I read War and Peace when I was fifteen - that's my copy there, all 1450 closely printed pages of it in a Signet edition, puzzlingly labelled "A New American Translation"! It led me on to a Tolstoy phase when I fairly lapped him up, but the book which started that craze was a school prize, although chosen by me. When a friend saw it she was quite incredulous that anyone could read a book of that length and of that subject matter - she stated categorically that she could never tackle it. Fair enough, I was probably a bit of an intense teenager and I certainly always had my head in a book, but I thought nothing of reading it and couldn't see why it might be in any way 'difficult'. I haven't read it since, so maybe it is a kind of Mount Everest of a book, certainly one that requires the vigour of youth or a great deal of time and attention - such as over a long school vacation when you have no responsibilities.
Are there some books which fall into the Everest class, I wonder: ones you've tried and failed to read, some you'd just never attempt because they are too big or perceived as being too tough, some which you have reserved to be conquered when life permits? Proust is spoken of in these terms, though I've no personal experience of A la Recherche..., and after Dark Puss' recent experience with Mann's Doctor Faustus
I'm tempted to put that in this category (DP did make it to the summit but he's still got the frostbite to show for it). However, perhaps all we need to tackle these mighty peaks is the right conditions and a following wind? (Does Proust come with sherpas?)
At the other end of the scale is the 'gentle stroll' of a book - the pleasant wander on a fine day, nothing too taxing, pure enjoyment. I've just read Tea Time for the Traditionally Built which is firmly in that class of things, (the No. 1 Ladies have man trouble and van trouble!).
But back to the big stuff: do you have an Everest, or are you quite content - and why not - to trek in the literary foothills?
Post a comment
Your Information
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
My recent Everest was 'Gone With the Wind' read as one of the books on the 1001 Books to Read Before You Die list. It was a good book, but 400 or 500 pages seem to be enough for me before I get sick of a book and want to move onto something else. Finishing the book is all part of the enjoyment, so GWTW was a bit of a struggle as I was impatient to find out how it ended! And the ending was a bit disappointing as Rhys and Scarlett didn't even end up together. Still, I guess that's life and that's ultimately why the book is a classic/masterpiece.
Posted by: Kaitlyn | 27 March 2009 at 12:01 PM
Virginia Woolf's Mrs. Dalloway, though not so many pages as War and Peace, is a book I tried to read many, many times. More than once, I set aside an entire day, and said to myself, "I'm going to get past page 50." Until a few years ago, I never did. My bookclub selected The Hours and Mrs. Dalloway to read so I had no choice. I have since read both of them again. I'm not sure what made Mrs. Dalloway so difficult for me since I had read (and re-read) To the Lighthouse. In any case, Mrs. D. and The Hours are two of my all-time favorites so, at least in my case, it paid off to be persistent.
Posted by: Linda C | 27 March 2009 at 12:29 PM
Lord of the Ring and Gulliver's Travels. I want to read them, I've tried to read them, but I can't.
Posted by: Mary McCartney | 27 March 2009 at 12:35 PM
My poor paws are gradually thawing out now readers will no doubt be happy to hear! In my youth I had lots of Everests (or at least Mont Blanc) and many when read were a bitter disappointment. Nowadays, as regular Cornflower readers will know, I have not even little molehills (i.e. I have no TBR pile and no wishlist of books on A.... etc.). I do however have Proust as a goal, at least to try again having read Volume 1 and then stopped. For my mother, and many of her friends, reading A la Recherche ... was so revelatory and such a influential experience that I surely should have one more go. I'm looking for some warm boots as I type.
Posted by: Dark Puss | 27 March 2009 at 04:08 PM
Interesting that some people seem to share my experience that there are some books which you just can't 'get' - nothing to do with length. I've started "Catch 22" about five times and never got more than about a third of the way in. It may also be the case that as with running you gradually get used to the exercise and provided you don't try and sprint all the way you gradually find your rhythm. I found that both with long individual works like War and Peace and with novel series (A Dance to the Music of Time, the Barchester Novels).
