Books with very inappropriate scenes w/ children

[Parrothead]

She specifically referenced The Lovely Bones in her OP. It is a book ABOUT A CHILD KILLER. I didn't read it because it is ABOUT A CHILD KILLER. I assumed it contained stuff I didn't want to read without even reading a single review. The editorial review on amazon listed with the book synopsis (not to be confused with reader reviews, which can vary widely) warns about the graphic scene in question. She didn't do proper research *or* apply the logical conclusion that a book about a child killer might contain a description of a child being killed.

 

 

 

Then, stick with the classics. You could keep yourself busy for a lifetime reading books written during tamer ages. There are *other* solutions.

Okay. No need to shout at me.

 

But in post 192 I Dup wrote:

I guess they do not bother people, but for some reason the graphic nature of them really sticks with me and I hate it. :( Again, I am NOT a prude, I am talking about hard core stuff, along the lines of hard core child p*rn.

 

And I really have no need to stick to the classics. I'm not quite at a certain age yet.

[Mrs Mungo]

Okay. No need to shout at me.

 

I was merely trying to emphasize, sorry.

 

But in post 192 I Dup wrote:

 

I don't like that stuff either. But, that's why I didn't read the book in question.

[Mrs Mungo]

I'm shocked ... at all you who apparently read lots of reviews before you will consider reading a book :tongue_smilie:

 

Ironically I just got "The Handmaid's Tale" out of the library after reading the editorial review (which now pops up on the library site when you click on the book - the book itself came up unexpectedly on an apparently unrelated search of "kids work"). Having read the the comments in this thread I probably won't be reading it - but nothing in the summary or editorial review "clued" me in on graphic sex. Of course it did mention stratification of women's roles (child bearing vs. rearing) but (shockingly I guess) I was able to envision a novel that included that kind of stratification and social statement without the graphic part. Apparently I'm just naive or something in spite of reading so many books without bothering to read reviews (and apparently I'm reading the wrong sf/f too - although the sf/f I read is too full of violence/sex these days, it's generally not what I would call "graphic" sex).

 

Note: If I hadn't read these comments and had started the book, I would have just returned it once I figured out it wasn't my "type" of book. I have read horrific scenes that have been written in a way that really resonated with me (i.e. they seem indelibly stuck in my memory) but they are few and far between -- and the type of labels suggested would not have protected me from them anyway.

 

The Handmaid's Tale contains some fairly graphic descriptions. But, again, it's a dystopian novel about women in sexual bondage. The subject matter, alone, should give people a clue.

[Word Nerd]

I'm shocked ... at all you who apparently read lots of reviews before you will consider reading a book :tongue_smilie:

 

 

 

Actually, It only takes a few minutes, if that. Those lamenting the thought of spending hours of extensive research are mischaracterizing what I (and presumably others who've chimed in here) actually do when choosing what to read.

[Mrs Mungo]

Actually, It only takes a few minutes, if that. Those lamenting the thought of spending hours of extensive research are mischaracterizing what I (and presumably others who've chimed in here) actually do when choosing what to read.

 

The OP could have found the quotes I gave by looking up the book on amazon and reading the editorial reviews for them. It took me less than a minute to look up both books and copy and paste the quotes for her. Like I said, I have a smart phone, so I *frequently* look up books while at the bookstore or call one (or more) of my sisters or text one of my cousins.

 

My large family is full of readers, so is my wider circle of friends. I was recently bored one night and asked for book recommendations along the lines of X, Y or Z. I quickly had more than 50 books recommended that I had not read. Some of them people loaned me on my Nook or sent me to links where I could download them for free. That is what generally happens in my world. I don't need to spend hours researching.

[Murphy101]

But it isn't really me that I'm advocating the warnings for. I'll read just about anything. But there are people with different sensibilities.

I don't get the nonchalant attitude of buyer's remorse. Money is tight. Wasting $8.00 on a book one ends up not being able to finish due to graphic scenes isn't as easy as it was 10 years ago.

 

Ya'll are driving me to the brink of insanity with your completely illogical merry go round reasoning of doing things supposedly for other people's own good with regards to adults selecting their own reading materials.

 

Let me get this straight:

 

The books need rating to protect them from reading certain stuff that offends the sensibilities of some adults.

It doesn't cause censorship.

Oh wait, well it does, sorta but I don't mind.

These poor blokes can't be expected to review books, because that's just too time consuming.

