Michelle Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 (edited) Ayn Rand was a superb novelist. But so were other people.So, what are your favorite novels not written by Rand?For me:Brave New World by Aldous HuxleyWatership Down by Richard AdamsThe Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor DostoevskyLust For Life by Irving StoneLes Miserables by Victor HugoWuthering Heights by Emily BronteWar With the Newts by Karel Capek Edited June 4, 2009 by Michelle R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 Ayn Rand was a superb novelist. But so were other people.So, what are your favorite novels not written by Rand?For me:Brave New World by Aldous HuxleyThe Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor DostoevskyLust For Life by Irving StoneLes Miserables by Victor HugoWuthering Heights by Emily BronteWar With the Newts by Karel CapekThe Moon is a Harsh MistressStarship Troopers both By Robert Heinlein.And just about everything written by Ursula La Guin especially -The Dispossessed- and -The Left Hand of Darkness-. La Guin has a humane touch that Rand does not have. Les Mis by Victor HugoMy favorite poets are Robert Burns and Rudyard Kipling. Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 In no particular order, with a wide range of magnitude, top ten in bold:Mists of AvalonEndless Voyageby Marrion Zimmer BradleyDune SeriesWhite PlagueDosadi ExperimentSantaroga Barrierby Frank HerbertMote in God's EyeFootfallby Larrrry Niven and Jerry PournelleLeft Hand of Darknessby Ursula K LeguinWatership Downby Richard AdamsCanticle for Leibowitzby Walter M. MillerName of the Roseby Umberto EcoA Case of Conscienceby James BlishTime Enough for LoveFridayMoon is a Harsh Mistressby Robert HeinleinLord of the RingsThe HobbitThe Silmarillionby J.R.R TolkienalsoInterview with the VampireThe Vampire L'EstatAnn RiceState of FearPrey NextTimelineMichael Crichton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 4, 2009 Author Share Posted June 4, 2009 (edited) Ted: Watership Down is a terrific novel. Probably my favorite "Fantasy" novel. I should probably add it. I'm not accustomed to making these kinds of lists, you see.What is your opinion of the Ender series? I loved Speaker for the Dead, but I wasn't too hot about the rest.What is your opinion of Niven's Ringworld books?And have you read Tau Zero by Poul Anderson? Edited June 4, 2009 by Michelle R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 Ted: Watership Down is a terrific novel. Probably my favorite "Fantasy" novel. I should probably add it. I'm not accustomed to making these kinds of lists, you see.What is your opinion of the Ender series? I loved Speaker for the Dead, but I wasn't too hot about the rest.And have you read Tau Zero by Poul Anderson?The only Poul Anderson I remember, fondly, was Breed to Come. Yes, Speaker for the Dead was excellent, and the rest weren't nearly as good. The first three Alvin books were good, the second was excellent. I also forgot:Darwin's RadioDarwin's ChildrenForge of God Anvil of the Starsby Greg Bear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 You edited in Larry Niven after I had read your post and responded to it.I have read everything by him, and liked almsot all. I would rate him as my fifth favorite author after Tolkien, Rand, Heinlein and Herbert, in that order. Ringworld itself is a classic. The second book is very good, and the fourth almost as good as the second. I am pretty sure he was either drunk or in rehab when he wrote the fourth. Legacy of Heorot and Beowulf's Children are quite good. Oath of Fealty is a libertarian manifesto. Lucifer's Hammer is great. World out of time, World of Ptaav's, Gift from Earth, and Protector are all worth reading. I disliked Inferno. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 In no particular order, with a wide range of magnitude, top ten in bold:Mists of AvalonEndless Voyageby Marrion Zimmer BradleyDune SeriesWhite PlagueDosadi ExperimentSantaroga Barrierby Frank HerbertMote in God's EyeFootfallby Larrrry Niven and Jerry PournelleLeft Hand of Darknessby Ursula K LeguinWatership Downby Richard AdamsCanticle for Leibowitzby Walter M. MillerName of the Roseby Umberto EcoA Case of Conscienceby James BlishTime Enough for LoveFridayMoon is a Harsh Mistressby Robert HeinleinLord of the RingsThe HobbitThe Silmarillionby J.R.R TolkienalsoInterview with the VampireThe Vampire L'EstatAnn RiceState of FearPrey NextTimelineMichael CrichtonYou have good taste.