Red Dragon was the first book to feature Hannibal Lecter, and the first Hannibal Lecter book to be made into a movie. Harris wrote The Silence of the Lambs as a compromise between his own desire to write books with strong female leads and the reception Lecter, a fairly minor character in Red Dragon, got among readers. You'll find that Thomas Harris's career has a lot of this pandering in it. The Silence of the Lambs got made into a movie that did very well, basically ensuring that Harris would spend the rest of his career writing about Hannibal Lecter. So he wrote nothing for a long time and finally wrote Hannibal, essentially for no reason other than to be made into a film. Which it was. As was Red Dragon, again, but now by an idiot who owes his directorial career to his family's money and influence instead of Michael Mann.

From what I recall, the books are basically stories hung around Harris's erudition, giving us the fruits of his research into forensic psychology and Classical studies. You could probably enjoy them without being into sadists and serial killers, just like you can apparently like metal without being into that shit.

"From what I recall, the books are basically stories hung around Harris's erudition, giving us the fruits of his research into forensic psychology and Classical studies. You could probably enjoy them without being into sadists and serial killers, just like you can apparently like metal without being into that shit."

yeah, i didnt mean to insinuate that people who read those kind of books harbor an unhealthly fascination. im just very particular about what i read, the genre doesnt interest me as far as reading goes. i did like the silence of the lambs movie as opposed to hannibal which seemed to be a slapstick parady of the first.

BassBehemoth: I'm loving it so far, so many things happening at once all over the place, and somehow they connect. My favorite are the Jon chapters though, I love the nightwatch. Who's story have you liked the most so far? I'm also curious on what children of the forest is, either i missed the explanation or it's still a mystery...but everytime they mention them I think about little alexi's roaming around being grim and necro

That's great man, I'm really glad your enjoying the novel. My favourite chapters without a doubt are Tyrion's, Arya's and Jon's..in that order. The children of the forest I presume are elves, as I've heard that on fan sites/reviews.

__________________

hahah nick, WE SHALL RIDE INTO THE FOREST WITH +2 AXES AND SLAY US THE DRAGON OF THE NORTH!

__________________

Apparently?

MY WAR AXE IS CARVED FROM THE BONE OF JESUS!!!

__________________

right now im reading egil's saga and reallllly liking it. its finally picking up. the book starts with about 40 pages of genealogical information, and now im on the father of egil skallagrimsson who has settled in iceland and will most likely die soon. it was seriously probably 7-10 generations back of information on how people died, kings they served,etc. shows how important heritage was to the vikings

__________________

Actually.. Silence of the lambs was the first to be made into a movie, then it was Hannibal, then Red Dragon, and yes those are the 3 with Hannibal Lecter.

__________________

thats what he said twat

__________________

"Red Dragon was the first book to feature Hannibal Lecter, and the first Hannibal Lecter book to be made into a movie."
shithead.

__________________

Wrong.

Silence of the Lambs — Release Date: 30 January 1991

Hannibal — Release Date: 9 February 2001

Red Dragon — Release Date: 4 October 2002

EDIT: but if you meant the book, yes red dragon was the first. but movie wise, you're wrong.

__________________

yeah, film wise "manhunter" was the first back in 1986, then "silence of the lambs" in 1991, then "hannibal" in 2001...then a remake of manhunter, "red dragon" in 2002

edit: so sorry nHoE, you're wrong...

manhunter didnt have anything to do with hanibal though did it?

__________________

yes, but hannibal was played by Brian Cox, not anthony hopkins

__________________

really i had know idea. i only knew of the trillogy... but i dont know if i want to see it. i can only see anthony hopkins as hannibal.

__________________

Manhunter, directed by Michael Mann, from 1986, is an adaptation of the novel Red Dragon. Hannibal Lecter is played by Brian Cox. The Silence of the Lambs, the film, came out in 1991, five years after Manhunter. If you don't believe me, check it out for yourself: the facts. Thanks. (ah, see this has been cleared up)

Yes, Pandemonium, apparently.

The geneology was a literary form in most pre-modern cultures. It's hard to read much authentic medieval lit without slogging through centuries of family history, no matter where it's from.

Brian Cox does a good job, and manhunter is infinately better than red dragon. i'd check it out.

__________________

alright, i was unaware of manhunter even existing.

__________________

still, anthony hopkins is perfect for the role in my opinion, but yeah, i'll check it out.

