More on George R. R. Martin

First off, if you haven't already, go and read my rambling post about Martin I did earlier this year.

Back? Good.

Well folks, despite my passion and absolute conviction for not wanting to read Martin's series A Song of Ice and Fire, I gave in, and read the first three books. Yes yes, get your gloating out of the way, but let me at least give you some semblance of an explanation. I watched, re-watched, and then watched the first two seasons of the HBO series and on a whim downloaded the audio book of A Game of Thrones. Really, it was the audio book that did me in, it was so good. Now I'm not talking about the story here, I'm talking about the brilliant reading of Roy Dotrice. In fact here's this:

Isn't that fantastic? Seriously. I'm not too familiar with audio books, I've listened to I Am Legend and one or two others in my time, but this is the first one that really captured me. I certainly read faster than the audio book, but I actually chose to listen instead of reading to myself and, indeed, I didn't even listen to the radio in my car during the time I was listening/reading to the series.

In any case, there's one other important factor to consider before I get into the meat of this post: I stopped at book three. This is because of the HBO series, I will continue to watch the show, but I know if I get too far ahead I won't be able to experience it to the fullest. I must also say, that HBO did a hell of a job, yes they did change this or that, and yes it doesn't follow the books exactly, but I think it's certainly one of the best out there especially with the last jaunt in epic fantasy that television tried to adapt: Terry Goodkinds The Sword of Truth. Gah, don't even get me started on that piece of work.

The result of this little journey for me is that my feelings really haven't changed all that much. Martin is a fantastic storyteller, but he ruins it with the episodic nature of his style and even with a brilliant narration by Dotrice, I could not get past the feeling that he just didn't think us readers would understand. It could be that that's how he needs to keep track of things, but I highly doubt it considering his brilliant short stories and other works. Aside from that, though, they were everything I imagined they would be. They filled out story lines and drew a much richer picture than any visual medium could have, indeed, the show feels more complete and the feeling of a vague sense of inside jokes is gone now that I understand the characters storylines and histories better.

All that being said, some of his actual writing quirks were highly irritating. I won't go into all of them because it's been a couple months since I finished and honestly they're all pretty minor, but the one that really bothered me while reading was his use (and over use) of  "Ser". At first I thought "okay, this is a more historically accurate term and he's just bludgeoning us with his knowledge and pointing out our error in using 'Sir'". But no, my friends, he really is just using it to show off and actually he's using it incorrectly as far as I'm concerned. While the honorific "Ser" is indeed a Middle English term, it was only used in place of "Sir" as a gender neutral alternative. Looking at the etymology of "Sir" we see that it is a shortened version of "Sire" in which case "Ser" just doesn't work. But, lets give him a pass on that and focus in on the fact that it is used as a gender neutral alternative; reading the books one of the things that stood out to me was his lack of female knights which would be an appropriate usage of the term, indeed if he was trying to avoid the whole "only men can be Sir" feminist trap, why on earth did he make his female have less social standing than the male characters? Is it because that's more historically accurate? Sure, but then why even bother with the gender neutral word "Ser"? Because he wanted to be a pretentious asshat, that's why. I certainly understand the usage if you're going to make your male and female characters equal, but it's utterly useless if you're not and only serves to jar the reader every time Ser so and so comes up, which is rather often. He could have pulled off the use of Ser had he really wanted to, which is the frustrating part. His female characters are strong, coniving, and every bit as powerful as their male counterparts, but any powerful woman was dubbed a Lady and the closest we come to a female knight is Brienne of Tarth and Martin makes sure we know on every other page that she is most certainly not a knight and thus will never be called Ser.

Blah. Like I said there were a few things that bothered me, the most jarring of which was Ser and of course the writing style, but all that being said it is an amazing series and well worth the read. Just don't get your hopes up that the next book will be out any time soon and instead just enjoy the HBO series.

