Recent comments in /f/books

Randym1982 t1_j6k9zi0 wrote

I felt that It had a bit more highs than lows, but the lows were kind of "wtf?" and a bit stupid. The highs?

>!The whole backstory on Derry. THe Lumbermill massacre. The gangsters getting shot to death while Pennywise dances in the background. Pennywise basically turning into 60's and 70's type monsters while tormenting the kids. !<

That stuff was the best parts of the book to me. Some of the other stuff was a bit of a slog to get through.

3

daedelus23 t1_j6k9jx1 wrote

I didn’t read his statement as he “never loved her” more of he loved her at one time but had changed and realized he was in love with who she was, and who he was, back when he first fell in love with her. Can confirm this happens and it can be heartbreaking to realize and difficult to admit to one’s self.

267

Ilathariel t1_j6k9eop wrote

Dante uses a lot of terms, expressions and ways of saying that italian has and english doesen't. It's not simple to translate something that old, in a language that was half latin and half vulgar.

He also said many silly things. "Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta", devils just farted

6

lucia-pacciola t1_j6k8pk2 wrote

Saying I think someone has the right to read a text for themselves, and decide for themselves what they think it means, is not the same as saying I think all interpretations are equally valid and correct.

There's also a huge difference between reading comprehension, where you correctly or incorrectly understand the explicit statements of the text, and interpretation, where you reach conclusions about the implicit themes and subtexts of the text.

16

Maxtrix07 t1_j6k7z88 wrote

Glad to hear!

Also, his son made a few short story books. Full Throttle is definitely worth picking up. Its interesting because he has a similar style to King, but I do enjoy his writing more than King for some reason. Definitely look out for Full Throttle as well, I haven't read much from his other shirt story books, "20th Century Ghosts" and "Strange Weather"

2

Bladewing_The_Risen t1_j6k6h0o wrote

To an extent.

We've all read Harry Potter, right? You don't get to say "Harry defeated Voldemort because love always conquers evil!" when the text explicitly says "Harry defeated Voldemort because Voldemort wasn't the true owner of the wand in his hand and the series established in the first book that wands choose their owners and don't work right for just anyone."

It's one thing to have your own interpretation when the text is intentionally vague, but if the text explicitly says something--or very obviously implies something--you don't just get to say, "Well that's what I think, so that's how it is."

That kind of attitude doesn't promote critical thinking or thoughtful analysis of evidence and I don't think it should be encouraged or supported.

8

shillyshally t1_j6k4l7h wrote

If you go back to the golden age of editing and look at Hemingway and Fitzgerald and Maxwell Perkins and take a look at the manuscript pages, the relationship is obviously collaborative. Both those authors are noted for their brevity - that is not an accident!

The self-publishing that has blossomed with Amazon is terrific but man, there is no substitute at all for a good editor.

3