__________________

I'd say that in pretty much all ways Manhunter slaughters Red Dragon, though it's hard to take Cox once you're used to Hopkins.

yeah, i can believe it to be a better movie, but i doubt i'll get used to hannibal not being anthony.

__________________

To be honest, he's a minor character. Neither adaptation is strictly faithful to the book, but Mann does a better job of keeping Hannibal absent. Ratner's a punk with zero film artistry and catered to the cult of Hannibal by centering the film around him, pushing the scenes with him in them so over the top that, to me, it reads like self-parody. Manhunter's best watched if you don't think of it as a Hannibal Lecter movie. If you do, yeah, you'll probably be disappointed, unless you happen to really like Michael Mann's style.

alright, but yeah i read red dragon, and he is pretty minor of a characer. i actuall really liked the movie red dragon, so i must get to watching manhunter.

__________________

yes, but you always hear genealogy and forced marriages and things like that in connection with asians and middle easterners compared to the vikings

__________________

Sure, but even people as boring as the French had them. We just find it exotic when people from 'mysterious' parts of the world do anything, even things we do.

i started reading the hobbit a few days back, pretty good

__________________

yeah that one craps all over the triology. way more fantastic and fairytale like

__________________

Agreed, I finished The Hobbit a couple of months ago, long after reading the trilogy...it was a well done book for sure.

__________________

im also reading various crap for school. the great gatsby...which is really flying way over my head. we're reading it before discussing it so im really clueless as to whats going on and why its such a great book. hopefully teach will enligthen me

__________________

Transient your a dumbass..haha, I haven't yet to read The Great Gatzby(my gf told me all about it)...but isn't it strange that novels are so much more enjoyable if you read them on your own as opposed to reading it mandatory through school?

__________________

i can honestly say if iw as reading this on my own id have put it down by now. it doesnt make much sense at all, its just like floating images of rich people on hot summer days and thats about all i can get out of it. i dont even know who the characters are! ill give him one thing though, and that hes good at creating lyrical descriptions

__________________

Gatsby isn't a great book, it's just insisted so strongly that it is that everybody's decided to agree. The painting on its cover is fantastic, though. If you have the Scribner edition, which is I think the most popular, it comes with an essay at the beginning by a Fitzgerald scholar that can tell you more or less why it's considered so great. Though I understand that if you have a really good English teacher who loves the book, some of his enthusiasm seeps into it and the book becomes great for you.

I'm surprised that somebody who likes the Eddas prefers The Hobbit to the LOTR trilogy. In The Hobbit Tolkien was writing a bedtime story for his kids; in that trilogy he was trying to create a modern equivalent to all the medieval lit he'd devoted his academic career to, namely the Eddas, Beowulf, and things like the Nibelungenlied (and also a parallel to World War II, and also some other things). I have fonder memories of C.S. Lewis's fully realized mythological world myself, but I figure that what's attractive in the Eddas should be at least somewhat attractive in Tolkien's attempt.

to be fair, i read the trilogy when i was quite young (14 or so). but i dont plan on reading it now and i have zero interest in the movies


yeah i have a good english teacher, so i plan on using that as an aide. im not going to dismiss gatsby as a total POS now becasue i havent finished it or heard anyones opinion, so that'd be unfair. our teacher told us to skip over the essay in the beginning (most likely the one youre talking about) untill after we read the book. and yeah, everyone knows that painting

__________________

The painting's better than the book. You can turn it upside down and change everything. In the book, no matter how many angles you try, you don't find anything new or worthwhile. There's not much there, but it acts like there's so much there. I've read Gatsby, I've understood Gatsby, I've wrestled with the little there to wrestle with, and, believe me, you've already gotten the best out of it: the lyricism. But you can find better of that elsewhere.

All Americans should read it, though, so it's a good thing most are required to in high school. I just wish they taught it earlier and gave the focus it receives to something really meaty and worthwhile.

And yeah, there's nothing there in the Tolkien either. Books or films.

i dont see anything when i turn the painting upside down.


pst what are your thoughts on the death of a salesman? we spent a good month analyzing that play and i ended up loving it, theres so much going on

__________________

Oh come on...don't bash it that much...they are good novels..except all the insane history kinda got to me...just because if I'm interested in something, I want to know all the details and not forget a thing.

__________________

have you ever ead any of the other junk tolkien wrote? from what i remember, the silmarilion was full of genealogy and boring details

__________________

haha, fuck no...I always avoided that book at the bookstore...it just looks like a fictioned headache.

