I love a good booklist, if for no other reason than the arguments that ensue. I think that's what lists are for. And with NPR's new Your Picks: 100 Top Science Fiction, Fantasy books I was not disappointed. The trash talk in the comments was delightfully nutty. The best thing is that everyone in the comments is trashing the people who made the list, who are...the same people as the commentors. So you knew it wouldn't be a definitive list anyway.
I went through the comments to create a alternate list, but there weren't that many people who stayed on point. There seemed to be many who think that fantasy and science fiction should be two lists, but then they don't seem to have a problem with them being shelved in the bookstores in that exact fashion. There were many who brought up the lack of Rowling, L'Engle and Pullman but it was clearly stated that they're saving YA for another list. There was grumbling about Ender's Game being YA but that's not how it was originally published.
So once you get over all that stuff, here are the authors most mentioned that did not end up on the list and were missed by more than one or two people.
By far the name most mentioned was Octavia E. Butler, and for good reason, followed by Samuel R. Delany, usually in the same comment.
The next most passionate outpouring was for Harlan Ellison. I think because he's predominately a short story writer and has many books, any votes for him probably got diffused. Right after him would be his friend Robert Silverberg.
There was some moaning about other Philip K. Dick books, but he's on the list so maybe they should have nominated his whole collection instead.
Poul Anderson and Jack Vance and C. J. Cherryh had a number of fans.
The other honorable mentions would go to H. P. Lovecraft, John Brunner, Mary Doria Russell, Alfred Bester, Joanna Russ, Fritz Leiber, Stanislaw Lem, Edgar Rice Burroughs, and E. E. "Doc" Smith.
There. Now you have an alternate list of great writers to check out. Have fun.
August 17, 2011
August 9, 2011
Best Thing I Saw While Weeding Last Year
"Weeding" is, of course, when we librarians go through old stuff (in this case videos) and pull the items that are either worn out, not circulating or just plain out of date. Oh, and by the way, shouldn't it be "attempts?" Sheesh.
August 8, 2011
The Skeptic's Dictionary for Kids!
I'm sure you've come across Robert T. Carroll's wonderful resource, The Skeptic's Dictionary. I had two students last year who asked me questions and when we went to look them up online, ended up on his site. One was a third grader looking up ghosts and one was a fifth grader looking up Bigfoot.
I was happy that they found The Skeptic's Dictionary, rather than some woo-woo believer sites, but some of the ads and much of the content wasn't really on their level.
Problem solved! Now Dr. Carroll has created an ad-free and more heavily illustrated version called the Skeptic's Dictionary for Kids! He recommends it for those curious kids from ages nine and up.
It's the perfect resource for those kids I always have looking for more and more info on aliens, astrology, the 2012 end-of-the-world nonsense, and all the famous monsters with plenty of links for further reading. This will be perfect for teaching critical thinking skills in the library in a fun and engaging way.
August 6, 2011
Back in the Saddle
Whew!
Just got finished with the first week back. This is the week for teachers, not students. We start seeing the little darlings on Monday.
So let's see. What have I been up to since last we chatted? Well, reading mostly, of course.
First of all, I'm sorry to say I read O. Scott Card's Ender's Shadow. I'm sorry because I really don't have very good feelings for Mr. Card as a fellow human (his extreme anti-gay activism is upsetting), but I liked the book okay. It wasn't as good as Ender's Game, of course, but it'd had been so long since I'd read the first one that this ''parallel novel'' was pretty interesting. I needed something I was pretty sure I would like because I had to abandon another highly-anticipated (by me anyway) science fiction novel that I gave a good chance to but finally had to part ways with. When I guiltily told My Lovely Bride that I was giving up on it, she said, ''Nanci Atwell would be so proud of you.'' (Only reading teachers will get that joke.) But I think I'm finally done with Card. At what point does an author's personal beliefs tip you over into disregarding his/her work? I mean I still like Dickens but hear he was an unpleasant fellow. I think Isaac Asimov was a great guy but admit he isn't the greatest prose stylist. But Roald Dahl? An insufferable boor. Only because I know he was heavily edited can I enjoy some of his stuff with my daughter. I guess ''disregarding his/her work'' isn't quite right. His books are still fine. I just don't want to read them anymore.