Oh I guess I should mention one thing everyone else seems to be bothered by which is his killing off of characters. Meh, Martin wrote (is writing) a highly realistic world and doesn't baby his main characters which seems to bother a lot of people. Generally in a fantasy novel, the main characters are immune to the hardships of everyone else, not so in Martin's world, and honestly, that's good. It's refreshing to fear for your favorite character and while some deaths are far from glorious, the fact that people can die from disease, a stray arrow, or just dumb luck adds a little something to his story. Sure, it's not for everyone, but it's always good to remember that the medieval times were far from easy, even for kings and heroes.

So while I won't recommend people go out and read the books, they are something to keep your eye on and if the show is not enough, check 'em out to fill in some backstory, but be wary, he's old.

Concerning George R. R. Martin

                           

Let me preface this post with this: I have not read A Game of Thrones by Mr. Martin nor do I plan to. Now that being said some of you will dismiss what I'm about to say out of hand, but alas!

I know Martin is a great storyteller because I've read one or two of his short stories and I've seen some of the shows he's written scripts for, but one thing has always bothered me about A Game of Thrones (hereafter GoT): the way he starts each and every chapter with the character the chapter is concerning. Now at first I thought it was a rather novel way of dealing with complex multi-character story arcs, and it is, but the more I think about it and now the more I see it being mimicked by other authors (more on that later) the less I like it. Indeed after I met Mr. Martin:

I've decided it isn't so much a clever solution to a problem some authors have, but a rather pretentious outlook on his readers. Don't get me wrong here, I've seen the HBO adaptation of GoT and spoken to more than a fair share of people about the books and series as a whole, and I know it's complex and multi-layered, but come on! Lord of the Rings, Dune, Feists Riftwar Cycle, and many, others have complex multi-character stories. Instead of holding our hands through each chapter and then announcing "Okay reader, I know you're enthralled and into what we just read, but I'm going to go ahead and change perspective.. I know it'll be hard to get used to, but here's the character we're going to be dealing with, I promise you'll be okay after a few pages." they just change perspective and move on. Most authors do this because they have faith in their readers and more importantly they don't have an over-hyped sense of self worth. I hear your groaning from here "but all authors are a little pompous" and this is true, but my impression of Martin is that he feels himself a Geek God who's stories are so complex and rich that there is just no possible way for us little readers to understand without some sort of hint as to what's going on. Furthermore,  his absolute unwillingness to bend from his style hurts GoT more than it helps. By writing each chapter completely separate from the one prior and the one following it, he's losing out on crucial developments. Sometimes a character or perspective needs more than one chapter to fully develop that portion of the plot and that's okay! The frustrating thing about this point is that he knows this, Martin wrote the big battle episode of Season 2 which only dealt with what was happening at Kings Landing, why? Because there was so much going on and so much that needed to be said, that the only feasible way to get everything across was to dedicate an entire episode to this one perspective.

The other downside to this writing style is that it is very episodic in nature and plot points end up not fitting together as well. From those I've spoken to one common theme that has come across is Martin's frustrating ability to end many chapters (and books for that matter) in horrifying cliffhangers and then not bothering to return to that character for several chapters. Sure this works well at keeping your readers engaged, but doing it too often is frustrating and has made some people skip ahead just to make sure that character appears again. This leads me to one last thing I would like to discuss, and that is, of course, time between books. This has been discussed, argued, defended, and re-argued over and over so I won't waste much time on it, but I'll  just throw my two cents in.