But these poor blokes can be expected to know without any labeling or reviewing that they are getting an edited version of the work and need to buy the original elsewhere. Nevermind how much more time that takes.

It's callous to be so nonchalant about their buyer's remorse for making an impulse buy on a material that they made absolutely zero effort into gleaning basic knowledge of because money is just too tight to expect people to accept buyer's remorse.

Nevermind that if money is truely that tight, one would think they would not be making such a hasty impulse buy to begin with.

 

Normally you are far more reasonable, even if I disagree, at least you make some sense.

But this is just completely not being reasonable.

 

Surely I am not the only person reading this and thinking, "What the? Huh?"

 

Neither is much of the general public. I'd be willing to bet that most people simply don't wonder why Walmart (or any other non specialty store) doesn't carry X item. They just go get it from where they can and don't question the why of it.

 

If they did even that much, I'd have some hope for them. Most however don't even know X item exists. They think the CD they are buying is X, when in fact it is a highly edited version of X. It happens with books too. I've had people shocked when I make a literary reference and insist it isn't worded that way. Come to find out, they had no idea they were reading an abridged version of it.

 

I'm apparently reading the wrong sci-fi.

ETA: I am informed and knowledgeable about many things I shop for and where I shop. I don't care for Walmart so I don't shop there often. Nor do I waste time researching them. I have enough knowledge to justify only shopping there only as a last resort. Learning their policy about media only reinforces that.

 

I'd rather have ratings on actual stores than books. Which is to say, I'd be slightly less vehemently against that. ;p

[Parrothead]

Normally you are far more reasonable, even if I disagree, at least you make some sense.

But this is just completely not being reasonable.

 

 

Funny. I was thinking the same of you.

 

Not that I mean that as a put down or anything. For what ever reason we are not in the same solar system when it comes to this topic. I'm having a lot of trouble following your logic also. I'm not saying what you think I'm saying. And I'm getting a way angry vibe.

 

Really I'm reading what you are posting and going :confused1: :blink:

 

Seem you are feeling the same about me. :D

 

I'm going to drop it since I don't want to lose a friendship over it. See you among the other topics. :seeya:

[Murphy101]

 

Funny. I was thinking the same of you.

 

Not that I mean that as a put down or anything. For what ever reason we are not in the same solar system when it comes to this topic. I'm having a lot of trouble following your logic also. I'm not saying what you think I'm saying. And I'm getting a way angry vibe.

 

Really I'm reading what you are posting and going :confused1: :blink:

 

Seem you are feeling the same about me. :D

 

I'm going to drop it since I don't want to lose a friendship over it. See you among the other topics. :seeya:

 

I'm really not at all angry.

I'm just mind boggling frustrated with confusion at the lack of reasoning in some of these posts. Not just your's either for that matter.

There's no risk of friendship lost from my end. It's a polar disagreement, but the disagreement itself is not one I'd toss anyone over.

:seeya:

[Parrothead]

I'm really not at all angry.

I'm just mind boggling frustrated with confusion at the lack of reasoning in some of these posts. Not just your's either for that matter.

There's no risk of friendship lost from my end. It's a polar disagreement, but the disagreement itself is not one I'd toss anyone over.

:seeya:

On this we can totally agree.

[I.Dup.]

She specifically referenced The Lovely Bones in her OP. It is a book ABOUT A CHILD KILLER. I didn't read it because it is ABOUT A CHILD KILLER. I assumed it contained stuff I didn't want to read without even reading a single review. The editorial review on amazon listed with the book synopsis (not to be confused with reader reviews, which can vary widely) warns about the graphic scene in question. She didn't do proper research *or* apply the logical conclusion that a book about a child killer might contain a description of a child being killed.

 

Then, stick with the classics. You could keep yourself busy for a lifetime reading books written during tamer ages. There are *other* solutions.

 

 

OKAY, OKAY so it was a bad example. I thought I already established that. FWIW I don't remember being bothered by violence as I was the sex*al aspects, didn't The Lovely Bones have graphic sex*al parts in it? Or am I thinking of another book?

 

It is clear I have not done enough research on the books I have read. That is all on me, I accept that. I will now do loads and loads of research before I read anything. :p I have truly learned a lot in this thread. I honestly thought the first couple of times I came across a graphic sex scene depicting a child that it was a freak thing done by some psycho author. But when it kept happening I realized it is more common and I wondered WTH is that about. Are people really WANTING to read descriptive scenes about children being molested or raped? Because I find that so entirely repulsive that it completely negates the entire book for me. I think it can be described in a way that the books I am talking about didn't do.

