing (though his program was not as extreme or horrific as Hitler's, he did state, for instance, the need to start and then win at least one war). We're just used to our monster dictators being men like Stalin or Saddam Hussein, who don't bother to "pre-memoir" themselves.

I'm not that generous -- I think many didn't care, it suited the rampant anti-Semitic mood in those years. I can hear a 'YESS!!'.

As to modern-day foes, nobody took Bin Laden seriously enough when he stated his intentions ... again, again, again.

[Mark Harwood]

But if more people had read Mein Kampf before WWII cranked up, they'd have known what Hitler was going to do.

Same applies to the Koran.

[Corlyss_D]

But if more people had read Mein Kampf before WWII cranked up, they'd have known what Hitler was going to do.

I don't think that was the problem. Of those who believed him, many if not most endorsed his ambition; of those who believed him and thought he was dangerous, many if not most thought they could control him; of those who disbelieved him, many if not most thought it would never happen anyway. People are rarely prescient enough to spot danger and act on it timely. Who did? The people who got out.