Undead & UnRead Book Club - Frisco Public Library discussion

I read this a few months ago. I have heard about this book for at least the last 30 years of my life. Various adjectives that people have used describing it to me are: funny, intellectual, unique, tongue-in-cheek, original, smart, and hilarious.

And of course after years of hearing how great it is and finally getting to read it all I can say is....eh.

Like you, I read this book after a lot of people told me how amazing it is. While I liked it, I have to say that it didn't live up to the hype that surrounds it. I expected it to be more.

Not to say I didn't like it, I just didn't love it.

Exactly. It was fun. I'm reading The Restaurant at the End of the Universe anf have already used a line from it. I will probably finish the series but nowhere near as fast as I read Arthur C Clarke's 2001 series.

I still need to read Clarke's 2001. Maybe once school is out for winter break.

2001 was amazing. I had the biggest crush on Dave Bowman.

I don't know if I'm going to make it through Hitchhikers. I got farther than before this time, but I'm just not able to get interested in it. It was probably really funny back before anyone ever experienced this kind of humor. It reminds me of Monty Python.

At least you gave it another chance. I'll usually give a book I didn't finish the first time around a second chance, as long as it's not cringeworthy, to make sure it wasn't a timing issue. I call it quits if I can't get through it a second time.

I often wonder with a lot of the classics we've been reading if I would have appreciated them more at the time of their original release when the ideas expressed in them were still fresh and new.

So, Amy, are you confessing that you are an agist?

I'm not ageist, I just think some science fiction "classics" don't necessarily stand the test of time. That an element from the book becomes so common place that if you're reading it for the first time it may not seem all that revolutionary or interesting. Also new ideas in Science Fiction have a habit of being explored by other authors in newer books, some of which might outshine the book the concept originated in.


Not to say that I didn't like these books, just that I might have appreciated them more if I hadn't already been exposed to the style/humor/idea/plot/ect. before reading them. The Forever War is a good example from book club. I thought Ender's Game did a much better job covering the same overall message as The Forever War. Both are considered Science Fiction classics, but I think Ender's Game is a better written book and more likely to stand the test of time.

Ah, I see....you're a Stinsonite "Newer is always better." ;)

I understand what you mean, to me Armor will always be the definitive book about interstellar battlesuit combat even though it eas written at least 10 years after The Forever War and because I read Dracula and Salem's Lot before the Vampire Chronicles, I point out the "errors" in the Chronicles.

I think you have to be selective about what's considered a "classic." Like I wouldn't have considered The Forever War to be a classic, as I had never heard of it before it was mentioned in book club. It may be a classic to people who read a ton of SF but not to everyone. I tend to be leery of this kind of "classic."

On the other hand, I do gravitate toward books that have truly withstood the test of time, like 2001. Everyone knows about it and most people agree that it's awesome, so I think hey there must be something to this. Usually (not always) I agree and can see what the fuss was about.

Sometimes I will read a super-classic like that when I'm tired of experimenting with new authors who may or may not have some good ideas that they may or may not have executed gracefully.

Kind of like that list that came out recently of the "most timeless songs." Some of them were pop songs from the 2000's. Eminem has not been around long enough for anything of his to become "timeless."

On a side note, I loved the book 2001 and thought it was brilliant in idea and in execution. But the movie was like watching paint dry.

With Hitchhikers I would put the book down and come back the next day and have no idea what was going on. It just didn't have a thread of logic that I could keep going in my mind. Eventually it was like picking up a book full of word salad. I didn't make it :-(

mmmm...word salad with just a drizzle of rant dressing.