Indeed let me direct everyone's attention to Neil Gaiman's blog that includes one of my favorite quotes "George R. R. Martin is not your bitch". Gaiman is brilliant and, in the end, absolutely right. As frustrating as waiting for a book can be, there is still nothing saying how an author must spend his time. Oh it sucks to see on their twitter, facebook, or blog that they're twiddling their thumbs or writing something non-series related, but if it bothers you so much, don't read their non-published works. I don't completely agree, of course, there is, at least in my opinion, some sort of unspoken rule that states that you shouldn't say something, even in passing, if you aren't going to try your damnedst to do it. If, like Martin, you know you're going to be writing short stories, working on scripts, and otherwise dicking around, you probably shouldn't say "oh hey guys this'll be out sometime in the near future". The real thing I want to mention about the whole scandal, and oh my god have I heard enough bitching from Martin fanboys to call this a scandal, is that there are much better ways to deal with your fans than Martin has. Patrick Rothfuss, for example, has taken his time in writing his trilogy, and while the times in between books haven't been nearly the same scope as Martin, they've been long enough to get people bitching. Instead of disgruntled with his fans, Pat has been very transparent on his blog. Shit happened in his life, he stopped writing, wrote a blog about it with an apology, and took some time to himself. What happened? Every single one of the comments were sympathetic and every one of his fans' hearts went out to him. Hell, he'll write on his blog that he's just not having a good week and hasn't written a scrap, and that's okay. Like any relationship, and yes the author/reader does constitute as a relationship in my book, communication is the key. For me, if I know you're working on it or why you aren't working on it, then take your time. I'd certainly read a well polished product than some rushed piece of shit, but the key is to talk to us, let us know what's going on. We don't need a huge explanation nor do we technically even deserve an explanation, but it'll keep us satisfied, and honestly reading Pats blogs have been fun and given me an insight to one of my favorite authors that I wouldn't otherwise have. Sure book three doesn't even have a tentative release date, but he's still posting and working, so he can take his time. Oh and cause I have to promote him, here's his blog: Patrick Rothfuss Author Extraordinaire.

Going back to Martin's style, a rather horrifying thing has started to emerge based on his success.. people are copying him. Indeed the whole reason for this blog is because of this silly phenomenon. Like I said, I have no plans to read GoT until it's finished (this is because I think he may die before he finishes and I don't wanna get blue balled) so his pompous hand holding hasn't had any effect on me or my reading experience, til now. Here in Albuquerque Martin and some other local authors including Daniel Abrahams, Melinda Snodgrass, Walter Jon Williams, and others have a writing group. Indeed it's more than just a writing group, they roleplay together and generally get into mischief. This is where Martin has screwed with me. Daniel Abrahams and Ty Franck (Martin's assistant) collaborated on one of the best space operas I've read called  Leviathan Wakes and guess what?

They totally pulled the "lets name the character at the start of each chapter". This didn't bother me at first, but then I was reading the second book in one of Melinda Snodgrass' ongoing series called The Edge of Ruin and lo and behold she did the same thing! This is when it really bothered me though because in the first book Snodgrass didn't do it, she just had normal perspective changes, but book two she started copying Martin, except half assed. You see Snodgrass doesn't really utilize many characters, indeed she has one main character and then occasionally she'll switch to another just to develop the plot. What she ended up doing was only naming the main characters chapters. The character, named Richard, has the main bulk of the book, but all of his chapters start with "Richard", but NONE of the other characters do. So we'll switch to a whole new, different character with no heads up, but then when it's Richards turn we're suddenly pulled back with that crap. Not only does this serve zero purpose, but it was annoying as all hell. Her story is not nearly complex enough to warrant naming the character, nor does it really work all that well when you only have one main character and a host of side characters. 

Both examples come from authors directly associated with Martin so my hope is that it is merely a local trend, but given the success of Martin and now Abrahams and Franck, I would not be surprised if authors, editors, and publishers started leaning toward this style. Authors.. we're not stupid, we don't need and holding, and no matter how complex you think your stories are, we can follow along with the plot. Furthermore, please, please just give the character his due time, don't try and keep it split up, instead if a character needs two, or three, or however many chapters to further the plot, give it to them!

More Publishing Complaints

In my last post, E-Books as a Means to Revolution, I got into a mini rant about the corruption and bs tactics of publishing companies. It turns out that I had more to say than what actually fit with the content of that last post. So here's a few more things that came up.