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomtg Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I like Isaac Asimov's original Foundation trilogy. When I first read them I thought he was describing the history of the Roman Empire. The story matched my Western Civ. history course at the time. I don't like the later sequels and the prequel; the subsequent storyline focused on "humanity" as a collective-galactic being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 In no particular order, with a wide range of magnitude, top ten in bold:Mists of AvalonEndless Voyageby Marrion Zimmer BradleyDune SeriesWhite PlagueDosadi ExperimentSantaroga Barrierby Frank HerbertMote in God's EyeFootfallby Larrrry Niven and Jerry PournelleLeft Hand of Darknessby Ursula K LeguinWatership Downby Richard AdamsCanticle for Leibowitzby Walter M. MillerName of the Roseby Umberto EcoA Case of Conscienceby James BlishTime Enough for LoveFridayMoon is a Harsh Mistressby Robert HeinleinLord of the RingsThe HobbitThe Silmarillionby J.R.R TolkienalsoInterview with the VampireThe Vampire L'EstatAnn RiceState of FearPrey NextTimelineMichael CrichtonYou have good taste.Ba'al ChatzafOn writing this list I find that I am offended by the fact that there aren't better contemporary writers of literature that aren't sci-fi writers. I have read Mitchner and Wolfe and Grisham and Clancy and many others, but find I have no desire to reread them. All of the books I have listed above as favorites I have read at least three times. Is it me, or is it the culture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I like Isaac Asimov's original Foundation trilogy. When I first read them I thought he was describing the history of the Roman Empire. The story matched my Western Civ. history course at the time. I don't like the later sequels and the prequel; the subsequent storyline focused on "humanity" as a collective-galactic being.Two writers I do not like are Asimov and Vonnegut. They both seem full of themselves, I feel like their novels patronize the reader. I started Foundation ten times. I read 90% of I Robot, and stopped. But I did avidly read every non-fiction book by Asimov in the town library as a child. Arthur C. Clarke is not bad, but only 2010 have I read twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 4, 2009 Author Share Posted June 4, 2009 I like Isaac Asimov's original Foundation trilogy. When I first read them I thought he was describing the history of the Roman Empire. The story matched my Western Civ. history course at the time. I don't like the later sequels and the prequel; the subsequent storyline focused on "humanity" as a collective-galactic being.Two writers I do not like are Asimov and Vonnegut. They both seem full of themselves, I feel like their novels patronize the reader. I started Foundation ten times. I read 90% of I Robot, and stopped. But I did avidly read every non-fiction book by Asimov in the town library as a child. Arthur C. Clarke is not bad, but only 2010 have I read twice. I don't like Vonnegut, but Breakfast of Champions is hilarious. I loved Asimov's Robot series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 4, 2009 Author Share Posted June 4, 2009 (edited) In no particular order, with a wide range of magnitude, top ten in bold:Mists of AvalonEndless Voyageby Marrion Zimmer BradleyDune SeriesWhite PlagueDosadi ExperimentSantaroga Barrierby Frank HerbertMote in God's EyeFootfallby Larrrry Niven and Jerry PournelleLeft Hand of Darknessby Ursula K LeguinWatership Downby Richard AdamsCanticle for Leibowitzby Walter M. MillerName of the Roseby Umberto EcoA Case of Conscienceby James BlishTime Enough for LoveFridayMoon is a Harsh Mistressby Robert HeinleinLord of the RingsThe HobbitThe Silmarillionby J.R.R TolkienalsoInterview with the VampireThe Vampire L'EstatAnn RiceState of FearPrey NextTimelineMichael CrichtonYou have good taste.Ba'al ChatzafOn writing this list I find that I am offended by the fact that there aren't better contemporary writers of literature that aren't sci-fi writers. I have read Mitchner and Wolfe and Grisham and Clancy and many others, but find I have no desire to reread them. All of the books I have listed above as favorites I have read at least three times. Is it me, or is it the culture? Modern Literature is a wasteland. Which is why most of what I've read was written before the twentieth century. I've not yet read any of Wolfe's novels, but the little excerpts I've read have been fantastic. I'm going to order his Book of the New Sun series when I have some money to spare. I can't stand Tolkien's stuff. It's so dry and boring. Edited June 4, 2009 by Michelle R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiodekadent Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 I'm not a fiction buff, so I can't claim advanced tastes in this issue. However, I admit this is stereotypical, I loved the first three books in Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles (Interview With The Vampire, The Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned). Before I read Rand, they were my favorite books.Apart from those three, one novel I do have a lot of fondness for is Michael Chrichton's "State Of Fear." Specifically, at some points, he sounds almost exactly like Ayn Rand. When describing one of the villains, he gives a very vicious summary of the man's personal history, one that almost eclipses Rand's own venomous descriptions of the "looters." Plus, when one of the characters (the Hollywood Actor) is on the plane to the islands, he gives this speech which is such a hilariously true statement of modern environmentalism's anti-modernity and love of the noble savage that you'd think he was