| Author | Message | ||
     Colin Leslie (Blackabyss) Username: Blackabyss Registered: 02-2010 Posted From: 86.164.67.73 |
There are so many good new books about I want to read them all...now! So faced with a 700-1000 page epic I find the commitment a bit offputting. Finished Under The Dome okay but read a couple of other books at the same time, I want to read Drood but another 800 pages..phew. Anybody else with this problem? Should there be a EU limit of 500 pages with anything more split into seperate books. Only joking of course but like 90mins for a film 400 pages seems just natural for a book. | ||
| Mark_lynch (Mark_lynch) Username: Mark_lynch Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 212.74.96.200 |
I'd skip DROOD. It's not Simmons's best. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.27.30.20 |
He should have left it unfinished. That would have been funny. | ||
| Colin Leslie (Blackabyss) Username: Blackabyss Registered: 02-2010 Posted From: 86.164.67.73 |
I've heard conflicting reports..I'll put it aside for a later date. | ||
| Colin Leslie (Blackabyss) Username: Blackabyss Registered: 02-2010 Posted From: 86.164.67.73 |
>>He should have left it unfinished<< If you mean Under The Dome Gary, I think he did! Disappointing ending I thought | ||
| Nathaniel Tapley (Natt) Username: Natt Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 78.146.242.226 |
I've often thought that Gus van Sant missed a similar trick with his shot-for-shot remake of Psycho. Given the lengths Hitchcock went to to make everyone think the mother was the killer before the film's release (holding casting calls for the part of Mrs Bates, etc), Van Sant should have made an exact shot for shot remake until Mrs Bates kills Marion Crane in the shower, and then he could have done what he wanted with an actual old-lady serial killer after that. I always thought that that would have been more in the spirit of the original... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
This is one of the reasons I prefer short stories - novels are just too long. I guess I have the attention span of a goldfish, but I just find it so frustrating having to break off from reading to do other things before I can go back and find out what happens next. So it's short stories for me, or novellas, but rarely full-length novels. I'll pick up an old paperback as novels seemed to be much shorter way back, but current novels - no thanks!  | ||
| Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker) Username: Stephen_theaker Registered: 12-2009 Posted From: 62.30.117.235 |
My bias against long books is declining a bit since I got the Sony reader, now all the inconvenience of lugging them around and forcing them to stay open is gone. But I still prefer shorter ones - the average length of the books I read last year was 215pp. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.110.173.27 |
Anything over 200 pages needs to justify its length... if I sense a book is being padded I bail out after the first nine or ten pages. | ||
| Ian Alexander Martin (Iam) Username: Iam Registered: 10-2009 Posted From: 64.180.64.74 |
I'd hate to specify a page-count for a novel. I refuse to establish word-counts for writers, for that matter. "Look at this novel I've written! It's only ten quid and it's got 500 pages!" Great, if the type is set in 18pt, or if it's 500 pages of ballocks, I've wasted my time and money. Go away now. Now, if someone's got the right number of words that pull you in and keep you up until 4 AM reading the thing, THAT's the right length for a novel. Look at Fahrenheit 451° for instance: hardly hefty in page/word count, but massively affecting in its selected words. I read the first chunk of Johnathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, was quite impressed with the style and wonderful character detail, but after about 200-or-so-pages thought "okay, but… so what else?" You have to do something to move things along, and that's what makes a novel "too long" more than the thickness of binding. | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 86.169.163.57 |
As a teenager I loved overlong epics. I wanted the full-on immersive experience, an alternate world I could drop in and out of and I'd be genuinely sad when there was no more book to read. These days, yeah, books have to justify their length and they rarely do for me. There are just too many things I want to read to feel I can risk devoting so many hours to a single book with no assurance I'll lose myself in it. That said, I'd never want to see restrictions imposed. | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 86.169.163.57 |
Oh, let me clarify that. I mean that very LONG books rarely justify their length for me. I prefer standard novel length, as then I can read more stories. The last great immersive "please don't ever end" epic I read was Iain Pears' An Instance of the Fingerpost. | ||
| Richard_gavin (Richard_gavin) Username: Richard_gavin Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 65.110.174.71 |
Joel wrote: "Anything over 200 pages needs to justify its length... if I sense a book is being padded I bail out after the first nine or ten pages." As do I, Joel. Well said. | ||
| Tartarusrussell (Tartarusrussell) Username: Tartarusrussell Registered: 02-2010 Posted From: 86.136.234.170 |
Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain was the book that made me realise that life is too short to waste on over-long second-rate books. (Especially as the whole of his tedious novel is summarised quite neatly in one of his short stories which deals with the same subject.) I’m glad that I read Melmoth the Wanderer, The Lord of the Rings and others when I was younger. I think I’d look at those behemoths very suspiciously today, especially if a half-dozen slimmer books were competing for my attention. Having said that, I recently read Margaret Atwood’s The Robber Bride and barely noticed the time passing because her writing is so good. (The subject was slightly too thin for the length of the book, but even her padding was elegantly written.) The last book I read which annoyed me because I wanted it to continue was Donna Tartt’s The Little Friend. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 217.43.29.197 |
