I think the reason...(might contain info re the new HP book)

[Pie]

wat can i say. I SPELLD BOISTEROUS RIGHT? coooool.


(EDIT(not really, but ime going to in a secont) i fixed it.

(EDIT: there, now i spelld (EDIT:Boisterouis AND witch(there, i spelld them rong here to) rong.)

[the_antisocial_hermit]

I read a 341p book in 4 hours once; just last week, actually... I used to read a book or two a day in the summers... before college... and work... and Cantr...

Working on Harry Potter 6 now, between packing and work and packing and work... I find it a good read, despite many people's complaints. I've definitely read pages of worse books that had nothing to redeem them. At least Harry Potter has Peeves. Yea, just kidding... at any rate, it's not that bad. Not big on the hype, and I agree with what was said before about releasing the movies too soon... But anyhoo...

Soo... what confuses me:

Usually reading a lot helps people with their spelling... Gives a bigger base for vocabulary and recognition of words...

But, nice to know you like to read, Pie... Always good to find people who like to read nowadays... Just... keep at the spelling...

[Genevieve]

I read a TON but it never has helped my spelling (my teachers always thought it would), though I do have a great vocabulary.

Anyway, Harry Potter...I love those books. They are fun, fast reads. Took me one evening to read the current book that just came out, about 4 hours, which surprised me at how long it took actually. Anyway, this one didn't hold my attention for as long as the last ones did, I was about ready for something to HAPPEN toward the end...and didn't even cry when...well, you know (at least not much). But there were some cute parts, and I laughed out loud at a few really good lines.

Overall, it isn't Pride and Prejudice, my favorite novel of all time, but it is a fun, fast, and interesting read.

[the_antisocial_hermit]

Overall, it isn't Pride and Prejudice, my favorite novel of all time, but it is a fun, fast, and interesting read.

That's my fave too!

[Nixit]

Well, I think that they got more sophisticated as they went on, sort of like she had intended for the readers to be a specific age group. They are predictable, for the most part, but it's still a great series.

[Dee]

Overall, it isn't Pride and Prejudice, my favorite novel of all time, but it is a fun, fast, and interesting read.

You call HP fun and fast? Then what do you call The Princess Diaries?

[nitefyre]

I'd only read Harry Potter during Conan's monologue, just to bust his chops. (Nah ,I love Late Night)

I'm currently reading Last of the Mohicans.

[Floyd]

Overall, it isn't Pride and Prejudice, my favorite novel of all time, but it is a fun, fast, and interesting read.

That's my fave too!

Man that books so dull! if you want a romantic(ish) Period drama try Thomas Hardy's Tess of the Durbivilles, it's about the only romantic novel i can sit through! Best book of all time... Hmm, a toughie... Huxleys "Brave new world" is wonderfull and much better than 1984 as distopian fantasy goes... err.. The Bell Jar is a wonderfull read... i guess i really have no idea of my favourite!

I got into Harry Potter when the book first came out, so i must have been about seven or eight (I've allways been big into reading, i must have read Lord of the rings when i was about six or seven.. even if i did skip all the "Boring" poetry bits (Which i love now)) and enjoyed them lots, as i've grown up i've started enjoying them alot less, but still read them to kind of.. well, find out what happens i guess, once you've read six of the books you might aswell finish the series right? Anyways, i havent bought it yet but probally will soon, in the meantime, could someone PM me the charector who dies? just incase i dont get round to it? Cheers, sorry for the essay, i'm bored

~Floydazoid~

[mortaine]

Man that books so dull! if you want a romantic(ish) Period drama try Thomas Hardy's Tess of the Durbivilles, it's about the only romantic novel i can sit through!

*shudder*

Floyd, Tess of the Dubervilles is NOT a romantic novel. It's a horror story, if anything, but mostly, it is a tragedy.

Anyone reading about Tess being raped, shunned, worked near to death, neglected, and finally executed and thinks "romantic" should really have their head examined.

If you're talking about time period ("Romantic" usually refers to a type and time period of poetry of which Tess isn't, either), then Tess is a good novel, but again, shouldn't be compared to Pride and Prejudice, because they're completely different genres as well as time periods. Like comparing, oh I don't know, "Pretty Woman" to "Silkwood." They have working women in them, but that's about where the similarities end. Same with Tess and anything by Jane Austen. Austen wrote in the late 18th century. Hardy wrote in the late 19th century.

When Austen was writing, the King of England (George III, who was king during the American Revolution) had been replaced by his son as Regent because, it was said, he was insane. An air of excess and hedonism pervaded society, as did social revolution (and in France and America, political revolution).

Compare that to Hardy's day, the Victorian era, in which Queen Victoria ruled as a grieving widow. Society was highly regimented and restricted, morality was "the thing," and industrialization was at the peak of its abuse of human labor (in America, this was the age of robber-barons and railroad tycoons).

I enjoy both novels, but for completely different reasons, and I wouldn't sit them side by side for comparison unless I were specifically trying to look at two completely different works and completely different worlds, to compare the evolution of the novel over the course of a hundred years.

[Floyd]

Oh C'mon there was romance in it! as a confession, i only read halfway before getting tired of it, as i did with P&P, Neither of them appealed to me very much. I much prefer the other Hardy novel i own, which influenced me to buy Tess, Jude the Obscure. As it goes, i much prefer 20th century litrature anyways.