__________________

I'm just saying what I think. I don't find much worthwhile in Tolkien, despite liking the British attempt to create fully realized fictional worlds. Silmarillion is what's necessary to back up this fictional world, all the kind of documentation and background info that a real world would have. I imagine it might be fascinating to somebody who really invested in Tolkien's world.

I don't believe I've ever read Death of a Salesman, only seen it. Even that was not recent. So I can say that I like it, but I can't say much more, unless I do go on to read it. I'm reading a lot of plays now, so maybe.

Anyone here read the Gunslinger by Stephen King?

definitley read it! a good play. i also read the glass menagerie this year, not as good as the death of a salesman though because it felt like the author was just beating you in the face with symbolism and cheesy 50s ness

and i started the gunslinger, got 100 pages in, and then left my book on the plane home from italy in, ironically, a valium and vicodin induced haze

__________________

I'm doing a book report on it, it's pretty weird sp far, but I'm not that far at all.

It's on my hit list, but it has been for a while, and so have many other things. I'll probably never manage to read everything I want to read as of right now, let alone the things I've yet to hear of or be interested in, which is somewhat humbling.

What ended up happening with your Bergman diet?

i got about a hundred pages into it. i remember there being a raven, and somebody meeting a friend in the desert, and thats about it. however i did read the stand (unadbridged, all 1200 pages) as im sure was mentioned earlier in this thread seeing as its months old. i LOVED that book, one of my all time favorites. i love apocalyptic books

__________________

I could not get through even 30 pages of the Silmarillion; my brain cells were melting from the utter tediousness. Even though my favorite power metal album is based on it, I will never read it.

After taking a class in which the textbook analyzes Gatsby using 12 or so different critical literary theories, I understand it really well. When I first read it, I wasn't exactly not comprehending it though...

Now I read "Into The Wild" by Jon Krakauer, "The Stone of Farewell" by Tad Williams, and "Desperate Journeys, Abandoned Souls" by Edward Leslie.

Everyone should at least read the summary of "Into The Wild" at Amazon, under Editorial Reviews: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/03...=books&v=glance

A truely touching story indeed.

The Leslie book is about castaways throughout history, and their survival stories. Extremely interesting to me.

I just finished a few Ibsen plays, most worthy was A Doll's House. Read it? I like it.

I'm Currently reading Pride and Predjudice. Looking forward to it because I hear its got some good comedy in it (i'm only a few chapters in).

I'm really not a Tolk. fan. I've read the Hobbit, skimmed the first LOTR book, and seen the movies and they didn't do much for me... but then again I'm not huge on fantasy. The guys good at creating worlds and atmospheres,but I like my thematic/literary devices used with some wit. Sure its cool for wasting time and light reading, but thats about all its good for.

__________________

Yeah, I've read A Doll's House and some other Ibsen. He's the bee's knees. If you like him, check out Joyce's Dubliners. Ibsen was a huge influence on early Joyce.

Not a big fan of Austen, though she does some interesting things with the narration that nobody had done before and should be respected for that. You probably already know all the funny bits, since that and other Austen's are some of the most film-adapted books in history.

Into the Wild's a great book. Very interesting stuff.

The Stand is also great fun.

Some of tolkiens stuff is actually very deep and has a lot of symbolism in it. I got this book a while back that is part of this philosphy in modern culture series and all the different books break down tv shows or books or what have you and go into the philosphy that the author or creator has put into them and things like that. The book is called Philosophy in The Lord of the Rings i think, wasnt all that good of a book but thats not the point.

I also read A doll's house earlier this year in my english class. I personally am not a big fan of plays but it has a lot for you to think about and is an all around decent play, its a fairly qucik read too I would pick it up if you havent read it.

__________________

Love The Stand. I'm also re-reading A Pale Fire right now. Ah, what beautiful prose!

My expierence with that genre of Philosophy books are that, obviously, thats the writers interpretation of the show. The writer always looks WAY too in to the show and ends up pulling out shit that I'm absolutely positive was never intended. But regardless of that, even though I may gain respect for whatever show the book is about, I still won't nessessarily like it. For example: My mother is a huge Buffy The Vampire Slayer T.V. series fan. She's got a Philosophy of Buffy the... and she had me read certain parts of the book to see what I thought, if it was, as far as I was aware, accurate with the philosopher, etc. Even though it was interesting to read, the show still blew hard, festering, donkey priapism infected donkey dick.

Point is, Tolkien bores me.