 

I respect that we all have different standards, but I don't think not wanting to read about children being graphically molested means my standards are way too high or prudish. :confused1: I thought that was just, um, not being a pervert? lol It DOES seem perverted to me to write about and read graphic descriptions of this sort.

[LeslieAnneLevine]

I'm shocked ... at all you who apparently read lots of reviews before you will consider reading a book :tongue_smilie:

 

Ironically I just got "The Handmaid's Tale" out of the library after reading the editorial review (which now pops up on the library site when you click on the book - the book itself came up unexpectedly on an apparently unrelated search of "kids work"). Having read the the comments in this thread I probably won't be reading it - but nothing in the summary or editorial review "clued" me in on graphic sex. Of course it did mention stratification of women's roles (child bearing vs. rearing) but (shockingly I guess) I was able to envision a novel that included that kind of stratification and social statement without the graphic part. Apparently I'm just naive or something in spite of reading so many books without bothering to read reviews (and apparently I'm reading the wrong sf/f too - although the sf/f I read is too full of violence/sex these days, it's generally not what I would call "graphic" sex).

 

Note: If I hadn't read these comments and had started the book, I would have just returned it once I figured out it wasn't my "type" of book. I have read horrific scenes that have been written in a way that really resonated with me (i.e. they seem indelibly stuck in my memory) but they are few and far between -- and the type of labels suggested would not have protected me from them anyway.

 

It's a good book, but the main character lives in a USA that's been taken over by religious nuts who have strange ideas of what a good and pure society looks like. The only part I found truly disturbing for awhile after I read it (**don't worry--I won't write the disturbing part**) was a description of a slasher-porn movie (for some reason the word for that kind of thing escapes me at the moment). IIRC, it was shown to them to demonstrate how sick the society was, as if that type of thing was mainstream and acceptable before the religious nuts took over.

 

As for the poster who won't read another Atwood book after having read that one, there are some that are more about human nature and relationships and probably wouldn't be upsetting to you (a couple that come to mind are The Robber Bride and Life Before Man).

[I.Dup.]

As for the poster who won't read another Atwood book after having read that one, there are some that are more about human nature and relationships and probably wouldn't be upsetting to you (a couple that come to mind are The Robber Bride and Life Before Man).

 

FWIW, that wasn't me. I think she was in very poor taste in that particular scene in the book I listed, but I was a fan of hers after reading The Handmaid's Tale. I thought that one was really good. The scenes used in that book I DID think served the purpose of the story line.

[Parrothead]

 

 

 

But when it kept happening I realized it is more common and I wondered WTH is that about.

 

How often are you coming across this type thing? What genre(s) are you reading?

 

I ask because I don't think I've ever read a book where this stuff happened.

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't think it is prudish not to read them. Again, I tend to shy away from most books that contain anything like that. There was a thread on GoT that pointed out the more upsetting parts of some of the books involving youngish teen girls; I think I posted in that.

 

But, I don't think it is perverted to write about real life issues that really happen. I don't think it is perverted to read books that discuss traumatic events. Traumatic events, sadly, happen every day. A desire to understand that is what drives some people (especially those who feel that they are sheltered OR those seeking validation for their own pain) to read or write those books. I see a lot of real life trauma without reading about it in books. I can't handle extra. I know that and avoid them.

[I.Dup.]

How often are you coming across this type thing? What genre(s) are you reading?

 

I ask because I don't think I've ever read a book where this stuff happened.

 

Not very often, maybe 5 times total? I know a couple were off of Oprah's book club, and I listed a couple others. I have never come across this in non-fiction. What surprised me were how popular the books were given this content.

[nmoira]

As for the poster who won't read another Atwood book after having read that one, there are some that are more about human nature and relationships and probably wouldn't be upsetting to you (a couple that come to mind are The Robber Bride and Life Before Man).

 

I was fortunate enough to be able to read Alias Grace while housesitting in a vintage row-house overlooking Kingston Penitentiary.

 

The Handmaid's Tale is far from my favourite Atwood, but not because of any graphic content. I found it didactic, often indistinguishable in theme from the women's studies books I was reading at the time. IMHO, its importance is more as a cultural touchstone and basis for conversation than a literary work, but there's nothing wrong with that.