Which brings up another recent read, The Pleasures of Reading in an Age of Distraction by Alan Jacobs. His thesis is not that people aren't reading enough, but that he hears from many people that seem to lack confidence in their reading choices. These people often turn to books in the vein of Mortimer and Adler's How to Read a Book and similar tomes. He says that's a good way to take the fun out of reading. And fun, or at least pleasure, is the point. It's not supposed to be like hitting the treadmill or eating your greens. It's supposed to be fun. So go ahead and read whatever interests you, whether that be Jane Austen or Archeology. He has a few pointers on how to achieve this by reading on a whim, but not aimlessly. He also advocates for different kinds of reading including classics, poetry, nonfiction, etc. Oh, and he encourages some re-reading, which I'm starting to think I should do more often. In college we regularly re-read books to make sure we were getting everything out of them. But since then, I've been more of a ''too many books, too little time'' type of a guy. But since my memory is so bad, I'm sure I'd enjoy re-reading some old favorites now and then.
I especially liked his sections on his embrace of the Kindle. He articulated a few things I liked about it but hadn't been able to express. It's like a reading focusing machine which somehow encourages more and effortless reading. I'm less likely to flip to the table of contents or check how many pages are left in the chapter and just keep reading. Yet he also discusses the pros and cons of note-taking when it comes to using physical books versus electronic ones and makes recommendations on which format is better for different purposes.
I couldn't take a lot of notes because I got my copy from the library. On a whim, of course.
Two other books I read this summer that had similar themes were Neil Gaiman's Anansi Boys and John Connolly's The Book of Lost Things, both of which had been on my TBR list for an extended time and I'm happy to have finally tackled. ''Tackled'' isn't really the right word because they were both delightful.
I suppose I'd put off the Gaiman because it's a kind of, sort of sequel to his American Gods but obviously not as good. I really liked Gods (his homage to Harlan Ellison, another favorite of mine). I guess I was reluctant because I knew it just couldn't compare and I didn't want to be disappointed. But I needn't have worried because it was simply a different kind of novel. This was more Anansi-centric and therefore more playful in a P. G. Wodehouse kind of way. The Lost Things was darker, but very good. I was lucky enough to get the book in a give-away from C. B. James who has a much more complete review here. I'll just say that I enjoyed it very much and it was more enjoyable still having read the Gaiman only a few books earlier. The ''Crooked Man'' is a darker version of the Trickster than Anansi. More Rumpelstilskin than Br'er Rabbit. The use of old tales and their influence on the modern-day events of the books are similar. The Connolly is more like Alice in Wonderland in that the main character goes into another world more than the characters in the Gaiman. In the Gaiman the characters enter other worlds, but only briefly in response to the events in the story.
In kid books, I read Smile by Raina Telqemeier which is a comic book memoir of her time in middle school through early high school and some serious dental work and trauma she had to go through during that already tough and self-conscious time in her life. It was brilliant but man oh man that ''gum scraping'' thing still gives me the willies. I know, I know, the Gaiman, the Connolly, even the Card were full of monsters, children in peril and death. But it's the gum-scraping that freaks me out. What can I say?
I've read some things recently about the Jeanne Birdsall books about her Penderwicks family. Stuff about how these are more nostalgic books for adults than something being embraced by kids. Well, all I have is anecdotal evidence but I talked with a third grade girl I know who loves them and a fourth grade boy who enjoyed them and a sixth grade boy who loved them as well. So there you go.
Just got finished with the first week back. This is the week for teachers, not students. We start seeing the little darlings on Monday.
So let's see. What have I been up to since last we chatted? Well, reading mostly, of course.
