What are you reading in 2025?

Reading challenge continues: books 4-7/100.

How the Gospels Became History: Jesus and Mediterranean Myths, by M. David Litwa. More neat stuff from Litwa, this time about the forms of classical history covering remarkable and miraculous events. He takes up examples from around 500 BC to 400 AD or so, discussing attitudes toward miracles among historians (from very credulous to harshly skeptical). He places the canonical gospels into this context, showing specific ways their writers drew on those forms to buttress their claims to truth. Really a pleasure to read. First time.

Mr. Gaunt and Other Uneasy Encounters, by John Langan. A collection of five horror stories, of which I’d rate at least three as truly top-notch. This was Langan’s first collection, and he another author who roared right out of the starting gate with superb work. “On Skua Island” is practically a modern-day Robert E. Howard story, and “Mr. Gaunt” has that gripping sense of outrage at a morally offensive wrong done. First time.

Red Square (Arkady Renko #3), by Martin Cruz Smith. This is the best fictional treatment of the immediate post-Soviet moment I know of, contrasting Moscow with Munich and Berlin, making clear how many ways the efforts at a new democratic era were being destroyed before they’d even really begun. It also picks up some important threads from the 1980 of Gorky Park, in twisting and satisfying ways. Reread.

Demon in White (Sun Eater #3), by Christopher Ruocchio. Honestly, this guy has no business being this good. The scope of the story continues to widen, things get weirder for Hadrian Marlowe - drawing the attention of vastly transhuman entities is sometimes not a lot of fun - linguistic and cultural development continues, there is awesome action. Something I haven’t commented on is how well Ruocchio handles time skips, briefly describing the events of decades and suggesting events as awesome as the ones spelled out. I’m going to have to take a look at the Expanse-like interstitial novellas and short stories he’s written. This is really amazing work. First time.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I am wary of splits between literary and genre fiction because I think they can be loaded and artificial, driven by commercial needs or cultural concerns -- Cormac McCarthy and Gene Wolfe both wrote considerable amounts of genre fiction; I think their works are clearly literary, yet Wolfe gets shelved in Sci-Fi/Fantasy at B&N, while McCarthy gets shelved with Fiction/Literature. It's a bit unreasonable.
Michael Chabon get shelved in literature because he won a Pulitzer.
For a <checks notes> alt-history murder mystery.

Also, he gets a nod for being readable.
 

My opinion, shared by none I assume -
All fiction books should be shelved in alphabetical order by first listed Author's last name. Anthologies by editor's last name. And then by title within the author's name.

Death to genre imposition by Big Book Publisher. Long live the artist!
 

Michael Chabon get shelved in literature because he won a Pulitzer.
For a <checks notes> alt-history murder mystery.

Also, he gets a nod for being readable.
Chabon's a great author, very gifted writer. It's anecdotal, but my brother met him once and said he was a great guy, very down to earth and friendly.

My opinion, shared by none I assume -
All fiction books should be shelved in alphabetical order by first listed Author's last name. Anthologies by editor's last name. And then by title within the author's name.

Death to genre imposition by Big Book Publisher. Long live the artist!
Your ideas intrigue me, and I'd like to sign up for your newsletter.
 

My opinion, shared by none I assume -
All fiction books should be shelved in alphabetical order by first listed Author's last name. Anthologies by editor's last name. And then by title within the author's name.

Death to genre imposition by Big Book Publisher. Long live the artist!
Your ideas intrigue me, and I'd like to sign up for your newsletter.
Because I'm contradicting a post I made earlier today, I should mention that my change of heart is driven by the fact that, upon consideration, books have covers and descriptions on the covers and blurbs. (Well, they had them before, too, but in my COVID fog, I didn't think of it earlier.)
 



Kind of you to say. And though I really do love King, Pynchon's an insanely interesting author, IMO. He's not my favorite, but I can't in good faith say he's not a better writer than King. Of course, neither of them is Dickens, though he's obviously not American.
Coming in to say "better writer" does not automatically equate to Greatest American Author. I mean, one point in favor of King - it is very American to aspire to or to actually make a ton of money. I imagine King has made about 100X more money than Pynchon, and that's not an exaggeration estimate.
 



Remove ads

Top