__________________

Even as a fan of his work, he can be boring....especially when it comes to describing the footed journeys in the LOTR...."The great stone that led before the wooded path was a marvelous sight indeed, especially to the low grounded hobbits. However, the path was considered passable to at least Gandalf, who chanted elvish vigorously at the great colossal ore." They could have stepped off the path to go around it...

OR, when he describes the direction of wind, amount of trees, steps walked, constant hunger, constant wearyness, ect.

__________________

this is good discussion, gentlemen!


theres some ibsen available in my text book and i thought about reading it only on account of the fact that it was norwegian first :P. im kind of crunched for time though,so i dont think ill get around to it. itd be quite cool to find a norwegian on one side, english on the other version of the play but i doubt thatll happen

ive heard good things about the dubliners (and love some of the irish drinking songs about that...tim finnegan's wake etc) but ive also heard that its damn near impossible to follow

__________________

I don't have one, but I'm sure there's a bilingual edition of Ibsen somewhere out there. I know Joyce learned Norwegian expressly for the purpose of reading Ibsen.

The stories in Dubliners aren't that hard to follow. It's a good idea to get an annotated copy, though, but even without one it's not hard to read. Joyce would become difficult later, but he was doing Impressionist stories there, dense but manageable. It's really the only book of his that didn't earn him his reputation of being difficult. A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man isn't too bad either, but already a step up. Most people quit Ulysses in the third chapter, and I don't know anyone who's really gotten past the first page of Finnegans Wake, but Dubliners is pretty far off from that. Some very pretty writing, too.

There's a lot of symbolism in the LOTR, but that really doesn't make it good or bad. It's a fact, not a judgment value. It's really, really easy to use symbolism if you're familiar with it, which Tolkien should have been. He was trying to make a mythology for England, so he used all the techniques he learned from all the mythological/historical texts. Thus passages like the one BB quoted, in that pseudo-epic tone.

A more interesting and much deeper try at the same thing can be found in Blake, whose poetry will never be made into a blockbuster movie. It does come with illustrations, though. In color.

As for those Philosophy books, I think they're all done by fanboys with credentials (think how many that must be, considering how many useless Philosophy degrees, grad and undergrad, there are out there) or by people who really don't care and are just being paid. At best they're things like fans of Lacan and Baudrillard writing about The Matrix because the Wachowskis are name-dropping pseudo-intellects who want to pass off their shallow understanding of famous minds as artistic and intellectual depths. It's easy to reference things, and it's just as easy to make a career out of saying 'Ooo! Look! They referenced things!'

I do like him, no doubt about that...however, I just find some of his writing redundent.

BTW, I created that quote...haha..it was just an example he could have used.

__________________

meh. To each his own.

On a side note has anyone ready any of William Faulkners books? Im pretty sure i don't get to read him in any of my English classes and i've heard hes really good.

On a second side note, I read Lolita after it being suggestesd by (I think) Darko it might have PST88 dont remeber which. It was really awesome though. I would sugest it for anyone who can read it.

__________________

PST got me into Nabovok. I remember suggesting the book to someone on this forum, mabye it was me.

I haven't read any Faulkner, although I have As I Lay Dying lying around here some where..

I just finished "The Sociopath Next Door"(the majority of it was read while I was taking a shit over the past months). It's about sociopaths, how there are alot more than we think (abotu 1 in 25) etc. It was interesting and helped pass the time while I pooped. I take long craps.

__________________

I figured you made it up, but you may as well have quoted it.

Nabokov, Dyldo.

Faulkner's good if you're careful about what you read by him. Anything too early's weak, and anything too late's lazy and stupid. But the decade or so following The Sound and the Fury is all good, with Sound, As I Lay Dying, and especially Absalom, Absalom! being the best. Or at least my favorites.

"portrait of a man as an artist", i wrote a thesis paper on this book in community college. read about 100 or so pages of it kinda skimmed thruout. wrote a long winded paper about how james joyce was "the man"<i dont even recall exactly what i wrote>. this was a slackers masterpiece. didnt know shit about the book, didnt know what the hell i was talking about..............A motherfucking +. id put down money bags on the fact that my teacher probably had tried to read this book years ago, hated it, didnt get a thing out of it and i could of wrote anything.......id just get an A on effort

pst how much do you read? the only time i ever read is before i go to sleep, so i get about 10 pages every night and thats it. i cant ever break myself away from teh electronics to read

__________________

That makes sense.

Nobovok! I'll make as many typos as I please!

