The three books should be taken as a whole instead of being looked at as individual units. The first book can stand on its own, but it does leave a bit unanswered at the end that will lead into reading books two and three. The first book's plot revolves around Mikael Blomkvist who is a part-owner of the Swedish political magazine Millennium. He loses a libel case and faces fines and prison time for it. He takes a leave of absence from the magazine and is offered a freelance assignment by industrialist Henrik Vanger to look into a cold case involving the death of Vanger's great-niece. In return for his investigation Vanger promises him information that will help exonerate him in the libel charges as well as a substantial monetary reward. During his investigation of this case he meets Lisbeth Salander, an antisocial but gifted computer hacker and researcher. The investigation exposes a lot of deep family issues in Vanger's family and some of the family don't want Mikael digging that deep. Book two involves Blomkvist and Millennium planning on publishing a researcher's thesis on sex trafficking in Sweden. The research hits a bit too close to home for the people dealing in the trafficking (as well as the mysterious "Zala" whose name keeps popping up everywhere). When the researcher and his wife are killed and Lisbeth is implicated in the murders things get a bit more complicated, with Mikael right in the middle of everything. Book three deals with the fallout of the end of book two. If I went into further detail on it then it would spoil the ending of book two, so suffice it to say that it picks up right where the second one left off. All three books have what feels to me to be a somewhat plodding pace and a lot of extraneous information jammed in that I'm assuming is supposed to give more background on the characters but just seems to fill up page space. My suggestion would be to watch the non-US version of the first book's film and see if you like it. If you do, go for the book and see what you think. If not, just avoid them or read the Wikipedia pages to get the Cliff's Notes version.
Just grinded through this thread after a week+ of not opening it. My only contribution to the World War Z debate was that I felt it was very odd that you guys would pick a book you had a distaste for. I seem to remember from the original announcement, you said it was in an effort to attract more people to participate in the book club. It just brings up an interesting questions of whether it's better to do what you love to an audience of fewer people, or to go outside the box and take on something you don't like in order to gain a larger audience. It's something I contemplate with my writing, and am currently of the mindset that since writing is just my side job, I would eventually resent it if I wasn't covering my bread & butter. As a caveat, I do think going out of your comfort zone is great and needs to be done from time to time, sort of like a calibration for your tastes. Do it too often though and you risk burnout.
Right now I'm working my way throughThe Girl Who Kicked The Hornet's Nest. It picks up right whereThe Girl Who Played With Fireleft off and then resumes the series' plodding pace. I'm in it to finish the story right now, because unless it picks up in the next few chapters I'm not really going to be recommending this series to anyone unless they're looking for something to kill a few weekends and have nothing better to read.
Those books appear to be stupidly popular. What are they all about?
I have also been curious about them. They are definitely the next mega-popular book series. Every Leo Laporte podcast I listen to he winds up fawning over them, something about showing the dark side of Sweden with a female hacker as the lead. They look like short reads so I will probably jump on that bandwagon eventually.
In "what I'm reading" news, it's pretty much just a long series of pregnancy books that were dropped off by various family members, and share more information on the process than I ever wanted to know. I have not even begun the task of finding trustworthy websites for content on having a child/parenting topics, but once the books are done it will happen. Never thought I'd have a tab in my google reader for that topic! Right now it's just Wired's Geek Dad blog.
In my quest to purchase all the library books I read as a child, I have just re-read Stranger In a Strange Land. It is very different through the eyes of a 12-year-old than through those of a 30-year-old. I admire Heinlein's merging of political and sexual liberalism.
That makes four Heinlein books in two months. I think it's time to switch gears and read The Postman, a novel starring Tom Petty.
In my quest to purchase all the library books I read as a child, I have just re-readStranger In a Strange Land. It is very different through the eyes of a 12-year-old than through those of a 30-year-old. I admire Heinlein's merging of political and sexual liberalism.