Posted by: Mr Cornflower | 27 March 2009 at 08:25 PM
The point with "A la recherche du temps perdu" is that the very beginning is not easy and not welcoming at all. Many people strongly recommend to start by reading "Un amour de Swann" first, which is the second part of the first volume. This is actually a novel in itself, it is included in the whole but it can be read separately without problem.
Secondly, nobody needs necessarily to read all of it. "A la recherche..." has seven volumes, and each is divided in several parts, but most French readers usually read only the three first volumes: "Du côté de chez Swann", "A l'ombre des jeunes filles en fleur" and "Le côté de Guermantes". These are the most famous and probably the best of Proust's work - en clair, la substantifique moelle de son oeuvre. Enjoy then!
Posted by: glo | 27 March 2009 at 10:09 PM
I think one of my Mt Everest books is Les Misérables, which took me the better part of the year to read in 2008. It wasn't hard, but he does like to go off on these tangents...A book I'm glad I conquered (so to speak), but probably one I won't pick up for a reread anytime soon. I don't mind reading really long books otherwise though. It may take me a while to get through them, but if the world is an especially interesting one, I don't mind losing myself in it for a good while.
Posted by: Danielle | 27 March 2009 at 11:11 PM
Glo, thank you for this advice, I'll have another go!
Posted by: Dark Puss | 28 March 2009 at 08:52 AM
Does anyone remember "Pinkerton's Sister" by Peter Rushforth who didn't live up to his name because it took him 25 years to write this his second book. It was over 700 pages long and of the group of online bookfriends that set out from base camp I think i was the only one to reach the summit. Why did I carry on when everyone else had the good sense to abort the mission and return to civilisation, warm food and a comfy bed? Sheer b*****-mindedness was my only motivation. I didn't enjoy the view, I knew it wasn't good for my health but my trudging on and doing so many miles, I mean pages, a time I got into stride and reached the end.
Posted by: Ruth | 28 March 2009 at 10:18 AM
I have twice started War and Peace, and each time given up at roughly the same place, the first long battle scene. A friend has advised to skip the war sections, but I can't help feeling that characters may emerge there or have things happen to them, and I'd need to know about it.
I took Vol 1 of the new translation of Proust to China with me, so that I couldn't "wander off to the bookshelf" if it didn't appeal. I did finish it, but with a "so...what?" air. Who needs a thirty page description of getting into bed and turning off the light? Gratuitously prolix, that's our Marcel.
Posted by: Curzon Tussaud | 28 March 2009 at 10:32 AM
I, too, resolved this year to revisit A La Recherche and get beyond the first volume. Then a couple of weeks ago I was trawling through the classic book section at my local Oxfam and behold a complete set of the 1970 Chatto and Windus edition. It was fate. Now all I have to do is find my way through them, although it is comforting to note should I fail, as Glo points out, the French mainly read the first three books.
Posted by: Lesley | 28 March 2009 at 10:53 AM
Talking of Everest ... after reading your most interesting post last week about The Artist's Way, I joined up on Sarah's blog with 19 others. (This is Sarah of Sarah's Writing Journal in the right-hand sidebar here under WRITERS.)
The idea is to follow for 12 weeks - together - Julia Cameron's book The Artist's Way in order to learn to get in touch with one's 'creative self'. The more I think about it, the more I feel oxygen may be required for this assault! (Why didn't I just sign up for a wine appreciation class?!)
Posted by: Barbara MacLeod | 28 March 2009 at 11:04 AM
Mine is Ulysses. I have promised a friend I will read it with her guidance and cheering section before I'm done w/ my PhD.
Posted by: ted | 28 March 2009 at 04:50 PM
Goodness, Karen... 1450 pages and didn't even blink? I get bored with most books around the 300 page mark, and the only loooong books I've managed have the words 'Harry' and 'Potter' in the title. Ulysses is probably my biggest struggle, or Moby Dick. I just can't imagine any book sustaining me past the 600 page mark.