'The Magic Mountain' is one of my favorite novels. As is Proust's 'In Search of Lost Time'. | ||
| Rhysaurus (Rhysaurus) Username: Rhysaurus Registered: 01-2010 Posted From: 212.219.233.223 |
One of the best novels I've ever read -- John Barth's The Sot-Weed Factor -- is very long. I think it's about 800 pages... But the story is so big in scope and spirit that it needs to be that length. Otherwise it probably wouldn't work as well. The same holds true for Thomas Pynchon's Mason & Dixon and William Gaddis's utterly superb The Recognitions -- among many others! | ||
| Tom_alaerts (Tom_alaerts) Username: Tom_alaerts Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.78.35.185 |
For me it's ok that a book has many pages, but it shouldn't feel "long". Novels (in all genres) tend to be bigger these days - there is a simple marketing reason: buyers think they get more value. And unfortunately not all novels have the depth to carry that many pages. For example, "The shadow of the wind" was a pretty good and rather big novel, but to me it was obvious that the story sagged between 50% and 75% of the book - it could have used trimming there. One of the things I like so much about the short novels of Leo Perutz is precisely that they don't have any fat. Now, when a big novel gets it right, then of course you're in for a wonderful ride. And it's because of this experience that since the last two years I read far less short stories (especially the genre ones which I have often the impression to have read before) but rather try to find big tomes with good storytelling. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
Conversely, some writers seem like the book is two long even if it's only a one sided pamphlet you're reading. It's all down to the quality of the writing. Which version of The Stand do people prefer? I actually prefer the longer version... I'm reading a Mo Hayder at the moment which appears to be over 500 pages, but the margins appear bigger than a lot of books I have and the word count per page is proportionally smaller. It's been deliberately printed to look like it's longer than it is. Weird. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.27.30.20 |
>>>to look like it's longer than it is A level of subterfuge to which you would never stoop, eh, Weber?  | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
n o i w o u l d n e v e r d o t h a t | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.243.247 |
I want to read oh so many novels, and so many are quite long - but I just don't have the patience. It's quite depressing to me. I envy everyone who reads often and much. I just hope it's a spell that will at some point pass from me. I'm always reading, always, but... bits, tiny chunks, slow pace, edging along... like I said, this is very depressing to me.... | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
I'm like that too, Craig - but I don't find it depressing. I just go for short stories rather than novels as I know I don't have the time/patience to get into some weighty tome. I did read lengthy novels (and trilogies) in my teens - Lord of the Rings, Gormenghast, etc - but even then I veered towards the short story more than anything else. I just prefer shorts. | ||
| Ian Alexander Martin (Iam) Username: Iam Registered: 10-2009 Posted From: 64.180.64.74 |
I prefer women in shorts also! …that wasn't what you meant, was it, Caroline? Sorry. Back to the topic, however: I agree that it's the pacing of the novel that makes it feel "long". When it's done correctly, length doesn't matter. [Just a note to say that I've attempted thrice now to re-phrase that last statement to avoid sounding filthy and, as I've not had any success with that, now leave it as is and permit all and sundry to make whatever amusing comments they wish. You're welcome] | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.5.10.174 |
you're right, Caroline. I should just not fight it, and read the shorts. At some point I'll want to read a (long) novel again - and if I don't, I don't.... I do want to read Wolfe's new one, looks pretty good - doesn't look too long - maybe that'll jump start me. | ||
| Colin Leslie (Blackabyss) Username: Blackabyss Registered: 02-2010 Posted From: 86.164.67.73 |
Perhaps it's particularly endemic in the "horror" world. Shorts and novellas generally seem to have just the right balance of characterisation and power to match the horror story making the overall result richer. Having said that I loved The Stand all those years ago so maybe it is just an age thing. I just worked out that at the rate of 1.5 books a week (good going for me) and if I keep going to 80 i can only read another 2808 books. A quick look at Amazon's contemporary horror section reveals 3080 results and that's without all the new books you pesky writers keep coming up with.  | ||
| Gcw (Gcw) Username: Gcw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.167.117.37 |
I read so many novellas now, it seems like a treat to read a full length book once in a while...If I buy a 'King (Under The Dome is on the shelf awaiting..) I kinda want it to be long...King feels better when he has pages to ruminate (except 'It' of course - my least favourite.. ) A good novella is brilliant, and also fits better into our busy lifestyles. A full length novel is a luxury, a bigger effort has to be made to accomodate it,but they can be so rewarding. gcw | ||
| Simon Bestwick (Simon_b) Username: Simon_b Registered: 10-2008 Posted From: 86.24.167.138 |
I'm really going to have to cut, aren't I? | ||
| Tom_alaerts (Tom_alaerts) Username: Tom_alaerts Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.78.35.185 |
> I'm reading a Mo Hayder at the moment which appears to be over 500 pages, but the margins appear bigger than a lot of books I have and the word count per page is proportionally smaller. It's been deliberately printed to look like it's longer than it is. Actually, most Tartarus books have that page design as well, and I do think that such an "airy" layout makes for very relaxed reading. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 217.43.29.197 |
Thinking about it, Proust's "In Search of Lost Time" is both the real and ironic answer to this question. One novel = six very fat books. It is a work of genius, imo. |