What are you reading in 2025?

I have a couple of tips for House of Leaves.

1. Johnny Truant is many people’s least favorite part of the book. If you find yourself feeling thst way, it is okay to skim most of his footnotes. Get the gist of it and move on.

2. A significant chunk of Zampano’s footnotes are a kind of joke thst wears thin easily. When you see one of his long, long lists, it’s also okay to skim. I don’t recall anything significant buried in them way down. There is a Truant footnote where he talks with some of Zampano’s aides about them, and that’s worth reading for insight into how they were made.

3. I suggest not skipping the parts of the Navidson Record oddly laid out. Go with the flow, it sometimes has a very engaging emotional effect.

And some folks on YouTube have assayed versions of the short exploration films described in the Record. Some of them are pretty cool.

It’s me of my favorite books, but not all parts are my favorites.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Well , foo. There are times when stress kicks my orthostatic hypotension into gear in ways that mess with my ability to focus on reading, even on the Kindle with font size set quite large. Unfortunately, this is one of those times. Also unfortunately, to Malazan Book of the Fallen audiobooks are not very good. So I need to shelve Memories of Ice until things improve. I do have Gladius, by the author of Populus, which. I enthused about above; here he does for the Roman army in particular what he did for Roman society at large there, and does it great so far. I will pick a fiction project to. Go in parallel with it. Pfeah. If I wanted world politics to control my reading this much, I’d have asked for it to do so.
 


I'm just starting the first of two tie-in novels to the Starz "Spartacus" TV series. The first one, Swords and Ashes, takes place before Spartacus escaped the ludus (it looks like it's right after he became the Champion of Capua) and apparently deals with lanista Quintus Batiatus trying to gain control of the estate of a murdered Roman. I just hope the author, J. M. Clements, manages to capture the manner of speaking as used in the show, as that was one of the things that I most enjoyed about it.

Johnathan
 

Just finished Slayers Vol 2. Still love the MC and sidekick. The writing style and quick pace are perfect for me. The writer definitely improved between volumes. This one was much better written. Same breakneck pace and skipping over most of the unnecessary details. Some of the fight choreography was fantastic. Definitely want a game that could do that. The only thing that comes to mind is Wushu.
 

Just finished Slayers Vol 2. Still love the MC and sidekick. The writing style and quick pace are perfect for me. The writer definitely improved between volumes. This one was much better written. Same breakneck pace and skipping over most of the unnecessary details. Some of the fight choreography was fantastic. Definitely want a game that could do that. The only thing that comes to mind is Wushu.
I must have missed when you talked about volume one; is this The Slayers with Lina Inverse and Gourry?
 

Just finished Island of Whispers by Frances Hardinge, one of my favourite authors and one whom I know personally. It’s a beautiful and eerie fairy tale of death and humanity, typical of Hardinge, and well illustrated by Emily Gravett. Highly recommended.

Also finished vol 1 of The Power Fantasy by Kieron Gillen (oddly, I don’t know him but one of my closest friends does and has gamed with him a fair bit in Bristol). It continues some of Gillen’s preferred themes from his contributions to the X-Men Krakoa books and the parallels are clear, for instance in a couple of characters (Etienne for Xavier, Heavy for Magneto). There’s some interesting stuff there but I do prefer superhuman protagonists whose first narrative recourse isn’t mass murder.
 


I do prefer superhuman protagonists whose first narrative recourse isn’t mass murder.
At a certain point, "what if superheroes, but massively violent" goes from edgy to edgelord to embarassing.

That said, "what if Superman, but evil" has gotten redeemed in recent years with the TV versions of Homelander and Omni-Man, so it's possible we can see "what if the JLA, but mass-murdering" work again. James Gunn introducing the Authority in the new DCU movies may do it.
 

At a certain point, "what if superheroes, but massively violent" goes from edgy to edgelord to embarassing.

That said, "what if Superman, but evil" has gotten redeemed in recent years with the TV versions of Homelander and Omni-Man, so it's possible we can see "what if the JLA, but mass-murdering" work again. James Gunn introducing the Authority in the new DCU movies may do it.
I dunno. I've never seen it as edgy, I always think it's embarrassing and cringe. I mean, it's the lowest possible hanging fruit. It's not an interesting question. "What if Superman were a dick?" or "What if Wonder Woman were just like us?" or "What if Jack Nicholson were a grocery-store clerk?" It's just not interesting because the outcome is so obvious. Superman kills anyone and everyone who stands in his way until he either 1) grows a conscience; 2) someone bigger and badder comes along, or; 3) he takes over the world.

Him not doing those things is what makes Superman an interesting character. The godlike powers aren't interesting unto themselves, nor are they the point. That he has godlike powers and doesn't abuse them is the interesting part, and to me that very much is the point. That makes for an interesting story. The person who could just murder the world but decides to save it instead. Infinitely more interesting.

Like The Suicide Squad and Peacemaker. They're not really superhero media. They're over-the-top action-comedy-horror where the characters use superhero tropes and setting trappings. They can be fun and funny for what they are, but they're not superhero stories.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top