I am OBSESSED with Lost Souls by Billy Martin (as Poppy Z. Brite)

I bought the book and I keep it with me wherever I go, I got my hands on an old copy so it has that library scent. Zillah and Nothing are my favorite characters, I dislike Steve and Ghost a lot.

I have been dying to meet other fans of lost souls, everyone I already know just doesn't understand or care or pay attention.

I was so inspired by Zillah and Nothing after rereading Lost Souls that I started my own novel series about multiple clans of hedonistic Chartreuse drinking musician biflexable mostly gay vampires. Though my universe vampires have vampire religion based laws, they worship Dracula and males and females are two separate biologically incompatible species.

Won't start self publishing it till I finish book 3, half way done with book 2 atm.

I fucking love Lost Souls so much its one if my biggest inspirations next to Anne Rice's vampire chronicles and Clive Barkers work

I really enjoy both post-modernist and magical realism books, but I'm not well versed in what characterises each type of writing beyond my experience of reading books. My boyfriend asked me what's the difference between the two styles and I struggled to explain it coherently!!

For post-modernism, I tried to explain the humour, satire or irony that is commonly used. As well as the often non-chronological or unusual structures of the story. A plot not always being the main focus of the book.

For magical realism, I tried to explain how magical or surreal components are weaved into the story and it's a normal part of the book's universe. Not necessarily seen as unusual or 'magical'.

However, I got muddled up when trying to explain that post-modernist works can also have a magical or surreal element to them.

How would you explain the difference between the two?

P.S. sorry for any incorrect grammar. English is my second language.

I know it is not unheard of for anthology editors today to occasionally have their own story or poem put in alongside their peers, but since it seems to me like anthologies of the 18th and 19th centuries collected the works of historical writers and famous people I’m curious if any editors from that era had the balls to put their own stuff alongside that of the greats.

I just finished reading the modern classic and I was thoroughly blown away by Archer’s engaging writing style. The story was enthralling and moved at a fantastic pace.

You’re so captured reading the storyline of one protagonist, when it switches you feel yourself pulled away and want it to continue. Genuinely enjoyed the format.

I will say however that the ending was a bit anticlimactic for me because I saw the “twist” coming from a mile away, and I feel Archer could have a disguised it better. On more than one occasion, when Abel shows gratitude to the guy he originally thought gave him the loan to buy out the hotels, he acts surprised. Combined with the fact that William repeatedly said that he backed him to succeed, it was quite obvious.

Anyway, what are your thoughts on the book? It’s a 4.5/5 for me personally, and please make suggestions

I’m only about nine chapters in so far, but I’m really surprised by how much of myself I can see in it. I relate so much to Jane—I was a very emotional child myself, and even now, I completely understand her philosophy of treating those who treat you well with kindness and responding with scorn to those who scorn you.

On the other hand, you have Helen Burns, who embodies the Christian practices of endurance and humility. Recently, I’ve found myself jumping between these two philosophies, not quite sure which is the best way to navigate life. It’s interesting to see this struggle laid out in the book. I assume Charlotte Brontë might have grappled with something similar, given how well she writes about it.

I also really like the character of Miss Temple. I hadn't thought so much about it before, but it’s nice to see a female character in a position of authority, and someone who is so kind and fair too.

What did you all like about Jane Eyre? (without giving too much away!)

I started reading the Thief's Journal by Jean Genet and I am such a hard time getting hooked into the writing. I do not know if it is above my reading level but there are a lot of sentences or metaphors that I can't fully grasp. I understand the overall plot and themes but like I find hard to get myself in the book and i re-read so many passages or sentences.

Any tips? or am I just not ready to read it yet?

What is your favorite story from the collection that won the Pulitzer?

The story that opens it sticks with me, due to my first impression.

The other ones that have the strongest place in my memory are the one about piano lessons, the one that takes place at the sky lodge with the lonely family of three, and the one about the elevator employee.

I once made an argument to my friend that publishing doesn’t have to result in mass popularity or significant notoriety. I posited that if you look around your local library or Barnes & Nobel, you’re going to find many books there that may have a niche audience, but neither you, nor most people, have discovered yet.

