two wolves

needlework, 11x14, 2006

What is a good book? (2)

"Other books" (non-fictions)

I enjoy reading books (or articles) on social, cultural and ideological matters. I occasionally read biographies on those I am curious about. With the very few books I have read, I do know what I want from one.

-Originality. It is always a pleasure to learn new things and ideas, big or small. Sometimes, same idea can be presented from a different angle, thus offering additional insight or perspective. It is also desirable when the same ideas are presented cohensively and creatively. Originality comes from content and style.

-Rationality. I tend to judge the quality of books mainly based on my own way of reasoning. I am less moved by emotional appeal or the moral correctness of the ideas. On the other hand, I can find myself sticking to my own opinions even when I relate to the sounding analysis of others.

-That personal touch. It is generally assumed that objectiveness is the one very important component in presenting ideas and events. Often things get dismissed quickly as being "biased". Or the hidden agenda or background of the authors are dug out to illustrate the unfairness of their opinions. I do think the opposite way. I believe and appreciate the fact that individuals perceive things differently and articulate things differently. As long as there is an environment allowing free expressing, the collective wisdom(s) can serve as the closest thing one gets as "objective". In fact, I particularly enjoy authors standing by their ideas with pride and authenticity.

-Insightfullness. Social, cultural and ideological matters are generally complex. We think and debate about them throughout human history. Still, new understandings and perspectives evolve and emerge as if there were an ultimate truth. Being brought to a "new level" is a truly rewarding experience.

"Other books" come in different forms. Just as human beings, it is often better to think and judge books on individual basis than to categorize (stereotype) them.

What is a good book

this piece was written a few years ago. my taste has evolved and changed somewhat since; still this represents my "gut feelings".

What is a good book?

I. About fictions

It is a very subjective matter to judge a book. This belief makes me feel pretty comfortable talking about it. There are certainly objective criteria; but then, I get to decide which books fit them and which do not.

I will not write a comprehensive piece, but a few key points I feel particular about. I will make my points mainly by citing negative examples; the good ones can be found on my bookshelf.

-Good stories and good ENDs. Twists and turns and branches, the more the better.

It seems hardest to end a book. Many a book starts spectacularly, develops smoothly and falls apart in the end. Often, a bad ending suffices to reduce the whole work to mediocrity. This problem is particularly obvious and fatal for thrillers. I enjoyed "Marathon man" (by William Goldman) literally to the last page, only to be disappointed, because the unfolded plot is not nearly as intriguing as the whole book has alluded to.

Good fictions teach us one thing or two; but they are NOT tools to express belief or ideas. John Irving's "Cider house rules" was well written with interesting characters and stories. Yet it was designed by the writer to illustrate his stand on abortion. The twists and turns served his points fine but look reluctant and deliberate despite his exceptional skill.

Big themes do help novels get recognized more readily. But I do not credit them as criteria for quality.

-Memorable characters. Sometimes good stories are sufficient to make a good book. The finest books, however, always have distinctive characters, who, like real people, are unique, have lives of their own and make stories realistic. On the flip side, fictions with stereotyped characters are the most common form of second-rate books. Michael Crichton's "Rising sun" defines this category well.

-Good language and style. Every writer, good or bad, has his own style. What is considered good is quite subjective yet recognizable and comes in different forms. I pretty much feel it, probably through the choice of words, fluency of sentences, and cohesiveness of the whole work. One notable flaw is redundancy - a writer uses certain words or expressions over and over again - a sign of paucity. Sue Grafton might be a fine writer but I could not even stomach her alphabetical titles: A is for apple; B is for bat...(These are actually better than hers).

-That Magnetic Sensation. I cannot find appropriate words to describe this. Many modern novels grab and surround you with certain emotions, exotic, intense or mystic. Generally, these books are well written and stylish (to have been able to achieve such effect) yet they tend not to stay in one's memory. I enjoyed Toni Morrison's novels while reading; almost immediately afterwards, however, I was left with a blur and couldn't recall anything substantial.

