The Best Writing

[NOIRTRASH]

I'm re-reading PSYCHO by Robert Bloch. I saw the movie back in 1960 and read the book about 10 years ago. Its as clear today as it was in 2006. I've forgotten little of it. A few other books share the same experience. GONE WITH THE WIND is one of them. They stick to your mind ribs. Poppie Z.Brite and Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings stuff sticks around, too.

On the other hand I enjoy plenty of authors whose books fade from my memory quickly. Robert Crais, Lawrence Block, Donald Westlake. Raymond Chandler and Raymond Carver stick around. Rambo by David Morrell is a keeper.

I wonder is some brainiac discovered what makes some books stick, some linger, and most fade.

 

[Carnevil9]

For me, a piece of writing needs to have three specific characteristics to be great. It can be good, and worth reading, with only one or two of these, but it needs all three to be truly great:

1. A compelling story and/or characters that I find very interesting.
2. Exquisite prose that makes me marvel at the wordsmithing skill of the author.
3. It has to exude a sense of importance, so that when I finish it, I feel that I have actually accomplished something, not just entertained myself.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

For me, a piece of writing needs to have three specific characteristics to be great. It can be good, and worth reading, with only one or two of these, but it needs all three to be truly great:

1. A compelling story and/or characters that I find very interesting.
2. Exquisite prose that makes me marvel at the wordsmithing skill of the author.
3. It has to exude a sense of importance, so that when I finish it, I feel that I have actually accomplished something, not just entertained myself.

What do you remember, though?

 

[Carnevil9]

What do you remember, though?

Those ARE the things that I remember. If I take away all three from a book, it stands out in my mind as among the best of the best.

 

[Semigloss]

It has to exude a sense of importance, so that when I finish it, I feel that I have actually accomplished something, not just entertained myself.

This is a curious one! Considering that you have exactly just entertained yourself, what can any piece of writing do to give people the mistaken impression that they've done more than that? Can you be more specific?

 

[Carnevil9]

This is a curious one! Considering that you have exactly just entertained yourself, what can any piece of writing do to give people the mistaken impression that they've done more than that? Can you be more specific?

Well, learned something, for one. After reading Lolita, I felt that I knew more about the good and bad sides of human nature. After reading Lord of the Rings, I felt that I knew more about how languages affect society. After reading The Epic of Gilgamesh, I felt that I had learned a lot about world history. And after reading Atlas Shrugged, I felt that I had learned a lot about philosophy and economics. And after reading anything by Jack Vance, I feel like I've just tripled my vocabulary!

 

[visioneer]

I'm not sure what the elixir is that makes a book hold solid in my memory, but novels by John Fowles top the list. I recall much of, and think about often, 'The Magus'. A close second is 'The Collector,' one of the most disturbing books I have ever read.

 

[SamScribble]

I suspect the 'stickability' of a book is not just down to the author. The reader plays a part. Catcher in the Rye has many fans - among those who read it at a certain stage of their lives. Personally, I remember The Ginger Man, The Alexandria Quartet, and a few others. But I first read them perhaps 40 years ago. Would they make the same impression if I read them just yesterday? Who knows?

 

[NotWise]

I suspect the 'stickability' of a book is not just down to the author. The reader plays a part. Catcher in the Rye has many fans - among those who read it at a certain stage of their lives. Personally, I remember The Ginger Man, The Alexandria Quartet, and a few others. But I first read them perhaps 40 years ago. Would they make the same impression if I read them just yesterday? Who knows?

Where and when I grew up "Catcher in the Rye" was required high school reading. Then the school system banned it. Odd (or not) how the teaching faculty and the school system could find themselves so much at odds.

I remember humour, imagery, strong characters and great events.

Oddly, as many of those things combine I remember the way that Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow" faded gradually into nothing, as I imagine the author meant it to.

 

[SamScribble]

Oddly, as many of those things combine I remember the way that Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow" faded gradually into nothing, as I imagine the author meant it to.

Funnily enough, Gravity's Rainbow is on my current list of 'probably time to read again'. I wonder how it will have survived the years.

 

[NotWise]

Funnily enough, Gravity's Rainbow is on my current list of 'probably time to read again'. I wonder how it will have survived the years.

I read the story about 1980 and haven't reread it, but I've been long intrigued by Pynchon's premise that the main character was conditioned as an infant to get a hard on at the sound of a loud noise, then deconditioned "beyond zero" so that as an adult he got a hardon before the loud noise happened, thus predicting V2 attacks with his dick.

 

[Saxon_Hart]

I suspect the 'stickability' of a book is not just down to the author. The reader plays a part. Catcher in the Rye has many fans - among those who read it at a certain stage of their lives. Personally, I remember The Ginger Man, The Alexandria Quartet, and a few others. But I first read them perhaps 40 years ago. Would they make the same impression if I read them just yesterday? Who knows?

I agree Sam. I think books are just like music or movies. Some of them speak directly to you and some don't. There are books I know by heart, that maybe some have read once and tossed away. It's about chemistry, some authors connect with many, some don't. Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Rising", Micheal Slade's "Ghoul", and Robert Heinlein's "Tunnel In The Sky" are books I have read many times and they stick with me.

A question. Do you re-read a book? I had an ex who chastised me for holding onto books I had read. "Why read them again? Nothing's going to change." I re read a book for the same reason I watch a movie more than once. I like them! Am I an oddball that way?

 

[rjordan]

This is a curious one! Considering that you have exactly just entertained yourself, what can any piece of writing do to give people the mistaken impression that they've done more than that? Can you be more specific?