on the train going through the Taggart Tunnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 5, 2009 Author Share Posted June 5, 2009 Interview With the Vampire is the most boring thing I've ever read in my life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Interview With the Vampire is the most boring thing I've ever read in my life.Even compared to LotR? And how about compared to Moby Dick, Ulysses, or Waiting for Godot?I did not like Queen of the Damned, it had far too many dei ex machina. But the first two stories were lushly written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 5, 2009 Author Share Posted June 5, 2009 Interview With the Vampire is the most boring thing I've ever read in my life.Even compared to LotR? And how about compared to Moby Dick, Ulysses, or Waiting for Godot?I did not like Queen of the Damned, it had far too many dei ex machina. But the first two stories were lushly written. I'm sorry. You're right. LOTR IS more boring. And The Silmarillion is more boring than LOTR. Although my estimation isn't really fair. I only read about fifty pages in before deciding that I wasn't in the mood for a history lesson, tossed it aside, grabbed something else (I think I started reading something by Heinlein at that point), and have felt no desire to pick it up since. Which is odd for me. I feel this gnawing irritation whenever I leave a book unfinished most of the time, which is how I manage to get through novels like Ulysses, Moby Dick, The Name of the Rose, etc. But I've just had no desire to re-read that book. I've only ever experienced that with one other writer: Henry James. Worst literary writer ever. His style is just... unspeakably awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Interview With the Vampire is the most boring thing I've ever read in my life.Even compared to LotR? And how about compared to Moby Dick, Ulysses, or Waiting for Godot?I did not like Queen of the Damned, it had far too many dei ex machina. But the first two stories were lushly written. I'm sorry. You're right. LOTR IS more boring. And The Silmarillion is more boring than LOTR. Although my estimation isn't really fair. I only read about fifty pages in before deciding that I wasn't in the mood for a history lesson, tossed it aside, grabbed something else (I think I started reading something by Heinlein at that point), and have felt no desire to pick it up since. Which is odd for me. I feel this gnawing irritation whenever I leave a book unfinished most of the time, which is how I manage to get through novels like Ulysses, Moby Dick, The Name of the Rose, etc. But I've just had no desire to re-read that book. I've only ever experienced that with one other writer: Henry James. Worst literary writer ever. His style is just... unspeakably awful.A few things with LotR. First, it was begun as a sequel to The Hobbit, and The Hobbit is a juvenile book. You have to have read and liked The Hobbit to enjoy the beginning of LotR. If you haven't already read and enjoyed The Hobbit, it may be hard to do so at your advanced age. I would suggest in that case that you simply watch the Rankin and Bass animated version, which is one of the best movie adaptations I have ever seen.Then, realize that after the first few chapters LotR b ecomes much more a story for adults, basically once they leave the Shire and its surroundings. The Flight to the Ford is where the story has transitioned. Over all, the plot is very well crafted. The characters are well characterized. The theme is well handled. Some people complain there is no sex, which I find an absurd objection. It does help to have some interest in linguistics and archeology. Tolkien was a scholar of Old English and it shows in his back story. Keep in mind he fought in the trenches of WWI as well. I suggest you watch the Hobbit and slog through the first book - half way through volume I, that is. You shouldn't need to be prompted to read from there.Here is The Hobbit in full at Youtube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 5, 2009 Author Share Posted June 5, 2009 Interview With the Vampire is the most boring thing I've ever read in my life.Even compared to LotR? And how about compared to Moby Dick, Ulysses, or Waiting for Godot?I did not like Queen of the Damned, it had far too many dei ex machina. But the first two stories were lushly written. I'm sorry. You're right. LOTR IS more boring. And The Silmarillion is more boring than LOTR. Although my estimation isn't really fair. I only read about fifty pages in before deciding that I wasn't in the mood for a history lesson, tossed it aside, grabbed something else (I think I started reading something by Heinlein at that point), and have felt no desire to pick it up since. Which is odd for me. I feel this gnawing irritation whenever I leave a book unfinished most of the time, which is how I manage to get through novels like Ulysses, Moby Dick, The Name of the Rose, etc. But I've just had no desire to re-read that book. I've only ever experienced that with one other writer: Henry James. Worst literary writer ever. His style is