The biggest thing, and actually the reason this post is coming into existence, is the dirty tricks publishers are now using to get our money. This has affected me directly as I've been reading the Codex Alera (very good by the way) series by Jim Butcher. Everyone knows that, in general, there are three types of printing sizes Mass Market (MM), Quality Paperback (QP), and Hardcover (CL)*. And generally the prices are as follows: MM $7.99, QP $14.99, and CL $24.99. There's some fluctuation depending on the genre as well as amount of pages--like Stephen Kings newest book Under the Dome which is retail $35.00 because it's a monster of a book--but on average that's about the price rundown. These prices are based on two factors: the materials used to print the book, essentially the MM's are cheaper because they're lower quality than that of the QP and CL, the other determinant factor is their size. MM's are 7 inches long by 4.5 inches wide; QP's are 8.3 inches long by 5.5 inches wide; and CL's are 9.3 inches long by 6.5 inches wide. Why have I told you all this random information? Well, my friends, it's because the publishing companies have decided to create another size, call it Mass Market, and charge two dollars more for it. Yes indeed, that's now $9.99 for your favorite books! That may not seem like much, but this new MM is 7.3 inches long and 4.5 inches wide and yet is still made from the same material as normal Mass Markets.





As you can see your two dollars goes to great use! If I'm going to pay more money I want better quality, not a larger size! The other thing that's retarded about this whole situation is the fact that these aren't meant to be in that larger size, so what do they do? They just change the spacing and the margins! A pretty dirty thing to do if you ask me. Most QP's actually have normal size fonts and spacings and so the book actually looks good, in these crappy things it annoys the hell out of you while you're reading because of all the extra room on the sides and between the lines! Lastly, but actually really important, is it completely destroys the look of your bookshelf. Sure maybe I have just a bit of OCD in me when it comes to books, but I like to have all the same editions otherwise it just irks me every time I look at my shelf. Yes that means if I buy a series starting with a hardcover I need to own the rest in hardcover. Even still, I don't know if this is Jim Butchers fault or if it was the publisher company who did this, but book number 5 is in this fucked up format.. why in gods name would you change the format of a SERIES on book FIVE?! At least they should offer up a normal sized MM for people like me, oh wait they can't BECAUSE NO ONE WILL BUY THE BIGGER ONE!

I haven't really written a ranty type blog in a while, it felt good. This one was particularly needed because of my recent reading of the Codex Alera books, but it has also been something that's always bugged me, especially about "popular fiction". It seems as though these publishers are doing this mainly with mystery/suspense books as well as sci-fi fantasy, which is even more sad because those are the ones I read more often! It also sucks because of the fact that generally popular fiction stuff like that are the only ones to go into MM, so if you just buy sci-fi/fantasy or mystery/suspense then you probably have a pretty sexy looking bookshelf, until now. I think perhaps I might send an emial or message to Jim Butcher, obviously a little less angry sounding, and ask if he knows whats up. Sometimes authors are as much of nerds about books as I am, maybe he has the same feeling, or he'll know if it'll ever come out as a true MM.

Anyway, two blogs in one day is pretty good for me, especially after so long without posting. I know I told everyone I was gonna do another Ry Recommends, it is coming, eventually, maybe I'll start throwing together a list of books to use. Ta ta for now.

*CL stands for Cloth which is what hardcover books were generally made from way back in the day. At least at borders they haven't bothered to change it to HC, but I've seen it done.

A Response to Cynics of Love

After reading and discussing love and relationships in class I believe it is very easy to be horribly cynical about love if you've never actually been in love. Dorthy Parker is a prime example, sure I'm not 100% positive if she was married or not, but I can say with a high degree of certainty that she has never been in true love. When you're with someone that takes your breath away every time they walk into a room you can count to a million and not get bored. Besides she says "men delight in novelty" so do women! Just because you have to give some thought about being with your lover doesn't mean there's no novelty! People who are cynical about love and relationships are, at least in my opinion, lazy. Being single is easy; you only have one person to please. I can tell you, though, that pleasing both you and your significant others a million times more rewarding than it will ever be to just please yourself. Don't hat on lovers because you're too lazy to put any sort of effort into a relationship. That's what a relationship is: caring about someone SO much that you'll do everything and anything in your power to make them happy. That may mean giving something up for yourself, or not doing what your id tells you to do, but no matter what the amount of effort you put in will be paid back a million fold.