Not curious at all. Once the writer has put something out there, what happens to it is not the writer's concern and mostly the stimulus for what the reader accomplishes whether an evening's entertainment or a life changing event.

rj

 

[Carnevil9]

......A question. Do you re-read a book? I had an ex who chastised me for holding onto books I had read. "Why read them again? Nothing's going to change." I re read a book for the same reason I watch a movie more than once. I like them! Am I an oddball that way?

I re-read The Lord of the Rings about once every ten years. Same with Jack Vance's Demon Princes series. They're like old friends that I like spending time with.

 

[Nathan_Brazil]

2 things

1. Something in the plot/world has to be new.

2. The characters have to appeal to me on some level.

For instance, noir does nothing for me. Gangsters and PIs have always struck me as flat and lifeless. So I don't read the genre. Ditto westerns...

I want to see inside the character's heads, and see their torment as they make decisions.

For instance... Most BTB revenge fantasies have psychopaths for protagonists. There is no mystery there.

I'd like to see characters who struggle... Like the rest of us.

 

[legerdemer]

I re-read The Lord of the Rings about once every ten years. Same with Jack Vance's Demon Princes series. They're like old friends that I like spending time with.

I agree Sam. I think books are just like music or movies. Some of them speak directly to you and some don't. ....

I re read a book for the same reason I watch a movie more than once. I like them! Am I an oddball that way?

I re-read books - maybe not always cover to cover, but not infrequently. They are like old friends, with no expectations.

To the OP, I agree with Carnevil's 3 criteria for great books. And learning can be any number of things - a new view point I hadn't considered, a new place or time made familiar to me.

These great books stick with me, though my memory is like a sieve and leaves me with an impressionistic painting rather than the gelatin print.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

I re-read books - maybe not always cover to cover, but not infrequently. They are like old friends, with no expectations.

To the OP, I agree with Carnevil's 3 criteria for great books. And learning can be any number of things - a new view point I hadn't considered, a new place or time made familiar to me.

These great books stick with me, though my memory is like a sieve and leaves me with an impressionistic painting rather than the gelatin print.

My simple point is: Great books stick in your mind NOT one proposition is all you need to identify great books.

 

[legerdemer]

My simple point is: Great books stick in your mind NOT one proposition is all you need to identify great books.

Not all great books I've read stick in my mind.

My understanding is that the making of memories is easier and recalled in sharper focus when they are coupled with shocking or cataclysmic events that happened about the same time. If that's true, it means that events that occurred about the same time as the reading of a particular book will influence how one recalls that book, regardless of whether it's great or mediocre, or possibly even bad. Those who were in Manhattan on 9/11 and saw it may recall whatever book they were reading at the time more easily than other books, simply because they associate the book with that event.

I have some instances in my own experience where this seems to fit. No one says it accounts for everything, but it may confound your hypothesis.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Not all great books I've read stick in my mind.

My understanding is that the making of memories is easier and recalled in sharper focus when they are coupled with shocking or cataclysmic events that happened about the same time. If that's true, it means that events that occurred about the same time as the reading of a particular book will influence how one recalls that book, regardless of whether it's great or mediocre, or possibly even bad. Those who were in Manhattan on 9/11 and saw it may recall whatever book they were reading at the time more easily than other books, simply because they associate the book with that event.

I have some instances in my own experience where this seems to fit. No one says it accounts for everything, but it may confound your hypothesis.

Then I cant explain how come I cant recall what I read when Kennedy was killed or 911 occurred. I read THE GOD FATHER in Vietnam, but most days were long and boring.

 

[legerdemer]

Then I cant explain how come I cant recall what I read when Kennedy was killed or 911 occurred. I read THE GOD FATHER in Vietnam, but most days were long and boring.

I wasn't suggesting a single explanation for every instance of every book. Not that you implied it. But being in Viet Nam must have been rather soul- and body-scarring.

 

[Peach102]

I have numerous novels are re-read periodically. Among them are Dennis Lehane's Patrick and Angie books, Richard Russo's Nobody's Fool, Walter Mosley's Always Outnumbered, Always Outgunned and Dashell Hammett's The Maltese Falcon.

I also have movies that I have watched dozens of times, I know what happens, but I enjoy the journey.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

I wasn't suggesting a single explanation for every instance of every book. Not that you implied it. But being in Viet Nam must have been rather soul- and body-scarring.

It was definitely body scarring, with a fractured skull and lotsa broken teeth. But I discovered I'm a natural born fighter after I did some stunts that surprised the crap outta me; it was like something took me over when the shit hit the fan. Flip Wilson said, WHAT DONT KILL YOU IS AN INCONVENIENCE.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

I have numerous novels are re-read periodically. Among them are Dennis Lehane's Patrick and Angie books, Richard Russo's Nobody's Fool, Walter Mosley's Always Outnumbered, Always Outgunned and Dashell Hammett's The Maltese Falcon.

I also have movies that I have watched dozens of times, I know what happens, but I enjoy the journey.

I read one Walter Mosley novel, and disliked it so much I refuse to read his others.

 

[SamScribble]

I read one Walter Mosley novel, and disliked it so much I refuse to read his others.

Refuse is an interesting idea. 'Refuse' suggests that someone said: 'James, read this'. And you said: 'No'.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Refuse is an interesting idea. 'Refuse' suggests that someone said: 'James, read this'. And you said: 'No'.

Reviewers.

My problem with Mosley are his characters. The blacks are entitled parasites, and the whites are tyrannical persecutors of entitled parasites and, in turn, are harassed by government nigger counters.