[Parrothead]

 

Not very often, maybe 5 times total? I know a couple were off of Oprah's book club, and I listed a couple others. I have never come across this in non-fiction. What surprised me were how popular the books were given this content.

Do I get banned for saying "Well, there you go." Re: Oprah's book club selections? Last I heard, and it has been decades, shock value is how she makes a living. It wouldn't surprise me that she recommends shocking or hard edged books.

[Murphy101]

I respect that we all have different standards, but I don't think not wanting to read about children being graphically molested means my standards are way too high or prudish. :confused1:

 

Fabulous. Of course it isn't. No problem. I completely agree and am much the same way. Even if you are a total prude, that's fine by me if that's what you want.

 

But then you completely undo your claim of respect for different standards of writing/reading by basicly calling everyone who disagrees with you perverts.

 

I thought that was just, um, not being a pervert? lol It DOES seem perverted to me to write about and read graphic descriptions of this sort.

 

Sigh. That's no different than thinking that everyone who writes/reads a graphic murder scene must secretly dream of getting their own hands bloody. Or we can take it to an even tamer concept, if a writer/reader has a topic of heirloom animal husbandry in their book, do you think it means they secretly find the idea of artificial insemination of livestock enjoyable? Can you not see that is a rather insulting thing and mistakenly presumptuous thing to insinuate about others?

[Parrothead]

secretly dream of getting their own hands bloody.

Oh, am I alone in this?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm kidding!!!! But I couldn't help it.

[I.Dup.]

 

But then you completely undo your claim of respect for different standards of writing/reading by basicly calling everyone who disagrees with you perverts.

 

 

"Basically calling?" Not a very strong argument.

 

I said it seemed perverted to me to write about and want to read graphic scenes of children being molested. Does anyone ENJOY reading scenes like that? What purpose does reading about a kindergartner licking whipped cream off of a grown man's body parts serve? And describing that in detail?

 

So yes, I stand by the fact that that seems perverted to me.

[misty.warden]

I don't want to read graphic depictions of r@pe, child abuse and other forms of extreme violence in books either but don't find it difficult to avoid that content in my book selections. I think the potential for unintended--but predictable--consequences of a warning system for books would not justify any minor benefit it might give readers who don't use reviews, articles, and other freely available ways to find out about a book's content when deciding what to read. We all have different standards of what content is disturbing or may be a trigger. The onus has to be on the reader, not the author or publisher, to avoid that material.

 

Buyer Beware already applies to everything we buy. If you're very sensitive and unsure if there will be anything you don't want to see, don't impulse buy it if you think the potential risk to your psyche and loss of money is greater than the potential enjoyment you can get from a book.

 

I think that's where the other part of being an adult reader comes in. If you come across something disturbing in a book, deal with it. Put the book down, skip the part, whatever. Serious books for adults will contain serious content. To go into a novel with the expectation that nothing offensive will happen, especially with regards to writers like Margaret Atwood, seems naive to me. Writers of good books write about life and how the events in a life shape people and there are a lot of events in most people's lives that, written down, can be greatly offensive. We're adults. We should be able to maturely deal with content that disturbs us in one way or another.

 

This. I'll admit I've been disgusted by movies, art, books, life events, etc and it has taken a while to get those images out of my head. What do I do? I try to figure out why it was disturbing me, how it relates to the story, and if it's IMO gratuitous and cheap, maybe avoid that author or do more research into what type of books I've been reading lately if it happens with alarming frequency.

 

Please. I have no problem with most offensive content, that is not what this thread is about. I honestly didn't even think there would be "another side" to this discussion, I thought we would all agree that these scenes are disturbing and someone would be able to give me some valid insight on why they need to be described in such detail. Just because I started a discussion here does not mean I'm not "dealing with it." I just wanted to talk about it.

 

There's always another side. We all have different interpretations of how disturbing these scenes are and we are talking about it. If you wanted JAWM, you didn't specify :p Several people have given many reasons why they would be included, rabbit trails are par for the course, whether or not you think they're "valid" is your choice, much like your personal view on what is too graphic for your own taste. But you've been answered.