__________________

Not with me around, Dyldo. I'll call your parents and let them know you've been misspelling authors' names. Then you'll be in trouble.

I read a lot. I have to read a lot for school, and I usually bring in outside reading if I have the time and energy. I don't sleep much and I can read while doing other things without hurting my focus, so I can get a lot in.

i can read and listen to music, but thaats about it...

__________________

The only music I can read with is anything ambient otherwise my mind begins to pay attention to the music. I can usually zone in pretty well in noisy enviorments.

__________________

yeah i fall asleep better to crazy music than mild music.

on a side note, what ambient do you like? i like autechre, aphex twin, synaesthesa, fennesz...

__________________

depends a little on what im reading, for instance right now still reading the hobbit so ill put on some finntroll or elvenking or something cause the music goes so well with the book, but for the most part ill put on something without vocals

__________________

Theres a band called Synaesthea? Fuck! I wanted to name my band that. I only know Aphex Twin out of those and they're not ambient. I like Godspeed You Black Emperor, Byla, Sigur Ros (really only the () album though), things that I make, etc. Over all, its anything that inspires mood but isn't distracting (vocals usually need to be at a minimum). Kayo Dot, Kaki King, Isis, Christopher O'Riley (most noteably his piano covers of Radiohead), Micheal Nyman's The Piano, Antemeridiem, Estonian Philharmonic Choir, Yo Yo Ma, Nils Cline, and other things alike find themselves playing while I'm reading or writing.

__________________

haha, my dad told me about that radiohead piano cover album. sounds funny!

i listen to the ambient works cd by aphex twin, but yea, normally they arent. yeah theres a band called synaethesia i think its, but the AE are connected.

__________________

synæthesia

__________________

i beleive thats right

cant forget liholesie or however thats spelled. best computer ambient ever! folky!

__________________

fuck yea man! I still cant find his new album though....

__________________

What kinds of other things?


I prefer not to listen to music whilst reading. I definitely can't sleep with music going, unless I'm stinking drunk. I find listening to music while writing works miracles though.

Sounds funny? Mind you it sounds absolutely beautiful and remains, in my respectable illuminating light of taste, one of the most beautiful pieces of work to be put on CD. Check it out and judge for yourself (even though I'll still be right). The album is called "True Love Waits". Even if you hate Radiohead, this is really enjoyable.

Back to reading. Richard, You mentioned Austen did something with narrative that no one had tried before. What is it?

__________________

Mostly just white noise types of things, like music - all kinds, not just ambient - or television. My mind concentrates better if I have something to occupy a portion of it, keep it from wandering. I've also carried on conversations while reading, walked around, helped a friend write a paper, etc. This kind of practice actually helps a lot when I'm watching particularly rich films.

Nyman's done things better than The Piano. I'm not sure I'd recommend them, though, since he's the kind of film composer who does such a good job at making building a mutually complementary relationship between music and image that it's almost a shame to listen to him out of context.

Dyldo: it's something called 'free indirect discourse,' where the third person narrator, who's technically omniscient, limits herself, in this case, to the thoughts and language of a particular character. Other people would go on to do it better, but it's really the only thing I like in her.

Nyman is great. I've heard most of his other stuff, I just only have The Piano (which is still one of my favorite works of his).

__________________

Finally finished A Game of Thrones today...it was fantastic...about to start A Clash of Kings..969 pages to go...damnit!

__________________

I just finished reading Congo.

Ya know, it's weird about the unstability of christianity......the DaVinci Code--a bestseller fictional novel--was highly controversial for its fictional "facts."

And Congo, a bestseller fictional novel, had no such controversy, and yet, Congo is written in a much much more factual way using many references and footnotes.

That's all I'm gonna say on the matter.

__________________

I haven't read either...but the bible is a fucking joke book.

__________________

ahh damn you, I'm half way through, haven't had much time lately though. How was the ending, was it a cliff hanger sort of thing?

Man, every chapter is a cliff hanger! Yes...the ending definitely wants you to buy the next book.

__________________

I've never read Congo, but from what I know about it I don't see how it's comparable to The Da Vinci Code as a perceived threat to Christianity, unless you're just pointing out that it's a work of fiction that makes pseudo-factual claims. Still, you can't expect the Church to fight against every book these days; the Middle Ages are over, so they have to focus completely on popular works explicitly threatening dogma. Though, if we cause Western Civilization to collapse in the next few years, like we might very well do, there's a decent chance we'll end up in another theocratic age, with all the appropriate book burnings. Hallelujah.