As for monogamy in general I believe it works. It may not work for everyone, but I've never been happier than when I am with Kimberley. When we're apart I feel so empty and.. alone.. I can't stand the thought of being without her. You may think that amazing new relationship sorta deal, but we've been together way past that stage. Sure it's not that sappy uber newness, but I feel that it's far better now than any new relationship can be. We know so much about each other, we're so.. compatible! One of the things that fuels a new relationship is that feeling of not knowing if it will work; you're both afraid so you try harder and do more for the relationship. In the end, though, it has the chance of ruining the whole thing because that's not who you really are. Or you fool yourself into thinking it's what you want and when it does work out you realize you don't.

So for me, I love her with every part of my being and I truly believe that it will only get better from here. As far as those naysayers, just wait til true loves comes and blows you away! When it does you'll look back on your cynicism and bitter poetry as an older person looks back on a young ones naivety. Trust me on this, true love is an out of the world experience and no crappy poet will change that. I seriously think that it's not peoples place to talk about things they don't know or understand, especially things that are truly magical. Love is one of those things! It's so easy to bitch and moan about how you don't have anyone and how love is stupid and how you despise the whole idea, but if you just took a quarter of that so called "passion" and energy and put it into finding another person you'll find out what it really means. Why is it that as humans we would much rather rant and rave about things that bother us, but yet never actually do anything to change those things; Even when it's in our best interests to go out and do something with our lives and find true love. I understand it's hard, I do, but why must you become a bitter person and try and burst everyone else's bubble? I'm sorry you don't have a love or you had a bad break up or whatever it is that's making you a bitter person, but I don't think you have any right to write shitty lyrics or poetry proclaiming how evil and wrong love is. It's an amazing thing and it makes people happy. That in and of itself should make a difference and make you open your eyes and find someone, or to actually work for your relationship because news flash, cheating on your partner is not the way to go. Sex is a very small part of a relationship, it's needed and one hell of a good time, but it is not the substance of your relationship. Just being with the other person should be more than enough to satisfy you, and guess what? If the sex has fallen out of your relationship and it all goes to hell the answer isn't to go fuck around, work through your problems, bring that spark back because if you don't it will all just come crashing down around you. When that happens and you lose not only your sex buddy, but possibly your one true love, it'll hit you the hardest. It's not worth it. Period.

Doctors and Athletes

So I haven't written anything here in a while, I don't know why, plenty of good stuff has come up recently. Indeed, I actually have a couple things I want to put up on here like my protest experience and about vampires, but for now I'd like to rant a little.

So my English professor is rather odd, I don't know what it is about him, but he's just.. odd. I mean he's really smart, has a PhD blah blah blah been working for years yadda yadda yadda, but he's got that "old" mentality ya know? Everyone has a grandma or grandpa that says fucked up things perfectly naturally, like my grandma, she said "japs" and "chinos" and "negritos" with a straight face and by god she didn't care if it wasn't PC or not. Fact is I don't even think they know what PC is, they're old, we let them say things like that. Now the same goes with my English prof, kinda. He's not really that old, I don't know exactly how old actually--maybe, like, mid-sixties?--either way he just says things that are like.. What? It's not really as bad as my grandma was, but it kinda makes you scratch your head. For example he talks about race in an almost racist way, but not quite. As you all well know, race doesn't really bother me all that much, people can say what they want, it's all a load of crap anyway. Today though he said something that really did bother me.