just... unspeakably awful.A few things with LotR. First, it was begun as a sequel to The Hobbit, and The Hobbit is a juvenile book. You have to have read and liked The Hobbit to enjoy the beginning of LotR. If you haven't already read and enjoyed The Hobbit, it may be hard to do so at your advanced age. I would suggest in that case that you simply watch the Rankin and Bass animated version, which is one of the best movie adaptations I have ever seen.Then, realize that after the first few chapters LotR b ecomes much more a story for adults, basically once they leave the Shire and its surroundings. The Flight to the Ford is where the story has transitioned. Over all, the plot is very well crafted. The characters are well characterized. The theme is well handled. Some people complain there is no sex, which I find an absurd objection. It does help to have some interest in linguistics and archeology. Tolkien was a scholar of Old English and it shows in his back story. Keep in mind he fought in the trenches of WWI as well. I suggest you watch the Hobbit and slog through the first book - half way through volume I, that is. You shouldn't need to be prompted to read from there.Here is The Hobbit in full at Youtube. The Hobbit was required reading for one of my English classes when I was younger. Hated it. I tried reading it on my own a few years later to see if perhaps I was just reacting to being forced to read something. Still hated it. But even if I hadn't, why would I, at 21, be unable to read and enjoy The Hobbit? I read roughly half of the first book of LOTR before deciding life was too short to keep on. I just plain don't like Tolkien's writing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 5, 2009 Author Share Posted June 5, 2009 (edited) Meh. Double post. Edited June 5, 2009 by Michelle R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 The Hobbit is a Kid's book. The first half of Fellowship of the Rings was written as a sequel, then Tolkien realized he was better off writing an adult novel. The books are simply some of the best literature of the last century. You are not in any way obliged to enjoy yourself. After all, I hate good will hunting even tho everyone says I shoul love it. That's my loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 5, 2009 Author Share Posted June 5, 2009 (edited) The Hobbit is a Kid's book. The first half of Fellowship of the Rings was written as a sequel, then Tolkien realized he was better off writing an adult novel. The books are simply some of the best literature of the last century. You are not in any way obliged to enjoy yourself. After all, I hate good will hunting even tho everyone says I shoul love it. That's my loss. The Golden Compass is a book written for children as well, but I enjoyed that. Although I do think the Narnia books are that way. Most of the people I know who love them grew up on them. I didn't and found them mediocre. Edited June 5, 2009 by Michelle R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Yes, I enjoyed the Narnia books (read them at 12) but found them juvenile even then, and find them unreadable now. Tolkien's quite a bit better. Plus you are a girl, and there seems to be some gender correlation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 5, 2009 Author Share Posted June 5, 2009 Yes, I enjoyed the Narnia books (read them at 12) but found them juvenile even then, and find them unreadable now. Tolkien's quite a bit better. Plus you are a girl, and there seems to be some gender correlation. Gender correlation between what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiaer.ts Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Yes, I enjoyed the Narnia books (read them at 12) but found them juvenile even then, and find them unreadable now. Tolkien's quite a bit better. Plus you are a girl, and there seems to be some gender correlation. Gender correlation between what?I don't know that it explains anything, or that I believe it, but I have read repeatedly that liking Dr. Who, Tolkien, and Monty Python is a "guy thing." Could just as well be an Anglophile thing. I happen to be a huge fan of all three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted June 5, 2009 Author Share Posted June 5, 2009 Yes, I enjoyed the Narnia books (read them at 12) but found them juvenile even then, and find them unreadable now. Tolkien's quite a bit better. Plus you are a girl, and there seems to be some gender correlation. Gender correlation between what?I don't know that it explains anything, or that I believe it, but I have read repeatedly that liking Dr. Who, Tolkien, and Monty Python is a "guy thing." Could just as well be an Anglophile thing. I happen to be a huge fan of all three. I don't know. I thought Life of Brian was a cute movie. Can't say I liked the other movies or the TV show, though. As for Dr. Who, I never watched it. Either way, though, it has nothing to do with gender. I know women who love Tolkien and Monty Python. I know men who hate the same things. Those people you read are full of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now