Well this is another book I picked up entirely because of its cover. So, you know, shallow reader over here. (I will say this: I do then read the back and the first page to see if the book is interesting to me -- I won't just blindly pick up a book and buy it based entirely on its cover!)
Not sure if you can really tell in this post, but that's the Palace of Fine Arts there. So, you know, this book had my number. Heh.
I can't remember when I bought it, but it was published in 1999 and I think it might have been in my first year or so of living in CA. So... 2000 or 2001? Ooof. I also have a feeling that I have begun reading it, but I remember nothing about it (you know, 14-15 years later...)
It's a collection of short stories and I would say... Present-day Kelly probably would not have bought it. I think I maybe... don't like short stories. I can't put my finger on it, but it's looking that way for me. I guess 2015 will prove whether or not that's true, because at least 3 other books on my TBR list are collections of short stories and/or essays. (It's somewhat telling that these books have remained unread on my shelf, right?)
Mostly, I chose to read this book in March because it's short and I know I'm going to be super distracted keeping up with the Tournament of Books!
love,
kelly
Short stories are so tricky. I think the problem with a collection of them is there are always a few you like, some that are mediocre, and some that are forgettable. I like short stories just fine when I read them, but I almost never choose them. And although I am a faithful reader of the New Yorker, I would say that I skip the short story 99% of the time.
ReplyDeleteSo I hear you. I often find the best strategy is to read one or two at a time and then take a break. Otherwise, they all really blur together.
I will say this, though. A perfect short story is a thing of beauty, and there are some that I consider so perfect I have read them several times.
I love that 2015 is the year of the book cover for you. YOU CAN JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER!
Hrm. I felt like I posted this comment yesterday, but then I must have gotten distracted (it happens...)
ReplyDeleteYou wrote: "I think the problem with a collection of them is there are always a few you like, some that are mediocre, and some that are forgettable."
Exactly! And that, because they are all grouped together, I tend to sort of "rate" each one as I go along, which does not really happen in a full book -- I'm not usually thinking, "Oooh! That was a good chapter!" And that, by *comparison*, some of the stories may end up suffering (or getting a *higher* rating) because of the stories around them.
I have finished two of the stories. After the first one, I said, "Ugh." That does not bode well. Stay tuned.
Also: "I often find the best strategy is to read one or two at a time and then take a break. Otherwise, they all really blur together."
ReplyDeleteYes, except I do find that I often put the book down and then forget about it entirely (like this one). How long do you wait between stories? I am reading one per day. Even still... blurring.
Yeah. A year later, you'll be like, "Oh, that *one* was great." Heh. This is one of the reasons I'm really looking forward to the ToB discussion of Deployment, which I thought was wonderful, but is sort of blurry in my memory.
ReplyDeleteIf I'm lucky.
ReplyDeleteI'm halfway through this book and I have just discovered a *dog-eared page*! Meaning... I have read this far before! I *thought* I had started this book once, but then as I went on, absolutely nothing rang a bell so I thought, "Oh, guess not."
Until I found that dog-eared page. (Yes, I do this to my books in lieu of a bookmark. I'm a rebel.)
So I have read these stories at some point in the past. And remember *nothing* about them. Oof.
Okay. I'm sorry. But that *is* funny.
ReplyDeleteI also dog-ear pages, which as you know, is a real accomplishment considering I used to try and read them without even cracking the spines.