In hindsight, I’m not sure if I’m the best judge of this since I never go out of my way to buy and read a book. On the other hand, I’d argue that the greatest popularity threshold for anything to cross is to get noticed by the people who weren’t looking for it.

I’d like to ask the literature enthusiasts out there: do most books (not written by biggest names in literature) get a small audience and die with only that? What constitutes a proper time in the limelight for a book and what percent of books in stores and libraries get it?

Hello,

I appreciate that this is very loosely tied to the subject at hand, but now that I'm exploring the arts and poetry in particular, I find it really frustrating that I struggle to recall even a single sentence or passage verbatim.

I've noticed this in the past, like my inability to remember lyrics to pretty much any song, even my favourites save a few verses smattered throughout the song.

It's frustrating me because I feel like there's so much value and beauty in what I'm reading that I'd like to be able to recall it for my own benefit, but also to share with others.

Any advice sincerely appreciated.

For what it's worth, I also have ADHD and autism if that affects anything.

Contains a fair amount of spoilers, be mindful!

"But I wasn’t crying because I was sad. I guess I was crying because we had nowhere else to go, no choice but to go on living in this world. Crying because we had no other world to choose, and crying at everything before us, everything around us."

Heaven is a coming-of-age psychological fiction novel written by Mieko Kawakami, an author & poet from Osaka, Japan. The English version of this book was translated as a joint effort by both Sam Bett & David Boyd in 2021, whereas the original, Japanese version was published in 2009.

Heaven follows an unnamed narrator who is the victim of severe bullying, & a girl in his class, named Kojima, who suffers the same fate. The narrator is picked on by the boys in their class for having a lazy eye, while Kojima is picked on primarily by the girls for being unhygienic. In the beginning of the novel, Kojima leaves a letter inside of our narrator’s desk, asking him to be friends. The two begin kindling a silent friendship, their conversations consisting mostly of letters where they would talk about their experiences & their overall thoughts on the world around them. Occasionally, they would plan meetups in secret locations to talk about anything & everything. Kojima has a belief that getting bullied is a “sign” that there is a better future awaiting both her & the narrator, one that only they could achieve because of what they have both gone through. Neither of them fight back against the harassment, they both adamantly take whatever is thrown their way. There was no happy ending, even in their final moments. The narrator’s signs he once shared with Kojima disappeared, & Koijma was never to be seen again. 

The relationship between Kojima & the narrator was unlike anything I’ve ever read about before. The friendship shared between the two was endearing, delicate, & incredibly understanding. I had expected the novel to take on a bit of a romantic turn at some points, but honestly, I feel I would have enjoyed this novel a lot less if that had been the case. Their feelings for each other almost surpassed traditional romance, as they truly saw each other for who they were. Kojima was patient with the narrator’s hesitation & general introversion, whereas the narrator would listen to Kojima’s philosophical ideas & past experiences carefully. Both of them shared an incredibly vulnerable & honest relationship, something that needed no words if the other hadn’t been feeling up to it. No hint of desperation, just solace. Even at the very end of the novel, the two could only laugh & cry together in their most vulnerable state at the bleakness of the world around them during their last moment together. 

This book, in all honesty, kept me frozen still after finishing it for the first time. I hadn’t expected to be as impacted by it as I was, yet once I had begun nearing the last few chapters, I had been a sobbing, inconsolable mess. Like many others, I started this book assuming I could predict exactly how the plotline was going to play out. I imagined Kojima & the narrator continuing on their consoling string of letters & conversations, I expected a happy ending for both of them. My predictions were, of course, crushed by the harsh thumb of reality. 

My favorite part of this book was how many questions remain unanswered. Kojima never showed the Heaven painting to the narrator, despite their long talks about the painting & even visiting the museum it was located in. The narrator never told Kojima what he wanted to say to her that day, before he had gotten shoved down the staircase. The reader will never know what happened to Kojima, or where she went. The reader will never know what life is like for our narrator, now that he had gotten his lazy eye corrected. No memories, no reflecting. All the reader is left to do is wonder. I think the ending is beautiful, & as much as I wish I could have some sort of answer for everything, I'm happamine (haha) that I don't. Just like life, sometimes we are left with no explanations, no reasons. The realism in this book carries on even through its uncertain ending.