Posted by: Simon T | 29 March 2009 at 08:42 AM
My Everest right now is Bleak House. I really like Dickens, but I can't seem to get that one off the shelf and into my hands. The cheap edition probably isn't helping. For a long time, it was One Hundred Years of Solitude. . . which I finally finished but still refer to as "About 200 Pages More of Solitude than His Editors Should Have Allowed Him". . . . And right now I am struggling to listen to the last three cds of Middlesex, by Jeffery Eugenides--Simon's comment about "sustaining" rings true here because I am past that point and just onto sheer grit and determination. And this is even in the car during my bleak early Spring commute!
I had a ninth grade student (14 years old) who also read War and Peace--as his "independent reading" for my class! I used to use it as an example: "If you're a fast reader, maybe you'll choose. . . say. . . War and Peace!" and he decided to do it. We were BOTH very proud of him!
Posted by: Becky | 29 March 2009 at 12:24 PM
But why worry about it? If you don't want to read something, or you feel unready in some way - read something else (wimps!). There's a great deal of great literature we'll never read becasue there is time, or we don't speak the language, for a start - so why worry about a couple of bogey volumes?
I enjoyed W&P, which I've read twice - but bits of it are pretty hard going, especially the theoretical history chapters at the end. I think there are a couple of points from my reading - decide in advance not to read the theory of history chapters (unless you're doing History as an A level or higher, of course); second, watch one of the films first, so that you're not waiting to find out what happens, which is hardly ever the point of a novel - and certainly with 1400 pages can't be the main point - you'll go mad. Enjoy.
But the real problem I have with W&P is that it seems to take everyone's entire Tolstoy quota, so Anna Karenina, which is an even greater novel (and half the length) is somewhat neglected by comparison. Just think, he wrote it to show Flaubert how Madame Bovary should have been done - and he was right. DO read AK.
Hope this is helpful, yours respectfully, Levin
Posted by: Lindsay | 29 March 2009 at 09:28 PM
A La recherche.... is my personal bete noir. I had wanted to read it for ages, dutifully reserved Vol I from the library, loved what I read, but couldn't struggle much past page 150. It is the only booked I have failed to complete over the last few years. However I now have a minor addiction to Madelaines as I had decided it would be in the spirit of Proust to try them dunked in cinnamon and apple tea .. it brings back such memories....
Posted by: charlotte | 29 March 2009 at 10:38 PM
This is very helpful indeed. Thankyou, Glo.
Posted by: Cornflower | 30 March 2009 at 12:41 PM
Well Levin,
You may be right about seeing the story before reading it (Anthony Hopkins was quite wonderful as Pierre), and though I did take in the theory of history chapters, they could be omitted. But yes, agreed, AK is the better book and should not be missed.
K
Posted by: Cornflower | 30 March 2009 at 08:49 PM
Glad to be able to help out!
My other advice would be to find a very good translation, and try another translation if you feel that the one you are reading is not fine enough. As you may know, Proust has a very particular writting style, he is famous for his very, very long and grammatically-intricate sentences. And moreover, the French tongue and the English tongue express things in dramatically different ways. This is even more true when it comes to thoughts, feelings and emotions, which are Proust's main material. Then I guess it must be difficult for a translator to render and express properly what Proust wrote.
Posted by: glo | 31 March 2009 at 12:43 AM
Dark Puss,
See also the answer I wrote to Mrs Cornflower (just below).
I hope your velvety paws are healing, and remember that a handsome cat can't afford to show up publicly in knitted booties.
I have already seen one, he just couldn't stand not to feel the ground under his feet.
Posted by: glo | 31 March 2009 at 12:49 AM
It's funny how some of those books on tapes can seem sooo long. I liste to a lot of them, and some of them can be a challenge.
I have Bleak Street on my to be read this year shelf. The length of it is intimidating. But I am reading The Count of Monte Christo now. It is a good book, but I still have about 1000 pages to go!
Posted by: Loretta | 01 April 2009 at 12:53 AM
Even I have read Anna Karenina!
Posted by: Dark Puss | 01 April 2009 at 09:02 PM