First of all, I'm sorry to say I read O. Scott Card's Ender's Shadow. I'm sorry because I really don't have very good feelings for Mr. Card as a fellow human (his extreme anti-gay activism is upsetting), but I liked the book okay. It wasn't as good as Ender's Game, of course, but it'd had been so long since I'd read the first one that this ''parallel novel'' was pretty interesting. I needed something I was pretty sure I would like because I had to abandon another highly-anticipated (by me anyway) science fiction novel that I gave a good chance to but finally had to part ways with. When I guiltily told My Lovely Bride that I was giving up on it, she said, ''Nanci Atwell would be so proud of you.'' (Only reading teachers will get that joke.) But I think I'm finally done with Card. At what point does an author's personal beliefs tip you over into disregarding his/her work? I mean I still like Dickens but hear he was an unpleasant fellow. I think Isaac Asimov was a great guy but admit he isn't the greatest prose stylist. But Roald Dahl? An insufferable boor. Only because I know he was heavily edited can I enjoy some of his stuff with my daughter. I guess ''disregarding his/her work'' isn't quite right. His books are still fine. I just don't want to read them anymore.
Which brings up another recent read, The Pleasures of Reading in an Age of Distraction by Alan Jacobs. His thesis is not that people aren't reading enough, but that he hears from many people that seem to lack confidence in their reading choices. These people often turn to books in the vein of Mortimer and Adler's How to Read a Book and similar tomes. He says that's a good way to take the fun out of reading. And fun, or at least pleasure, is the point. It's not supposed to be like hitting the treadmill or eating your greens. It's supposed to be fun. So go ahead and read whatever interests you, whether that be Jane Austen or Archeology. He has a few pointers on how to achieve this by reading on a whim, but not aimlessly. He also advocates for different kinds of reading including classics, poetry, nonfiction, etc. Oh, and he encourages some re-reading, which I'm starting to think I should do more often. In college we regularly re-read books to make sure we were getting everything out of them. But since then, I've been more of a ''too many books, too little time'' type of a guy. But since my memory is so bad, I'm sure I'd enjoy re-reading some old favorites now and then.
I especially liked his sections on his embrace of the Kindle. He articulated a few things I liked about it but hadn't been able to express. It's like a reading focusing machine which somehow encourages more and effortless reading. I'm less likely to flip to the table of contents or check how many pages are left in the chapter and just keep reading. Yet he also discusses the pros and cons of note-taking when it comes to using physical books versus electronic ones and makes recommendations on which format is better for different purposes.
I couldn't take a lot of notes because I got my copy from the library. On a whim, of course.
Two other books I read this summer that had similar themes were Neil Gaiman's Anansi Boys and John Connolly's The Book of Lost Things, both of which had been on my TBR list for an extended time and I'm happy to have finally tackled. ''Tackled'' isn't really the right word because they were both delightful.
I suppose I'd put off the Gaiman because it's a kind of, sort of sequel to his American Gods but obviously not as good. I really liked Gods (his homage to Harlan Ellison, another favorite of mine). I guess I was reluctant because I knew it just couldn't compare and I didn't want to be disappointed. But I needn't have worried because it was simply a different kind of novel. This was more Anansi-centric and therefore more playful in a P. G. Wodehouse kind of way. The Lost Things was darker, but very good. I was lucky enough to get the book in a give-away from C. B. James who has a much more complete review here. I'll just say that I enjoyed it very much and it was more enjoyable still having read the Gaiman only a few books earlier. The ''Crooked Man'' is a darker version of the Trickster than Anansi. More Rumpelstilskin than Br'er Rabbit. The use of old tales and their influence on the modern-day events of the books are similar. The Connolly is more like Alice in Wonderland in that the main character goes into another world more than the characters in the Gaiman. In the Gaiman the characters enter other worlds, but only briefly in response to the events in the story.
In kid books, I read Smile by Raina Telqemeier which is a comic book memoir of her time in middle school through early high school and some serious dental work and trauma she had to go through during that already tough and self-conscious time in her life. It was brilliant but man oh man that ''gum scraping'' thing still gives me the willies. I know, I know, the Gaiman, the Connolly, even the Card were full of monsters, children in peril and death. But it's the gum-scraping that freaks me out. What can I say?
I've read some things recently about the Jeanne Birdsall books about her Penderwicks family. Stuff about how these are more nostalgic books for adults than something being embraced by kids. Well, all I have is anecdotal evidence but I talked with a third grade girl I know who loves them and a fourth grade boy who enjoyed them and a sixth grade boy who loved them as well. So there you go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)