Help from readers?

On Mar 5, 8:10 pm, jeff wrote:
Adam wrote:
On Mar 5, 10:54 am, "Wayne Knight" wrote:

On Mar 5, 9:57 am, "Joe McIntosh" wrote:

Still trying to complete article on life of a small brook trout from
hatchery to death on a rat face McDougal from the fish point of view., and
find first person {the fish } point of view sort of confusing.
Wolfgang or some of you book folks, have you read anything presented from
the fish side of story?

Haig-Brown : "Return to the River"

A terrific book, from probably the most talented writer of fishing
books, ever. However, it happens to be written in the third-person
(omnicient) point of view, not in the first-person.

That being said, wouldn't any story that attempted to be from the
perspective of the fish be fairly contrived? That's probably why you
find it confusing, Joe. It's hard enough to imagine a story narrated
from the perspective of a nonhuman primate, not to mention going a few
rungs down the evolutionary ladder to the fish. Either some serious
anthropomorphism needs to be accomplished (so the fish talks more like
a person), or there has to be a third-person voice.

Just my $0.02 worth,

Adam

john gardner wrote a book from the beowulf monster's point of
view...grendel. very effective and interesting when i read it decades ago.

Broadly speaking, there are two classes of books in this world; those
whose covers are (as Mr. Bierce once observed) too far apart, and
those whose covers are way too close together. Gardner's "Grendel"
exemplifies the latter as well as any.

Thanks for the reminder. I'll be looking for a copy to reread soon.

Wolfgang

On Mar 5, 10:32 pm, "Wolfgang" wrote:
On Mar 5, 8:10 pm, jeff wrote:

john gardner wrote a book from the beowulf monster's point of
view...grendel. very effective and interesting when i read it decades ago.

Broadly speaking, there are two classes of books in this world; those
whose covers are (as Mr. Bierce once observed) too far apart, and
those whose covers are way too close together. Gardner's "Grendel"
exemplifies the latter as well as any.

Thanks for the reminder. I'll be looking for a copy to reread soon.

I know it is poetry (I know, I know! I've got a reputation to uphold,
after all!) but you boys should have a look at Gardner's translation
of the Gawain poet. "Gawain and the Green Knight" is rolicking good
fun- banquet feasts, quests, lots of slaying- and Gardner did a darned
good job of rendering the old English into new.

I don't know much about Gardner- his academic background- but he must
have gotten a taste for the early stuff at some point.

Hwæt!
Wm

Wolfgang wrote:


Broadly speaking, there are two classes of books in this world; those
whose covers are (as Mr. Bierce once observed) too far apart, and
those whose covers are way too close together.

That's a cool observation and very true. Got me to thinking of some
books that might fit the two categories. Two I've read the past year I
think make good examples, at least in my opinion, which is all either
category is anyway. Opinions.

I reread, after a first reading twenty-five years ago, "Atlas Shrugged"
by Ayn Rand this summer. That book is too thick. Way too thick. If it
were edited down to about half it would be a much better read.

I also read "1776" by David McCullough. When I finished the book (which
ends with almost a quarter inch of pages left) I was ready for "1777."
Covers too close together.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Mar 6, 11:35 pm, 13thchoise wrote:
Wolfgang wrote:

Broadly speaking, there are two classes of books in this world; those
whose covers are (as Mr. Bierce once observed) too far apart, and
those whose covers are way too close together.

That's a cool observation and very true. Got me to thinking of some
books that might fit the two categories. Two I've read the past year I
think make good examples, at least in my opinion, which is all either
category is anyway. Opinions.

I reread, after a first reading twenty-five years ago, "Atlas Shrugged"
by Ayn Rand this summer. That book is too thick. Way too thick. If it
were edited down to about half it would be a much better read.

I tried that once. It's a lot like eating tree bark with vomit
sauce. That is to say, it can certainly be done......

I also read "1776" by David McCullough. When I finished the book (which
ends with almost a quarter inch of pages left) I was ready for "1777."
Covers too close together.

Subject matter generally counts for a lot with most authors but if you
like McCullough, you should give "The Path Between the Seas" a shot.
Actually, the building of the Panama canal is one of the most
fascinating stories in modern history......even those who are lukewarm
about McCullough should read it.

Wolfgang
who, floundering ever more weakly in an ever more tempestuous sea of
printed matter, had successfully avoided "1776".....till now.
thanks.

"Wolfgang" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Mar 6, 11:35 pm, 13thchoise wrote:
Wolfgang wrote:

Broadly speaking, there are two classes of books in this world; those
whose covers are (as Mr. Bierce once observed) too far apart, and
those whose covers are way too close together.

That's a cool observation and very true. Got me to thinking of some
books that might fit the two categories. Two I've read the past year I
think make good examples, at least in my opinion, which is all either
category is anyway. Opinions.

I reread, after a first reading twenty-five years ago, "Atlas Shrugged"
by Ayn Rand this summer. That book is too thick. Way too thick. If it
were edited down to about half it would be a much better read.

I tried that once. It's a lot like eating tree bark with vomit
sauce. That is to say, it can certainly be done......

I also read "1776" by David McCullough. When I finished the book (which
ends with almost a quarter inch of pages left) I was ready for "1777."
Covers too close together.

Subject matter generally counts for a lot with most authors but if you
like McCullough, you should give "The Path Between the Seas" a shot.
Actually, the building of the Panama canal is one of the most
fascinating stories in modern history......even those who are lukewarm
about McCullough should read it.

I read "1776" shortly after it came out, and thoroughly enjoed it.

Op

Wolfgang
who, floundering ever more weakly in an ever more tempestuous sea of
printed matter, had successfully avoided "1776".....till now.
thanks.