I am thankful to have read this book when I did. At a time in my life where I have felt excruciatingly lonesome & depressed, this book provided me with a strong sense of comfort & solace, just like the letters shared between the two main characters. The feelings of both the narrator & Kojima resonated with my own so heavily, at times I almost felt uncomfortable with how understood I felt reading this novel. There is no mincing of words, there is no flattery. The emotion depicted is raw, jarring & unrestrained. Heaven will follow me around for a long time, I'm sure.

If you've read this book, please talk with me about it! I didn't touch too much on the philosophical aspect of this book, just because I would rather let it set with me for a bit longer before trying to analyze that properly. Perhaps someday in the future I'll make a separate post for that... who knows. If I missed something, or if you thought differently about certain parts of the novel, let me know! I'm scratching at my skin, wanting to talk about this book...

The video features a powerful scene from Tadeusz Konwicki's film Lawa, in which the acclaimed Polish actor Gustaw Holoubek delivers a stirring recitation of "The Great Improvisation" from Adam Mickiewicz's epic poem Dziady (Forefathers' Eve). In this intense performance, Holoubek embodies the role of Konrad, a tormented poet and visionary who grapples with existential questions, passionately confronting God with his suffering and despair. Holoubek's rendition captures the depth of Konrad's inner conflict, conveying the timeless themes of freedom, rebellion, and the search for meaning that resonate through Mickiewicz's words.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDb9IkurI-0

I finished Martin Eden about three days ago for the second time. It's always been one of my favorite novels. Everything about this book is painful and lovely at the same time. Martin's first encounter with Ruth, and his love towards her was the beginning of the biggest changes in Martin. for everybody, he was just an unemployed daydreamer, but he managed to be one of the most famous writers. it was sad to see Martin realizing that even Ruth never believed in him. and the episode where Ruth came to Martin for forgiveness just broke my heart. I wouldn't even imagine that she was able to tell lies to Martin's face too easily about how she came to him alone and secretly. poor Martin, he fighted non-stop for nothing. it was hard to read about his apathy to his success after years of waiting. I blame Martin only for one thing: I guess he could run away with Lizzie Connolly, forget about everything and start a new life. but he choose something unusual.. the ending was just unexpected. it's my second time that I finished it but every time I read the ending, I feel depressed..

what can I say more? absolutely perfect book. if you haven't read, I highly recommend it.

I can't find any sources how THE WRITERS (which are considered the best one. Like the classics writers, for example) explain how THEY ANALYZE books.

If you can cite me some authors. Then could you (it's just bid) broadly explain their strategy of analyzing?

https://youtu.be/hXXZ4AJhKTw?si=6xYMDBQqFFU7LWs0&t=2625

What do think about his position of understading how to read? (There is English subtitle)

I began reading the book “Leaving Las Vegas” early this year probably around March or April. Well my grandfather committed suicide at the end of May. As you can imagine the book went on hold as it hit a little too close to home. However, now that a few months have passed I have picked it back up and have continued reading.

Oddly enough, this book has served as a kind of therapy for me. The circumstances around the protagonist’s death and my grandfathers are quite different, but similar in that they both made the choice to end it themselves.

I don’t know this book may go down as one of the most profound reads I have ever read partially due to the timing. Still collecting my thoughts around it, but great book!

Hello fellow readers!

I'm Tomás, a reader from Brazil. I recently gave Dom Quixote a shot but my translation into Portuguese is very archaic and it made me to difficult to engage with it or even understand it.

A publisher I love just announced their edition of the book, with a new, fresh and modern translation. The problem is: this edition contains only the first volume published in 1605.

Can anyone who has read the two volumes weight in an offer me your opinion if the reading experience of the first volume alone feels incomplete/lesser?