Of course, if Congo does, in fact, challenge the Church in some way comparable to that half-assed sweeping the feet out from under it the quarter-assed The Da Vinci Code does, I retract at least part of the above statement.

Austen is boring me. She writes wonderfully, but I feel as If I'm ease dropping on a 19th century highschool girl suffering from logorrhea.

__________________

Austen probably invented what high school girls would be like - so much of both the actual behavior and artistic representation of modern high school girls is straight out of her, whether they know it or not - but I find her annoying too, so no worries. You probably shouldn't pay too much attention to what happens if you want to enjoy it. I had to write a paper on Emma freshman year here (it's a freshman-level high school book, not a college book, so I was appropriately pissed about it), and I don't think I discussed the plot at all, except in how it existed as an annotation to the narrative stance. Her books are more enjoyable if read this way.

I just picked up some Jack London.

Its interesting for about an hour untill I get an urge to reach through the page and rip out her larynx.

__________________

Worms beat you to it.

I started reading "The Icewind Trilogy" the other day..I'm on about page 50...pretty damn mediocre so far...not looking too good for a little less than 1000 pages left...

I'm going to have to start reading A Clash of Kings...because I'm sure it's MUCH more wicked awesome.

__________________

i started reading "the man who mistook his wife for a hat"

really awesome book

__________________

Yeah it is. So much too because its a real disorder and really happened.

__________________

My brother got me a zombie survival guide handbook for christmas. It's some funny shit by Max Brooks.

ZOMBIE

__________________

yeah! the guy who thinks hes still in 1945 is fascinating too

__________________

I actually like stephen king, well so far. I've read "It' and Am currently reading "Misery". "It" is extremely detailed and I ended up feeling connected to the characters.

I think my favourite author is Shaun Hutson. I've read "Exit wounds" "Relics" and "Assassin". Not exactly literature, but he can get quite gruesome sometimes and uses a few heavy metal references too.

"The Hellbound heart" is also a brilliant book. It's basically the Hellraiser story in book form, but it was the first book I'd read out of choice since school and I was just getting into reading.

I'm thinking of maybe reading some Shakespeare of all things after Misery. Is he any good? I did macbeth at scool but wasn't really that into it. I think I may "get it" second time around. What do you think?

Alot of people hate King's detail and only concern it with being verbose, but it isn't useless details. If you can dole out the patience, it helps connect the reader to the characters very well. It's just one of those popular things people latch onto in order to hate something because it is just that.

Shakespeare is nice. School has a tendency of dragging literature through the dirt every now and then, so give it another go.

__________________

i just bought A Clash of Kings by George R.R. Martin!! The first book A Game of Thrones was excellent! I never thought reading about battles could take me to the edge of my seat. Thanks for getting me into this series bass behemoth. lol

lol, that's awesome you're enjoying them! I've owned the second book for about a month...and STILL haven't started in...I'm been so busy working.
And a book like that I need to be concentrated on, it will start soon hopefully.


I did start reading Salvatore's The Icewind Dale Trilogy, fucking mediocre compared to GRRM that's for damn sure...it's alright I guess for actually reading words I suppose...

__________________

I just finished Walden!

I love Thoreau's philosophy. I love his quaint writing style, his (seemingly) directionless rants, and his appreciation for as simple a thing as squirrels thrashing about under his house. Discuss thoughts on Walden, if you have had the balls to get through the entire dense script.

Shakespeare is the man, I never enjoyed it while at school, but he is really worth reading, a true genious. (My fav is Othello, Iago has some brilliant soliloquies).

I'm gonna bump this shit.


Anyways, I wants some more good reads. What I fancy:

A few years back, PST recommended "The Redneck Manifesto" by Jim Goad. Since then, I've been a hardcore Jim Goad fanboi.

Anything over the top gory. Splatterpunk Jack Ketchum's Open Season is probably the best I've read in this category.

Transgressive Fiction I've read Bret Easton Ellis, Irvine Welsh and Hubert Selby Jr.

Anything by David Foster Wallace. I'm in love with you, Grampa.

__________________

For over the top gore/sex Georges Bataille Story of the Eye and Marquis de Sade's 120 Days in Sodom are great.

I really, really, really want to read Michael Gira's (of Swans) book The Consumer as I hear its quite disturbing but its out of print and every copy I have seen ranges from $70 - $200. It makes me sad.

__________________

I heard you paint houses:Frank "The Irishman" Sheeran.

The enemy within, by Bobby Kennedy.

__________________