We were discussing education and why we were in college and what not. I was only semi paying attention I mean I know what I'm going to school for and as entertaining as his stories are it's like meh. So there I was kinda listening, kinda doodling, when he says "I don't think doctors should get paid as much as they do." Uh, what? So he goes on to say that just because they went to school for longer than most people that doesn't mean they should be paid any more and he goes on to say "In fact I think doctors should be paid a lot less and someone working at, say, Albertsons should be paid more. Doctors don't really have to deal with people bitching [he did use bitching] about food or complaining about prices or even as many people as a clerk does." Before I go on let me point out that he doesn't think that a clerk should make more than a doctor, but he thinks that doctors shouldn't be paid nearly as much. He then goes on to say that it's both the doctors fault and the health care system here in America and he cites that "doctors here make more than any other country." Probably true, but still come on! I work retail, you all have seen my rants about how stupid and retarded people can be, but I seriously don't think I should make more just because of that. Especially if the difference means taking money from the people that keep me alive. Jesus H. Christ are you kidding me? I mean I don't understand at all how you can truly think that doctors should be paid less and then go on, with a straight face, that Albertsons employees go through more hardships and deserve to be paid more. Stupid, stupid, stupid! Another thing he said was that the only reason doctors do get paid as much as they do is because "they have to, how else would they pay back all their student loans." Excuse me no no no no. Doctors get paid so much because THEY HELP PEOPLE. Ughhhh

Shit if you think all us retail people need more money why don't you take money from the people that don't actually do anything for society. This, like most of my opinions, is arguable, but I think those people are athletes. Mainly "professional" athletes. What the fuck are these people doing to make millions and millions of dollars per game! If doctors made 2.2 million dollars per patient then okay, take some money from them, but until they do shut the fuck up. At least doctors actually help people, what does a football player do? Run around, grope at other men, toss a ball around, and then make an idiot of himself in the end zone? Cool. So glad you're getting paid the big bucks to not actually do anything. Eh, okay they provide entertainment, but I would by no means call that a service. To be fair I think this is true for actors, eh, they don't do much either, don't even come up with the stories or characters they act. Before people say that musicians are the same way, I'd like to point out that they actually come up with what they're doing, create it, and, this I'm not positive about, I don't think they make millions of dollars per song, they make a lot, but they put a lot of work into it too. Athletes can just shoot up some steroids and bam they're good, no matter what drugs you do, you either have a good voice or you don't. They probably get paid too much too at least in comparison to doctors, so my point still stands. Besides people, do you really want someone without any education prescribe you medication that could potentially kill you? Honestly? No I didn't think so. Just because you put up with idiots on a daily basis does not mean you should get paid way more because of it, it's not like hazard pay. So what if someone treats you like crap, get over it. Plus, doctors get treated like crap all the time, AND have to deal with druggies, hypochondriacs, and insurance companies.

If you want the average joe to get paid more, drop the pay for people that don't do shit. And I'm sorry, talent in a sport does isn't worth shit in the real world. Period.