 

Wow! I haven't read the whole thread, but I'm going to put in my $.02 about Oryx & Crake. It is the only Margaret Atwood book I've read, so I can't speak to her others. The scene described by the OP is backstory for a particular important character later in the book. It is an uncomfortable topic, for sure. But exactly what happened to that character is happening NOW somewhere in the world. Young children are sold by their parents into the sex-slave trade. If you want to be outraged, spend your time fixing the income inequalities that exist in this world which cause poor families to sell their children like that. That character's adult attitude about her childhood past made me think deeply on the topic. I thought it was a very good book, and I can see how we can easily get from where we are now (as a society) to the dystopia presented in that novel. It's not a huge stretch of the imagination.

 

This too. It didn't happen for no reason, it was character development. <- Answering the original question "why is it allowed/included?"

 

Not very often, maybe 5 times total? I know a couple were off of Oprah's book club, and I listed a couple others. I have never come across this in non-fiction. What surprised me were how popular the books were given this content.

 

This would be the problem, methinks. The books I have been recommended by Oprah are The Lovely Bones (r*pe, murder, revenge fantasy, teenager teA), She's Come Undone (disturbing depression, voyurism, eating disorders), White Oleander (statutory r*pe, drug use, child/foster abuse, murder), and A Million Little Pieces (disturbing mental health issues, author being a complete liar). I think Oprah is the problem.

[misty.warden]

"Basically calling?" Not a very strong argument.

 

I said it seemed perverted to me to write about and want to read graphic scenes of children being molested. Does anyone ENJOY reading scenes like that? What purpose does reading about a kindergartner licking whipped cream off of a grown man's body parts serve? And describing that in detail?

 

So yes, I stand by the fact that that seems perverted to me.

 

Enjoyment is not everyone's sole goal of reading books. Not every aspect of life is enjoyable. If you want to cut out all the non-enjoyable aspects of life from your reading and/or life that is your choice, insinuating that people who read about it in whatever context are perverted is not logical. I don't enjoy garlic on its own, I appreciate it in chinese food for what it adds to the dish. CONTEXT I. Dup. is the point. I don't know what your example serves because I don't know it's context. Taking things out of context makes them look pointless no matter how important they might be in their element.

[I.Dup.]

Okay. It seemed just as out of context in the book as it did when I posted it here. But it looks like this thread has run its course, thank you all for responding. I have learned a lot. :)

[Luanne]

And some people on here ... even if you are just asking an innocent question ... always have to try to find a way to start trouble. It is like that is what they live for. I'm not even 100% sure they honestly believe what they say on here, but are just saying it to cause controversy. If they are indeed how they seem on here, I'm so glad not to have to actually deal with them in person because they are clearly not very nice people.

[WishboneDawn]

"Basically calling?" Not a very strong argument.

 

I said it seemed perverted to me to write about and want to read graphic scenes of children being molested. Does anyone ENJOY reading scenes like that? What purpose does reading about a kindergartner licking whipped cream off of a grown man's body parts serve? And describing that in detail?

 

So yes, I stand by the fact that that seems perverted to me.

 

 

I don`t think most authors (with anything important to say anyway) write scenes of that sort with any enjoyment or with the expectation that their readers will enjoy that scene. Generally they do it because it might be a key moment in a story, to reveal something about a character, to ellicit disgust or sympathy or something else from a reader. It`s not to titillate. If the scene repels you, that`s likely what the author wanted. It may be that an author went into more detail to ensure readers the readers understood how horrible the scene actually was. A lot of great novels with important messages (The Painted Bird, Blindess, A Fine Balance) would lose much of their impact if details were glossed over.

[WishboneDawn]

Okay. It seemed just as out of context in the book as it did when I posted it here. But it looks like this thread has run its course, thank you all for responding. I have learned a lot. :)

 

 

It could be just an issue with that scene then - perhaps it was badly written or a bad choice by the author in that instance?

[Joker]

Do those of you who say you don't read reviews also not read reviews for your dc's books? I feel like I am constantly reading reviews. I have a 13 and 10 yr old with different tastes and I have never let them start reading something I know nothing about. I also haven't felt any book I've read has been spoiled by reading editorial comments and/or a few reviews. If, somehow, a book ends up going somewhere I didn't expect, I just close the book and move on. I can see where it's going before I read too much and know to just stop. I've never read something and been so disturbed because it was unexpected. I have had that happen with movies though, even with the ratings.

 

I do browse, but only purchase from book stores that have internet access. All of our B&N stores have Nook centers and I can just hop on one and check out which book I'm interested in. If the store has no access, I will wait to buy until I can look it up somewhere else.

[I.Dup.]