They are big prize grabbers, though. It seems the best formula to win something is to have a sensational style and a larger than life theme. Toni Morrison won both Nobel and Pulitzer. "The English patient" (by Michael Ondaatje) also fits neatly in this category. If I have to choose, however, I usually prefer a poorly-written thriller to a stylish emptiness.

A few words about writers. Having served as a self-appointed authority, I have to emphasize my true admiration for those who can write fictions (or those who can paint or write music notes...). Novels are works of creativity and imagination. And for me, I can only imagine what is missing in my own brain....

Wise or foolish - from "Nature"

in The Essential Writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson

All men are in some degree impressed by the face of the world; same men even to delight. This love of beauty is Taste. Others have the same love in such excess, that, not content with admiring, they seek to embody it in new forms. The creation of beauty is Art. - pp.13

A man's power to connect his thought with its proper symbol, and so to utter it, depends on the simplicity of his character, that is, upon his love of truth and his desire to communicate it without loss. The corruption of man is followed by the corruption of language. - pp. 15

The wise man shows his wisdom in separation, in gradation, and his scale of creatures and of merits is as wide as nature. The foolish have no range in their scale, but suppose every man is as every other man. What is not good they call worst, and what is not hateful, they call best. - pp. 20

Virtual reality: the virtual is the reality

(it has been 5 years since i was stuck in the net.)

Virtual reality: the virtual is the reality

"I think therefore I am."

So one's existence lies where his mind is. That is how I've come to the realization that participating in an internet chat room is a "real" , not a "virtual", life experience.

Nothing virtual about it

I've found myself in a strange mode ever since I wandered into the HuaXia Forum one year ago. While I had surfed the internet extensively before that, I used it as a convenient extension of the conventional media. The chat room was quite a different thing. The discussions were lively, enlightening and interactive (it was at the end of this Forum's best time). Almost immediately it became a routine for me to visit this and various other chat rooms whenever I had a break, which was a lot, because I mostly did my work on computer. In no time, my desire to be part of the discussion was not to be suppressed. Compared to the regulars, those who posted on the Forum daily with multiple lengthy postings, my involvement appeared negligible: less than one per day in odd hours, early in the morning or late at night, in a span of 6 months.

However, this was "achieved" with great restraint that I had to impose on myself, because I was burdened with guilt and scared by the obsession: my mind was often there when I was not! During my commute, for example, instead of listening to radio, I would be thinking about the discussions and composing my own responses. So the more I was attracted to it, the harder I tried to get away from it.

I don't remember encountering anything even remotely this addictive. The richness of individual ideas and the inter-activeness are enchanting and intoxicating.

It is an intimate communication between minds made possible by a new technology. It is simultaneously secretive and revealing: secretive because almost all of us hide our "real" identity; revealing because we invariably express a lot of "deep thoughts" which we somehow withhold from people we physically know. Thus, it is truly a new life experience.

An emotional one, too, I might add. Though obsessed, people also treat it lightly, convinced that it is just a play. Yet each one of us knows how much we are pleased or hurt by it, "really", not "virtually". More so than in real life: being secretive, it is hardly resistible to be ruthless and nasty; "spilling guts", one becomes touchy and vulnerable.

So it is all too real, heart and mind

Obssesion grows a life of its own, often making me feel like its carrier. It was silly when I dreamed of typing "www...." It was unpleasant that I became absently-minded tending the daily routine while the mind waging in some vigorous arguments with "who-knows-whom". It also seemed particularly worrisome that it was the mind being obsessed with itself, not some third objects, like gambling or cigarettes.

Thus my reluctance. I gather my limited power to restrict my own access to the forum, not because of lack of interest, but because it can so completely occupy the mind that it even squeezes out other significant things in life, say, family and "real" friends. And daily mundane. To me, this "virtual" world can be too "real" to be a good thing.

Really.