I'm formulating a list of challenging novels I would like to tackle. I'm working my way through Ulysses, so once I'm done with that, I will work on these, in no particular order:

In Search of Lost Time
Gravity's Rainbow
Ada, or Ardor
The Recognitions
2666
Finnegans Wake

Obviously, some of these are much easier than others on this list. But yes, I am insane, and I need to get cracking because life is short.

Lucky lunch break visit...

Hello!
I’m lesson planning for 8th grade lit and curriculum is loose surrounding book choices (small private school, i’m the only teacher for lit). I’m looking for classic literature that features female characters that are multi-faceted and deep. They can be feminine, I just would like them to have some type of depth. I ask because 1984 and Brave New World are on my list and their female characters lack personality beyond stereotype and exist purely to motivate the male lead, which I find gets a lot of my girls disinterested. (Not interested in debating that). The female characters can be side characters, and I’d also like something my boys might be interested in too. Sorry if it’s too much to ask.
Thanks!

PS I don't speak Russian.

Also, I felt the book was much bigger and has more pages than the English translated one. I guess it's the font size.

I'm starting Bleak House today.

Has any of you read it in its original 20-month cadence? Pros and cons of that?

The Penguin Classics edition has the table of contents organized this way, so you can see which chapters were published together in the original release. It seems to be about 50 pages per installment.

So I am thinking I'd read an installment (two or three day's reading), then wait til the first of the next month to read the next installment, and so on.

This would give me more of the original readers' experience, and would leave me a lot of time for reading other things at the same time.

Is there any downside to this approach?

(Sorry. I accidentally posted one picture twice!)
First time poster here.
About a year and a half ago, I became unemployed and stayed that way for 8 months. During that time, I decided to take a deep dive into classic literature. There are so many great books that show up as Jeopardy clues and I realized that I should familiarize myself with them.
Instead of watching hours of television, I decided to listen to audiobooks. I made a list and have checked off a lot of them. My monthly credit just came through and I’m stuck on what to read next. I just finished The Count of Monte Cristo.
I’ve attached my list. The multiple checkmarks represent multiple listens. Please recommend anything, whether it’s on my list or not. TIA!

I have been on a journey which started just over a year and a half ago when I decided to delve into George Eliots ‘Middlemarch’. Since then I have read Felix Holt, Daniel Deronda, Romola, and Silas Marner and have felt a sense of accomplishment and enlightenment after every closing chapter.

Of course I want to finish her 2 remaining major works but, her books are a huge commitment and require a lot of dedication to really feel what she’s trying to convey.

As a result, I’m curious as to which you’d recommend I reach for next and why? How do they compare to her other novels? And what stands out to you?

Really excited to hear what you all think!

Hey share the best lines you have read in a book and why is it best for you and which book?

Made a set of chapter tabs for a friend’s Les Misérables. I learned that this book is filled with fascinating historical details, which made me want to explore it myself.

I’ve been eyeing these for a while and finally gave myself permission to buy them. I could’ve borrowed from the library but wanted my own copies because I’ve been getting more into annotating

What's the reason behind our fascination with literature? Why do we read classics even though when they are works of antiquity?

I couldn't believe this error and the only reason I noticed it is because I begun reading the book through the public domain before buying this copy. My Antonia is a frame narrative and its opening is set many years after the events of the book itself. The opening is integral to the strength of the story as a reflection by the protagonist on the events subsequently recounted, and without it you'd miss out on much of the nostalgia that underpins the story. The book also has an epigraph, quoting Virgil's Georgics. Both are completely absent from the Vintage Classics edition of the book. So, buyer beware.

This specific edition is: Vintage Classics, published by Vintage Publishing (Penguin Random House UK), ISBN-13 9781784874445.

Easily the biggest mistake I've seen from a modern publisher. Safe to say I won't be buying any more Vintage editions...

Seen any other major mistakes like this?

I just finished reading The Trial, and this might be the most complicated book I've read so far. I really liked it, every chapter left me wondering for a long time, and I took a lot of notes.

My first major reaction, before K. went to meet the lawyer introduced by his uncle, was this:

'Some very weird things are happening within the normalcy.

First of all, this court of law and institution is very weird. It doesn’t even seem to have a proper building. It has a very “backrooms” kind of feel.

Secondly, weird things keep happening. Why was an “executioner” beating the two guards from K.’s office? Why in K.’s office? That is such a weird place for something like that to happen.

Thirdly, every single girl this man meets seems to throw herself at him, and he keeps cucking all of their lovers.

The whole thing is starting to feel like a fever dream, especially because K. is being extremely passive and just going with the flow.

I also kind of felt this way about the secretary part in the attic, with the two workers. The female and male workers who helped him leave felt like they were some kind of keepers of a purgatory, with K. being on the verge of death. That would explain why he felt bad inside, and why they seemed to feel bad when he opened the door and outside air came in.

But of course, that was just a theory.'

My 'eureka' moment, that is probably totally wrong

'I believe even more strongly now that I might be right about K. being at the gates of death.

The story about the gatekeeper and the man that wasted his life. I think the man who encountered the gate was, in a way, flirting with the unknown, with life after death, but it simply wasn’t his time to leave this plane yet.

It is also interesting how the merchant from the previous chapter, who was proud of how long his process had lasted, behaved somewhat like the man from the priest’s story.

The lawyer also seems like some kind of gatekeeper.

I think the trials only open themselves to people who live impersonally, people who are alone, alienated from this plane. And that is why they receive the trial: the first calling towards the afterlife.

So should they ignore it and just live normally?

Should they follow the fears of others and, as a consequence, live in fear themselves?

Another interesting part is that an effective acquittal can never actually happen, even though it is one of the three possible solutions. And escaping death is also never going to happen.

So I really do think it is death.'

The ending

K. is taken away by two men during the night. After initially trying to resist, he eventually accepts his fate.

He accepts it almost until the very end, but in the final moment he seems to have a desire to live.

Too late.

They end up killing him.

Fragments - my version had these loose chapters at the end

I found this part particularly curious. It touches on several of K.’s relationships and on his attitude towards people.

He seems to have an attitude of superiority and disdain towards others. His relationship with the snobbish club also seems to be one of superiority towards the supposedly inferior members of the club.

It made me wonder:

Did the court ask each of these people for their opinion about K., and, because he was arrogant, did they condemn him?

We know that the court talked to people.

Kullych worked for the court.

What was in the letter?

Overall

Overall, I liked the book.

It was very abstract, and I was left with a lot of curiosity about what everything actually means.

I definitely feel like there is much more to unpack in it, and I haven't touched the surface

https://top100books.abc.net.au/

Vote for ABC’s top 100 Aussie books - so it’s not all the same popular books (or kids book) Trent Dalton and the book thief will get enough votes anyways … but there are so many other good books out there …

I've been building a free daily puzzle for people who love classic literature.

The game gives you three authors and two title categories, and you have to name a novel by each author that fits the corresponding category. The goal is to fill the entire grid using your knowledge of authors and their works.

It's part of a site I built called Grid of Minds, which also has daily grids for U.S. Presidents, Shakespeare, and the periodic table.

I would be very interested to see how you do on the Authors grid and whether you can think of a good third row to make it a 3 x 3.

https://gridofminds.com

I really enjoyed this poetry book. The poems are about moments in a child's life. It has the first appearance of Winnie the Pooh, but it is not the plot of the book. You will find stories about animals, toys, walks and thoughts.

It is easy to read with patience if you haven't got a high level of english. The pictures can help you and they are so cute.

I don't know why it is not more recommended!