Frustration

So I had one of the most frustrating experiences today. It's a rather common experience to anyone who's read, nevertheless it's annoying! There I was, sitting comfortably on my bed, curled up under the covers reading—don't be jealous—and I was enjoying my book. Or so I thought…But then I reach a chapter and begin to get an odd sensation of déjà vu. I read a few more sentences and…GOD DAMN IT! I had already read that book. 86 pages in, which has to be a new record for me, but still. Such a waste of valuable reading time, and class time O:-) to be honest. Honestly, it made me so mad, because with school and work, and life in general my reading time is valuable! How on Earth did I forget a book SO much that I can read freaking 86 pages in before realizing? *Sigh* Like I said before, this is a very common thing, I can't tell you how many times I get people coming into my work and returning books because they've already read them without realizing. Lots of times this is the publishers fault, they'll reissue books under new covers and it throws people off. No such excuse for me, this was already on my shelf, while I was rearranging my shelves I saw it and went "hey wait I don't remember this book". So I read the back, flipped through it a bit, and put it on my "to read" shelf. I think this is partly Anne Rice's fault. By the way, since I didn't mention what book it was Blood Canticle, the last of the epic "Vampire Chronicles". In any case she's gone all super Christian on us—I know it's stupid, one of the greatest vampire authors "finding God"—after her husband died in 2002. Canticle was written in 2003, so its chalk full of religious crap, and she even goes as far as to try and "redeem" her greatest evil character, Lestat, and turn him into a Saint. A SAINT. Gah! Fucking shoot me! I'm not sure why I love her Chronicles so much, but I do, well I love the earlier ones. Partly cause the main character was vile, despicable, evil, selfish, and arrogant. He was the perfect "bad boy". I had kinda seen her going this way with the series after Memnoch the Devil, but I didn't think she'd ruin the character, or at least try. I'm really glad she failed, or at least she tried to stay true to his evilness, but it doesn't change the over the top amount of religious themes in her book. As such, I most likely skimmed over most of those parts making it so I couldn't remember them, at least not til a super memorable part 86 god damn pages in. Fuck. My. Life. I'm trying really, really hard not to rant about her turning all religious, but it still bugs. A lot. She no longer writes vampire books; instead she has a series about the life of Jesus. God, what a waste of such talent! She is, or was, one of my favorite authors, her skill at descriptions and gah just her style was amazing. I'm sure her Jesus books are well written, but the content is ugh! I should be okay for a little while with her yet, I still have her witch books to read, as well as the new tales of the vampires, and her mummy book, but after that *sigh*.

I think instead of ranting about her here, that I will write a Vampire post in the near future. No one really knows how much I'm into the whole vampire scene—not the goth/emo crap right now—but like literature wise. Obviously my favorite is Anne Rice, but I think I just love the concept of vampires. You'll see. Sorry about the mini rant here, I had to get this off my chest though!

A Year of Reading

Since I began working at Borders I've kept a log of all the books I've read. Mind you, this log is only from November 19th 2007-- I've read probably triple if not more books in the course of my life-- so it’s rather short. Hopefully I'll keep this log up to date for the rest of my life, then when I'm 40 I'll be able to be like whoa! It'll also help with the nasty problem of not knowing if I've read a book or not. I've found this extremely irritating of late, I'll pick up a book, think it looks pretty good, buy it, only to get like a chapter in and realize I've read it. It’s not a huge hassle but when I'm the reading zone its shitty to go back and find another book. Anyway here it is, I figured posting it a year from when I started would be kinda neat.

• A War of Gifts by Orson Scott Card
• Choke by Chuck Palahniuk
• Lullaby by Chuck Palahniuk
• Survivor by Chuck Palahniuk
• Next by Michael Crichton
• Monster by Frank Peretti
• Empire by Orson Scott Card
• Paranoia by Joseph Finder
• Harsh Cry of the Heron by Lian Heor
• Stiff by Mary Roach
• Anthem by Ayn Rand
• Brimstone by Douglas Preston & Lincoln Child
• Dance of Death by Douglas Preston & Lincoln Child
• Book of the Dead by Douglas Preston & Lincoln Child
• Dune by Frank Herbert
• Wheel of Darkness by Douglas Preston & Lincoln Child
• Dune Messiah by Frank Herbert
• Children of Dune by Frank Herbert
• God Emperor of Dune by Frank Herbert
• Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer
• A Child Called It by Dave Pelzer
• Heretics of Dune by Frank Herbert
• The Handmaids Tale by Margaret Atwood
• Chapterhouse: Dune by Frank Herbert
• Salem’s Lot by Stephen King
• Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson
• Robota by Orson Scott Card
• Elantris by Brandon Sanderson
• Rant by Chuck Palahniuk
• Revelation Space by Alastair Reynolds
• The Stranger by Albert Camus
• Innocent Mage by Karen Miller
• Lamb by Christopher Moore
• Awakened Mage by Karen Miller
• Player Piano by Kurt Vonnegut
• We by Yevgeny Zamyatin
• Requiem for a Dream by Hubert Selby Jr.
• The Time Machine by H.G. Wells
• Feed by M.T. Anderson
• Redemption Ark by Alastair Reynolds
• Click by Bill Tancer
• Final Theory by Mark Alpert
• The J-Curve by Ian Bremmer
• The Sword by Deborah Chester
• The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell
• The Ring by Deborah Chester
• The Chalice by Deborah Chester
• Absolution Gap by Alastair Reynolds
• The Way of Shadows by Brent Weeks
• Sway by Rom Brafman
• Chasm City by Alastair Reynolds
• Shadows Edge by Brent Weeks
• Daughter of the Empire by Raymond E. Feist
• Servant of the Empire by Raymond E. Feist
• Ender in Exile by Orson Scott Card

