Which obviates your very posts here.

Shaun said a stupid thing. He was called on it. You defended it, then got silly.

W/no argument here, was it merely gastritis that impelled you?

Normally I would end my part here by saying this is a public thread, and I’m satisfied that I’ve made my points. And that I’m satisfied with the judgment any reader might care to make of me on that basis.

But this is a rather old thread. I’d guess you and I are the only ones reading it. So I’m going to offer you a little assistance here.

There are differences between fact and opinion. One might think this an obvious point, and yet the world is full of people who express their opinions as if they were facts: obviously true. And anyone who disagrees must have something wrong with them.

Not all opinions are equally valid. Ignorance, for example, is a poor basis for opinion. Though it seems to me that ignorance is more often a motivator than an inhibitor. Still, it is possible for diametrically opposed opinions to be equally valid. In cases where people disagree, reasonable arguments might be possible on either side. Or so, at least, in my opinion.

There is difference between a merely clever argument and an actually good argument. Just as there is a difference between an argument and no argument at all. And having no argument at all is often the fate of those who can’t tell fact from opinion. Or so, at least, in my experience.

Take or leave, as you like. And have a nice day.

a) Shaun: ‘In my view, there are few bad books, only varying degrees of good books.’

This is known as self-explanatory idiocy.

b) George: re: the above comment: ‘I’m completely willing to vouch for the quality of Shaun’s taste.’

This is known as ‘making it easy.’

c) A = B = Yes!

Just to be clear:

a) You’re calling Shaun an idiot?

b) You’re calling me vapid?

c) You think these judgements are self-evident?

I need no defense, as I posited nothing idiotic re: literature. I just humorously nettled the idiocy. Trying to defend the idiocy, ‘I’m completely willing to vouch for the quality of Shaun’s taste’- and rather vapidly, needs defense.

As for his brain, quit the guffaw, and get to work on that defense!

So, your defenses are

a) it was a joke

b) Shaun’s brain don’t work!!

I must concede, I am laughing now.

H-U-M-O-R.

You can get some from the ice cream truck.

bbbrriinngg!

‘I’m completely willing to vouch for the quality of Shaun’s taste.’

‘Twasn’t the taste, but the gray matter, that was under question.

And since he’s known to praise Frederick Exley and Tim O’Brien, I’m completely willing to vouch for the quality of Shaun’s taste.

Sorry I’m a day late. I had no inkling this pleasant thread would degenerate into tedious scolding.

SWEET, dude!

As for Life Of Pi, he even cribbed the story from another writer, and then told a much more compelling version of the tale after the main tale, and was unaware of it.

And then the stonesmith amended the tombstone:

‘Too many poor parts and undeveloped characters [PLUS BANAL AND BLOATED STORY ARCS) are the stuff of great literature.’

‘But I don’t give a hoot because the series has brought great pleasure to so many young people, including a computer-addled nephew, who wouldn’t otherwise pick up a book except to use as a doorstop.’

So has crack, sniffing glue, and consorting with ladies of the night- but they all can fry your brain.

‘In my view, there are few bad books, only varying degrees of good books.’

Crack, glue, or ladies, for that silly quote?

Your wife shouldn’t quit her day job. One of the things that makes Suite Française so sweet is precisely what she objects to.

Regarding Life of Pi, “banal” literature is in the eye of the beholder, and I am respectful of the fact that you breathe air far rarer than most mere mortals like myself and can flick this well told story aside with the back of your hand.

The Harry Potter series will never be confused with the Alexandria Quartet, and I bogged down 30 pages into the one Rowling that I tried to read. But I don’t give a hoot because the series has brought great pleasure to so many young people, including a computer-addled nephew, who wouldn’t otherwise pick up a book except to use as a doorstop.

In my view, there are few bad books, only varying degrees of good books.

Life of Pi is an ok idea, but is the sort of banal literature Jason Steck is mentioning in his Harry Potter post.

http://www.cosmoetica.com/B198-DES140.htm

It’s not coming out till the end of summer, but I’d recommend Steven Pinker’s The Stuff of Thought:

http://www.cosmoetica.com/B598-DES519.htm

He deals with everything from politics to the way people think to the way they name themselves. It’s a great book.

But warning, it’s a tear jerker at the end. But aren’t all books about dogs?

Anyway, I thought about what I’ve read, and these should qualify as ‘light’ reading:

Never Have Your Dog Stuffed ( Alan Alda)

Pope Joan (Donna Cross)

Brick Lane (Monica Ali)

Also, if you don’t mind large series of books, Bernard Cornwell, especially the Sharpe novels. And if anyone likes fantasy, Robert Jordan is great, though there are eleven books in his series so far.

Funny that you should mention Gravity’s Rainbow. I know I have plenty of company in noting that I always have struggled with Pynchon, but I am now over 400 pages into Against the Day, his new 1,300-page opus, and it is easily his most accessible book. And a real hoot.

Meanwhile, I heartily second your recommendation of A Fan’s Notes.

Does this mean I can give up on Gravity’ Rainbow?

I recommend:

A Fan’s Notes.

The Killer Angels.

Battle Cry of Freedom.

I hope all that HTML works.