Yea, I can't tell you how much that book changed how I looked at Sex in my late teens. (not that it helped :-p) It's pretty responsible for my general EXTREMELY liberal views on Sex. (though I love to pretend to be disapproving ^_^)
In my quest to purchase all the library books I read as a child, I have just re-readStranger In a Strange Land. It is very different through the eyes of a 12-year-old than through those of a 30-year-old. I admire Heinlein's merging of political and sexual liberalism.
I love Heinlein's explorations of political philosophies more generally, but I really do not like Stranger. I mean, in the first part, it just rubs me the wrong way aesthetically; I just don't like it. But in the second part, I also find that it really disappointingly continues to rather blithely treat women as objects, or at least as largely passive participants in society, even as it advocates sexual liberalization. I know that's a product of the times. I get that. I know it was more progressive than its environment. I know, I know, I know. That doesn't mean I have to like it.
Now, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, THERE'S a Heinlein book. Libertarianism is still a retarded practical impossibility, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy thought-experiment explorations of it.
I also find that it really disappointingly continues to rather blithely treat women as objects, or at least as largely passive participants in society, even as it advocates sexual liberalization.
Really? While it's been years since I read Stranger, I still recall a very strong female character that is one of the "Fair Witnesses" along with a bunch of others of varies degrees in the story. However I agree Heinlein always had trouble writing female characters but I've never found a lack of strong female characters they just are never written very well.
Now,The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, THERE'S a Heinlein book. Libertarianism is still a retarded practical impossibility, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy thought-experiment explorations of it.
Yeah, and the only way it works in this thought experiment is that if anyone can't get along with the system,they are THROWN OUT OF THE AIRLOCK and KILLED. Also, to put in place a libertarian government, they use utter control of the press, massive secrecy, dictatorship-level powers in the hands of a very few people, and manipulation of democratic processes. Yay libertarianism!
I really disliked Stranger in a Strange Land. I think it is my least favourite of all Heinlein books.
However I agree Heinlein always had trouble writing female characters but I've never found a lack of strong female characters they just are never written very well.
Heinlein's female characters remind me of the ass-kicking sexy girls who are found in many comics books. Sure, they make a pretense of making the character "spunky" and "tough" but they are mainly just there to be sexy and wear bikini armor. Red Monika is a good example. This is what Heinlein girls remind me of.
However, a character can be sexy and an interesting character at the same time. I like women in fiction like this:
You watched the series. She has big breasts, but she is by no way a purely fan-service character. The male characters don't treat her much differently than they treat their other comrades and they have a lot of respect for her. The series focus is on her mind as much as her body, and she almost never uses her feminine looks to get what she wants (there are a few examples where she is undercover and must play the femme fatale type, but they are rare.) If all you got out of the major is that she wears a leotard and kicks ass, you need to re-watch the show. I chose the major to illustrate the difference between an empowering female character and a fan-service character. It's not just on the surface, but in the actions and attitudes of them and the people around them.
You watched the series. She has big breasts, but she is by no way a purely fan-service character. The male characters don't treat her much differently than they treat their other comrades and they have a lot of respect for her. The series focus is on her mind as much as her body, and she almost never uses her feminine looks to get what she wants (there are a few examples where she is undercover and must play the femme fatale type, but they are rare.) If all you got out of the major is that she wears a leotard and kicks ass, you need to re-watch the show. I chose the major to illustrate the difference between an empowering female character and a fan-service character. It's not just on the surface, but in the actions and attitudes of them and the people around them.
The show doesn't even make it clear whether she was orginally female so while she looks it on the outside that's her cybernetic body. I'm not even sure she is female....
No I haven't, I have only watched the first season. I'm just saying the way she is portrayed in the first season it's left kinda up in the air.
And therein lies her appeal. The fact that you don't automatically assume her gender identity as female because of boobs is a testament to the construction of the character.