Total: 55

Note: The books in bold I own, the non-bolded books I read at work or borrowed from a friend. In my personal list I have each of the books rated from 1 to 10 but I decided to hold off on that simply because I'm probably pretty biased. Plus how can you rate a Fantasy against a Mystery or a Fiction?

Here in America reading has become one of those things that everyone wants to do but is "too busy" to do. Back in 2007 the Associated Press did a poll concerning just that, what they found is honestly saddening to me. "One in four adults read no books at all in the past year, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll released Tuesday [August 21, 2007]" This quote was taken from a Washington Post article that was written on the day the Ipsos poll was released. I don't know the details of the poll exactly but even if its somewhat true this country is in trouble. I did a little snooping around recently after I found the aforementioned article and found a somewhat 'better' set of figures. These numbers came from the Harris Poll:

TABLE 1

BOOKS READ PER YEAR

"How many books do you typically read in the average year?"

Base: All adults

	Total	Generation				Gender		Political Party
		Echo Boomers (18-31)	Gen X (32-43)	Baby Boomers (44-62)	Matures (63+)	Men	Women	Rep.	Dem.	Ind.
	%	%	%	%	%	%	%	%	%	%
None	9	6	7	9	12	11	7	10	8	7
1-3	23	28	24	23	15	27	18	23	24	18
4-6	19	18	22	20	15	22	17	22	17	20
7-10	13	12	11	14	11	11	14	13	15	11
More than 10	37	36	36	33	47	29	44	33	35	44

Note: Percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding.

As you can see roughly 1/3 of Americans read more than 10 books a year, which is good. It’s hard to say which of the two polls is more accurate and indeed from what I found both seem fairly legit. In any case, I'd say that we should be reading more. Granted my opinion is a bit biased seeing as I've read 55 books this year but even still. 10 books aren’t really that many if you think of the amount of time Americans sit in front of the tv or even the computer. Sure some people really don't enjoy reading at all and sure many find a movie or a reality tv show more entertaining than their imagination.. still.. the human mind is a great thing. When I read it feels like I'm watching a movie with actors that put real people to shame, with views and imagery that an HD tv can only dream of making. If you think about it television and movies are just dumbed down books, and if ANYONE thinks there's a movie based on a book that’s better than said book they have a poor imagination indeed. Why would you settle for someone else's imagination? What you can do with your mind is so wonderful that it’s sad to think some people go their lives without reading. Authors not only give you all the tools to create a world in your head but they can also give you meaning. What are you gonna learn about the world by watching American Idol? Pick up 1984, A Red Sky at Morning, Dante's Inferno, East of Eden, or any other number of classics out there and you'll discover not only a fantastic story but symbolism, satire, and a touch of politics. All of which with such intensity that there's no way a tv show or even a 2 hour movie could put it all in. Hell, if you're not into the "dry" classic stuff they forced you to read in high school pick up Alastair Reynolds or Neal Stevenson and you'll learn something.

Well I suppose I'll stop preaching now, I hope this possibly interested some of you into reading or at least picking up one of the books I've mentioned. If not, well, all the power to you it’s your life after all. If there are any questions about the books above or any sort of recommendations I can make, feel free to hit me up.