Abandoned books

[sophia_sol]

This year for the first time I kept track of all the books I began reading, so that I would have a record of how many books I abandoned over the course of the year! This list is not particularly comprehensive, I think, as I didn't always do a good job of remembering to write down when I began a book. But it's a start! Maybe next year I will be better at it.


1. The Count of Monte Cristo, by Alexandre Dumas

idk, I just...didn't keep reading it. As happens sometimes. Maybe sometime I'll go back to it, but somehow I doubt it.


2. Les Miserables, by Victor Hugo, as translated by Fahnstock and MacAfee

(this was after my first read and before my successful reread.) I was trying to do a careful in-depth book-study type reread, where I took careful notes on my thoughts for every chapter. TOO MUCH WORK, TOO LITTLE TIME.


3. The Cross and the Lynching Tree, by James H Cone

I was bored at my parents' house, and this looked interesting, so I picked it up. And I continue to think it would be interesting, but at the time my dad wasn't yet done reading it so I had to leave it behind. Hopefully at some point I'll pick it up again.


4. Revelations of Divine Love, by Julian of Norwich

As I said at the time: This is one of those cases where I had to remind myself, "it is okay to give up on a book." It's one of those books I'd really LIKE to enjoy, but I began reading it and...well, I think it's a book that I would get more appreciation out of if I were reading it in an academic context, or a context where I have the time and energy to do the academic research on my own time to supplement my reading of it. And I do not have that right now. ALAS. So I gave up after reading the introduction (which was FASCINATING) and the Shorter Text, which I spent too much time with my eyes glazed over in a sure sign that I do not have enough mental energy to expend on a book like this right now. I put it back on my bookshelf and maybe in a few years' time or something it will be the right time to try reading this again.


5. Profiles of Radical Reformers: Biographical Sketches from Thomas Müntzer to Paracelsus, ed. Hans-Jürgen Goertz

...hahahaha SO BORINGLY WRITTEN


6. Leave It To Psmith, by PG Wodehouse

CANNOT READ. TOO STRESSFUL/EMBARRASSMENT-SQUICKY, and I can't even tell which of those it is because IT DANCES HAPPILY ON THE LINE BETWEEN THE TWO which is a very unfortunate place for a book to be.


7. To Be Or Not To Be: That Is The Adventure, by Ryan North, William Shakespeare, and YOU

Really awesome! But! I am a completist and it is hard work carefully keeping track of every variation and making sure I don't miss any, so I keep on putting off finishing it until I have a good chunk of time to do it in. I still hope to come back to it!


8. The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman, by Laurence Sterne

Gave up within a few pages because HAHAHA nope I'm not subjecting myself to that. I should have known better. It was highly recommended by my literature prof at university and I pretty much shared ZERO overlapping taste in literature with him.


9. Sugar: A Bittersweet History, by Elizabeth Abbott

Combination of boring and something about the intro really annoyed me. So I'm skipping it.


10. Recovering Jesus: The Witness of the New Testament, by Thomas Yoder Neufeld

Eh, I started and it just all felt very introductory, so I gave up. It's possible it goes more in depth into things I don't already know later? But I was too bored to get there.


11. Forgiveness: A Legacy of the West Nickel Mines Amish School, by John L. Ruth

Again felt wayyy to introductory for me. Again possible it goes more in depth into things I don't know later, but why suffer to get there?


12. a book of Russian history from the 60s (forgot to note title/author)

...It's a book of Russian history that is very definitely from the 60s. Yeah no I think I'd rather read something a bit more recent.

Comments

[carmarthen.livejournal.com]

Oh man, I had to slog through Count of Monte Cristo my freshman year of high school (the only other person who picked it noped out), and...I am not sure I have ever hated a book (or a protagonist) so much. The brief existence of subtextual lesbians was not enough to save it.

[sophia-sol.livejournal.com]

Hah, well then, I'll amend "somehow I doubt it" to "definitely I won't", then!

[carmarthen.livejournal.com]

I just, hmm, as much as I love stories about TERRIBLE PEOPLE (look at my fandoms look at my choices), I have to find something sympathetic in the protagonist, especially for something as long as a 19th century novel. And Dumas...mostly wrote about protagonists I want to punch in the face forever. I just had zero sympathy for Dantès despite his suffering.

(I suspect this is also why I've never finished Three Musketeers.)

Basically, I think I like Dumas best in adaptations where his protagonists are made more sympathetic for a modern audience and I don't have to read 100s of pages of them being assholes. :-P

[osprey-archer.livejournal.com]

I have had a similar reaction to a lot of P. G. Wodehouse's books, which is sad because a lot of people love them so much. But I frequently feel so embarrassed for the people that the protagonist steamrolls over, even when he steamrolls in a hilarious manner.