Thank you in advance

Listening to The Old Man and the Sea narrated by Donald Sutherland was a real surprise. Typically, I don’t listen to fiction audiobooks, but I was looking for something short while preparing dinner and came across it. Sutherland’s voice suited the story wonderfully, adding great depth to the experience. Although he reads slowly, carefully enunciating each word, this pace gives space to appreciate the simplicity and weight of Hemingway's writing.

I didn’t realize the book was so short—the version I listened to was only around two and a half hours. Yet, despite its brevity, it has a timeless, classic feel. The writing is straightforward, not overly descriptive, yet it holds a surprising depth. Told primarily from the perspective of one character, the story pulls you into his mind, letting you feel his inner monologue and sparse responses to his own thoughts. It was reminiscent of The Road by Cormac McCarthy; I wouldn’t be surprised if McCarthy took some inspiration from Hemingway, or even directly from The Old Man and the Sea.

While on the surface it’s about fishing, the story feels like a metaphor for life itself, making it surprisingly emotional and impactful. There’s a meditative quality to it, as we follow the old man and his quiet, solitary thoughts. The violence also took me by surprise. The details of killing fish and other sea creatures aren’t overly graphic, but they’re striking and intentional, adding layers to the story. This brutality underscores both the harsh realities of life and the resilience of the human spirit. In impossible situations, Hemingway seems to say, a person can find the strength to push forward.

The prose is beautiful, creating vivid imagery of the man’s struggle at sea. Though it’s a tragedy, I found it unexpectedly optimistic. Despite how things turned out, his effort wasn’t in vain. The old man’s struggle profoundly impacts the boy, and that alone makes his journey worth it. There’s something timeless in the idea that hardship makes us stronger, and this story is a powerful depiction of that truth.

Alone, with no food or sleep, it’s just the old man, the fish, and his thoughts on the boat. The Old Man and the Sea is perfectly written in its simplicity. If classics aren’t usually your thing, this book might not completely change your mind, but it’s a fantastic, short, and powerful one to try. Straightforward and deeply resonant, I highly recommend it.

I recently created a blog where I discuss books. If anyone is interested I can share the link!

Im currently reading Mary Renault's book the nature of Alexander. Its a biography about Alexander the Great. I chose it because I was recommended it by a fellow Alexander enthusiast and so far im loving it. But me aside, what are y'all reading now and why'd you chose that book?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.amazon.com/Nature-Alexander-Mary-Renault/dp/039473825X&ved=2ahUKEwjNtbvEy7KJAxXBkokEHfNEIrYQFnoECDwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1jpwkuEvXar8G76S-lmNqj

I know there are often "what classic lit is worth reading?" posts, and this is halfway that, but mostly a post about wanting an English Literature degree and considering how to piecemeal an unofficial one together. Lists of classic works to read are abundant, but what I struggle with is annotation and really understanding each work and the background that I assume would come more from studying under a professor. Does anyone have any ideas for these kinds of resources?

Okay, for starters I am not one who frequently indulges in smut or erotic stuff, so please don't blindly bash me. Don't know why I need to put it out there, but just for safety as I've seen the normalization of fetishizing dark content and lgbtq people!

I love literature. Hence, why I'm writing this.

But idk, something about LGBTQ-themed books or depressing bitter-sweet books creates a spark in me. A really lively one.

I mean— imagine the thought of people of the same sex, in love with one another, yet they don't know it yet; both struggling and finding a path to choose, maybe one wants to follow their heart and love the other one, but the other one wants to push their feelings away, mourning and laying in their bed of lies and excuses, just to hide their feelings.

Although what really IS the jackpot for me is LGBTQ/Angsty books. It hurts, but you get pulled closer to it like a moth to a light source. Like maybe a story about two male gods and one falls in love with the other, turning himself into a woman the other one desires, yet no matter what he does the other always escapes from his grasp, and ends up falling inlove with someone else, leading the shapeshifting god all by himself, broken and lost; just like the crumbs and pieces of a delicate fine porcelain.

Be it the unrequited love trope, forbidden love, scandalous, reincarnated, right person wrong timing— or vice versa, it really makes me feel so many things.