And some people on here ... even if you are just asking an innocent question ... always have to try to find a way to start trouble. It is like that is what they live for. I'm not even 100% sure they honestly believe what they say on here, but are just saying it to cause controversy. If they are indeed how they seem on here, I'm so glad not to have to actually deal with them in person because they are clearly not very nice people.

 

 

Are you referring to me? I don't ever recall interacting with you at all...? :confused1:

[Caitilin]

And some people on here ... even if you are just asking an innocent question ... always have to try to find a way to start trouble. It is like that is what they live for. I'm not even 100% sure they honestly believe what they say on here, but are just saying it to cause controversy. If they are indeed how they seem on here, I'm so glad not to have to actually deal with them in person because they are clearly not very nice people.

 

 

:lol: Reflexive much?

[Parrothead]

Do those of you who say you don't read reviews also not read reviews for your dc's books?

Up until recently no, I didn't. Dd was reading things like classic children's literature and things I read as a kid. Now though I do have to take a look at reviews and sometimes read what she is reading for content. I've posted here a number of times asking for recommendations for reading material for dd.

[Parrothead]

Are you referring to me? I don't ever recall interacting with you at all...? :confused1:

:lol: Reflexive much?

No, she is talking to me. I'm the one who has reiterated time and again that I'm not a nice person. :laugh:

[katilac]

Actually what she said was a parent can take his kid to any movie they want which is true. The theater cannot stop a parent taking his child to an R or even XXX rated movie.

 

Of course they can. NC-17 is short for "no children under 17." My local theaters definitely enforce this, along with the "parent or guardian required" for R rated movies. They even have a rule that no one under 17 can attend an R rated movie after 6 p.m. no matter what - this is obviously for the enjoyment of adult patrons, not for protection of minors, but it illustrates that they can certainly restrict attendance. I have never in my life heard of a theater allowing a parent to take a child to an X-rated movie.

 

It is a big PITA to go to a bookstore, find something interesting then have to leave it there to go home and look up the review(s) and go back and get it if I still want it. That is like a 6.5 hour project at a minimum. Do you always know what you want when you go into a bookstore?

 

I think this, and some of the other various posts, are an example of 'you can't have everything.' You can review books, or you can pay your money and take your chances. Likewise, there are advantages and disadvantages to living in certain areas, ie places so rural there is no internet for easy access to reviews. If you don't have internet, then you are buying your books in person, and you will simply have to skim them, ask the staff, read newspaper or magazine reviews, ask your friends, and so on. There is no perfect solution that will make everyone 100% happy. I don't think book ratings are the way to go, because the vast majority of people do have reasonable resources.

[Luanne]

 

Are you referring to me? I don't ever recall interacting with you at all...? :confused1:

 

 

I was certainly NOT referring to you. You are fine.

[Luanne]

No, she is talking to me. I'm the one who has reiterated time and again that I'm not a nice person. :laugh:

 

 

That's funny, Parrothead. I wasn't talking about you either. :)

[I.Dup.]

WHEW!!!!! :laugh:

[Parrothead]

Of course they can. NC-17 is short for "no children under 17." My local theaters definitely enforce this, along with the "parent or guardian required" for R rated movies. They even have a rule that no one under 17 can attend an R rated movie after 6 p.m. no matter what - this is obviously for the enjoyment of adult patrons, not for protection of minors, but it illustrates that they can certainly restrict attendance. I have never in my life heard of a theater allowing a parent to take a child to an X-rated movie.

 

Well it was the late 70s. There was a drive-in in town. My mom's friend had a young boy. She took him to see Snow White at the drive-in. It was not a Disney version. I think my mom's friend was scarred more by it than her kiddo. At least it seemed that way from the telling.

[Parrothead]

That's funny, Parrothead. I wasn't talking about you either. :)

 

Okay. Thanks.

 

Seriously though, I'm not a nice person.

[I.Dup.]

Okay. Thanks.

 

Seriously though, I'm not a nice person.

 

 

Stop it. You are one of the nicest people I know here.

[Parrothead]

 

Stop it. You are one of the nicest people I know here.

 

I hide it very well so I don't get banned again. :coolgleamA:

 

Just ask dh. He is scared of me. :laugh:

[Guest submarines]

I was fortunate enough to be able to read Alias Grace while housesitting in a vintage row-house overlooking Kingston Penitentiary.

 

That must have been surreal!

