roguefan
Well-Known Member
I'm reading a book called Wolf Brother by Michelle Paver. It's part one of the The Chronicles of Ancient Darkness. Got to Chapter 4 last night so I'm not that far in, It's good though.
Damn right it is. But don't read them in chronoligical order the first time Irish. Read them in publishing order. I haven't slogged through the Legends of Dune Trilogy, or the prequel, but I did make it through the others. I'd definitely recommend doing it in the order of publication rather than chronology, because otherwise the significance of some things is likely to be lost on you. Its that kind of complicated and interesting story.Baxter said:It's all about Idaho man.....
Caduceus said:Damn right it is. But don't read them in chronoligical order the first time Irish. Read them in publishing order. I haven't slogged through the Legends of Dune Trilogy, or the prequel, but I did make it through the others. I'd definitely recommend doing it in the order of publication rather than chronology, because otherwise the significance of some things is likely to be lost on you. Its that kind of complicated and interesting story.
Baxter said:It's all about Idaho man.....
I'm going to have to disagree. Couldn't you look at it as reading things in the order they were intended, rather than the order they actually came? The story is just too insanely large in the last books, while the first book is relatively contained.DIrishB said:Thats what others have told me, but I'd rather read it in chronological order, like I said I'm a linear freak. And while I might miss out on some of the surprises, the overall scope and story won't be lost on me.
Caduceus said:I'm going to have to disagree. Couldn't you look at it as reading things in the order they were intended, rather than the order they actually came? The story is just too insanely large in the last books, while the first book is relatively contained.
I could not stand that book. A few english professors I work with have told me that I just need to re-read it, but I'm not sure.Planet-man said:Right now I'm reading The Catcher in the Rye for school, and it's pretty good. The only magazine I really read is MAD, and I buy it every single month.
My money's on you using some of the theories in an Ultimate treatment of the Fireheart Corporation.compound said:If you have even a passing interest in economics or social theory (and ESPECIALLY if you like both), I strongly urge you to pick up a copy of Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything, by economist Steven Levitt and journalist Stephen J. Dubner.
It's basically adapted from a number of articles by Levitt, using accessible, everyday prose to apply economic principles to a diverse number of topics that most "old-school" economists avoid, like:I don't agree with huge chunks of it, but the ideas explored are totally fascinating, and have a surprising number of real-life applications.
- Roe v. Wade as a cause for the drop in crime during the 1980's and 1990's (from the article The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime).
- The surprisingly low wages of crack cocaine dealers.
- The surprisingly low wages of crack cocaine dealers.
Plus, the tone of the writing is casual and easy to follow, without questioning the reader's intelligence, or over-simplifying things in a patronizing "For Dummies" kind of way.
Dr.Strangefate said:Read Anansi Boys.
I really enjoyed that book. It was awesome.Fuzzy Birds said:At the moment, I'm still chewing my way through the fiercely interesting A Short History Of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson. I can't count the amount of times I've had to put the book down and have a little ponder about what I'd just read. Seriously eye opening, thought provoking, witty and generally stunning stuff.
Caduceus said:I really enjoyed that book. It was awesome.