The thing with the major is: She can be anything. Batou teases her to the effect of "Hey, just get an man's body already." Her body is one she choses. Because of the cyberpunk setting this is amplified, but I yearn for female characters whose body does not define them.
I knew the jiggle butt picture was going to come back. Dammit. I don't care, Major is still awesome.
Edit: Back to the original topic, I have read "A Model World" by Michael Chabon and "The True Deceiver" by Tove Jansson. Both were good, but the later was very full of winter.
That was the worst book I've read cover to cover since my childhood days of Forgetten Realms drivel. Not necessarily a bad book, but the worst I've actually subjected myself to. I'll agree that I have high standards, and this did not even approach them. At least Snow Crash was strange and entertaining, nevermind quotable, despite its poor composition.
Comments
The first book's plot revolves around Mikael Blomkvist who is a part-owner of the Swedish political magazine Millennium. He loses a libel case and faces fines and prison time for it. He takes a leave of absence from the magazine and is offered a freelance assignment by industrialist Henrik Vanger to look into a cold case involving the death of Vanger's great-niece. In return for his investigation Vanger promises him information that will help exonerate him in the libel charges as well as a substantial monetary reward. During his investigation of this case he meets Lisbeth Salander, an antisocial but gifted computer hacker and researcher. The investigation exposes a lot of deep family issues in Vanger's family and some of the family don't want Mikael digging that deep.
Book two involves Blomkvist and Millennium planning on publishing a researcher's thesis on sex trafficking in Sweden. The research hits a bit too close to home for the people dealing in the trafficking (as well as the mysterious "Zala" whose name keeps popping up everywhere). When the researcher and his wife are killed and Lisbeth is implicated in the murders things get a bit more complicated, with Mikael right in the middle of everything.
Book three deals with the fallout of the end of book two. If I went into further detail on it then it would spoil the ending of book two, so suffice it to say that it picks up right where the second one left off.
All three books have what feels to me to be a somewhat plodding pace and a lot of extraneous information jammed in that I'm assuming is supposed to give more background on the characters but just seems to fill up page space. My suggestion would be to watch the non-US version of the first book's film and see if you like it. If you do, go for the book and see what you think. If not, just avoid them or read the Wikipedia pages to get the Cliff's Notes version.
In "what I'm reading" news, it's pretty much just a long series of pregnancy books that were dropped off by various family members, and share more information on the process than I ever wanted to know. I have not even begun the task of finding trustworthy websites for content on having a child/parenting topics, but once the books are done it will happen. Never thought I'd have a tab in my google reader for that topic! Right now it's just Wired's Geek Dad blog.
That makes four Heinlein books in two months. I think it's time to switch gears and read The Postman, a novel starring Tom Petty.
Now, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, THERE'S a Heinlein book. Libertarianism is still a retarded practical impossibility, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy thought-experiment explorations of it.
I really disliked Stranger in a Strange Land. I think it is my least favourite of all Heinlein books.
Red Monika is a good example. This is what Heinlein girls remind me of.
However, a character can be sexy and an interesting character at the same time. I like women in fiction like this:
I chose the major to illustrate the difference between an empowering female character and a fan-service character. It's not just on the surface, but in the actions and attitudes of them and the people around them.
The thing with the major is: She can be anything. Batou teases her to the effect of "Hey, just get an man's body already." Her body is one she choses. Because of the cyberpunk setting this is amplified, but I yearn for female characters whose body does not define them.
I'm reading Psych: The Call of the Mild. It is a fun book but not a masterpiece of literature by any means.
Edit: Back to the original topic, I have read "A Model World" by Michael Chabon and "The True Deceiver" by Tove Jansson. Both were good, but the later was very full of winter.
That was the worst book I've read cover to cover since my childhood days of Forgetten Realms drivel. Not necessarily a bad book, but the worst I've actually subjected myself to. I'll agree that I have high standards, and this did not even approach them. At least Snow Crash was strange and entertaining, nevermind quotable, despite its poor composition.