I don't mean to make this really cheesy or sentimental but it just fills up my heart alot with so much love. I can't even describe it haha

Honestly, I just needed to yap my heart out. I love all kinds of books and genre (except the booktok kind), but I just wanted to show my love for this specific one.

P.S If there are any grammar errors or wrong use or certain words feel free to let me know! English is not first language (even tho im fairly adjusted to it) and I am dyslexic.

share your views on the book, too!

it is easier to write about what you feel rather than what you don't and Camus, i believe, wrote even that beautifully. Meursault has thoughts and opinions about what happens around him but chooses not to vocalize them more often than not. He never acts on them and gives very few reactions, 'only speaks when he has something to say'.

I also think that Meursault's Maman is the spirit of God for him and he does not believe in God because God too, like Maman, is gone. But God's hand was withdrawn from his head when him and his mother found themselves devoid of each other when they stayed together too and even if the hand no longer remains he still remembers the words and lessons. Like when he remembers something his mother used to say and agrees. he no longer believes in god because, to him, there is no meaning left in life and he does not believe in the existence of someone who brings meaning to life. That is why he describes what happens as though he is removed from the position mostly, as if merely just the narrator and that is why we know not what his name or age is. because it holds no meaning.

Meursault is a man of values and is painfully and constantly true to himself. He does not abandon his opinions just for the sake of being in any one's good graces. He stands by what he believes. He is mundane, unrelatable and shows no empathy yet in his dullness, is so interesting that i could not keep the book down.

Obligatory English is not my first language disclaimer. I'm a bit late to the party, but I just finished reading Normal People. I must admit I loved hating it. I wanted to open a discussion about a chapter of the book that instantly made me think about Hemingway's short story "Hills Like White Elephants".

I couldn't find anything linking them on the internet, but when I read the end of the chapter "April 2012", it highly reminded me of the short story, and I wondered if it was foreshadowing the end of the book, and now that I have finished it, I think it did.

First, Connell and Marianne do talk about abortion before the conversation I am mentioning. Later, Marianne says (not about abortion) "I would have done it if you wanted, but I could see you didn't." And Connell tells her "You shouldn't do things you don't want to do." To which she answers "Oh I didn't mean that."

Here is an extract from Hemingway's short story:

"Then I'll do it. Because I don't care about me."

"What do you mean?"

"I don't care about me."

"Well I care about you."

"Oh yes. But I don't care about me. And I'll do it and then everything will be fine."

"I don't want you to do it if you feel that way."

Later in the same conversation Marianne asks Connell to stop talking about what is actually unspoken between them, just like in the short story.

After reading that, I thought about this part of the short story:

"We can have everything."

"No we can't. It isn't ours anymore."

"It's ours."

"No it isn't. And once they take it away, you never get it back."

"But they haven't taken it away."

"We'll wait and see."

I came to the conclusion that it did foreshadow the end of the book, since after Connell tells her "You know I love you" (an exact sentence that is in the short story) one of the last sentences of Normal people is "What they have now, they can never have back again."

If we take a step back from the texts, and think about the general stories, both are stories where the two characters keep avoiding talking about the elephant in the room (hehe, see what I did there?), with the woman refusing to express what she wants, and the man wanting her to say what she wants.

Anyway, what I wrote is more thoughts than a university analysis, but I am curious of your opinions.

Has anyone else read this lately? What did you like about it? I loved this book and it is one of my absolute favorites. I enjoyed the sights, sounds and smells of this adventure. I enjoyed traveling through the narrator's life and how Waltari illustrates that no matter where you are in history human nature remains the same.

The title really says it all, but it feels wrong to leave this blank, so I’ll elaborate. I recently came into possession of Vaughn Bateson’s biography and learnt online that there are a handful of letters between him and Kipling, but I haven’t been able to find any posted online. If you’re an expert on Kipling, or you can access to the volumes of his letters that include Bateson, I’m dying to know more about their correspondence. Thank you in advance for any answers or assistance you may be able to provide.