 

The Handmaid's Tale is far from my favourite Atwood, but not because of any graphic content. I found it didactic, often indistinguishable in theme from the women's studies books I was reading at the time. IMHO, its importance is more as a cultural touchstone and basis for conversation than a literary work, but there's nothing wrong with that.

 

ITA. I think it's her worst, but has its place. It is too bad she's most known for it. I didn't like Oryx and Crake either, but she's one of my favorite authors. Lady Oracle, Life Before Man, Cat's Eye, The Robber Bride, Alias Grace--I love all those and reread them regularly.

[Lady Florida.]

I'm shocked ... at all you who apparently read lots of reviews before you will consider reading a book :tongue_smilie:

 

 

 

As others pointed out, it really doesn't take long. A few clicks of the mouse, a quick call or text to a friend whose reading tastes are similar to mine, and I have an idea if I want to read the book or not.

 

My book budget is limited. I don't want to spend money on a book then be sorry I bought it. My reading time is limited. I don't want to waste it even on a free book from the library. I'm more willing to take a chance on a library loan because I won't have wasted money, but even then I don't want to waste time going to and from the library.

 

To me, researching a book before I buy or borrow it just makes sense.

[Murphy101]

Are you referring to me? I don't ever recall interacting with you at all...? :confused1:

 

No, she is talking to me. I'm the one who has reiterated time and again that I'm not a nice person. :laugh:

 

Okay. Thanks.

Seriously though, I'm not a nice person.

 

 

You are just as nice and just as much a trouble maker as I am. ;p

 

But I just assumed she was talking about me. *shrugs*

 

Tho to be fair my second thought was, "That's sometimes how I feel about Reya too." :p

 

[Jennifer3141]

As others pointed out, it really doesn't take long. A few clicks of the mouse, a quick call or text to a friend whose reading tastes are similar to mine, and I have an idea if I want to read the book or not.

 

My book budget is limited. I don't want to spend money on a book then be sorry I bought it. My reading time is limited. I don't want to waste it even on a free book from the library. I'm more willing to take a chance on a library loan because I won't have wasted money, but even then I don't want to waste time going to and from the library.

 

To me, researching a book before I buy or borrow it just makes sense.

 

 

This. A million times over.

 

I don't understand how in this day and age, anyone could read/get a book without figuring out the reviews first.

[Parrothead]

You are just as nice and just as much a trouble maker as I am. ;p

 

But I just assumed she was talking about me. *shrugs*

 

 

 

That is why I love you. LOL

[I.Dup.]

As others pointed out, it really doesn't take long. A few clicks of the mouse, a quick call or text to a friend whose reading tastes are similar to mine, and I have an idea if I want to read the book or not.

 

 

This is exactly how I've always done it (for myself). For my children, I do a little more digging. But after coming across several books now that have shocked and offended me, I obviously need to be more careful. And stay away from Oprah's picks. :p

 

I've read some great books from this forum. Oryx and Crake was recommended here. I haven't really researched any of the ones that are recommended here, or elsewhere if the recs are coming from friends. It just didn't occur to me to do so. Not sure why. Obviously now I know I should.

[Word Nerd]

That's the thing about vague "you" and "some people" posts, whether they're on Facebook or a forum. They could be about anyone, and many will wonder if they're the pot-stirring meanie-pants in question.

[Impish]

I'm Canadian, and loathe Margaret Atwood. *runs before the RCMP shows up to boot her out of the country*

[I.Dup.]

I'm Canadian, and loathe Margaret Atwood. *runs before the RCMP shows up to boot her out of the country*

 

 

you must share why.

 

I have absolutely nothing against Margaret Atwood. The only book I've read of hers was the Handmaid's Tale (which I loved) and a little bit of Oryx and Crake (didn't love :p ) I will have to look into the other ones mentioned.

[Impish]

I hated Handmaid's Tale. And other assorted books they tried to cram down my throat in highschool.

 

Not a huge fan of Margaret Lawrence either. :tongue_smilie:

[unsinkable]

 

This is exactly how I've always done it (for myself). For my children, I do a little more digging. But after coming across several books now that have shocked and offended me, I obviously need to be more careful. And stay away from Oprah's picks. :p

 

I've read some great books from this forum. Oryx and Crake was recommended here. I haven't really researched any of the ones that are recommended here, or elsewhere if the recs are coming from friends. It just didn't occur to me to do so. Not sure why. Obviously now I know I should.

 

 

i actually grabbed it tonight at the library because of this thread.

 

thanks for the warning, friend!