Summary Donna Tartt
What we enjoyed about the book:
- very engaging, “pleasantly surprised”
- hating all characters was the point?
- Julian a mysterious figure: cult leader? enigma? shadow figure? dangerous? at fault for Henry’s fate?
- “I loved this book”
- tragic novel, made a person feel sick and sad
- invites a reread
- pretentious students fun
- humour: “Francis is such an icon”
- book haunts you after you finish reading
- what did Henry whisper to Camilla???
- detective story inverted, fascinating
- homeric beginning: Bunny will die –> waiting for it do happen; whodunnit in reverse
- tons of plottwists
- writing style captivating, pleasant to read
- narrative situation: Richard looking back, can we trust him? Nah
- unreliable narrator
- “I liked the friendship”
- a secret kept them together, cult, are they really friends?
- class difference very interesting, made Richard more human
- very toxic relationships
- Richard as the outsider
- Can we trust Richard at all?
- winter episode terrible but told us a lot about Richard
- fairly small group, good for readers to remember who they were
- Henry: we need to know more, idealised Julian to a fault
- “morbid longing for the picturesque” – vibe
- “they’re all damaged and they all think they’ve found solace”
- money is not an obstacle for the group, only Richard is poor: yet he is the only one who manages to obtain a degree and find financial stability?
- priviledge: dark academia, the arts, philosophy, philology –> far from the mundane
- giving yourself over to pure thought clashes with Richard and his material needs
- transition when reading: I want this, dream, nightmare, reality
- rich people (in academia): “they can afford to be assholes about it”
- making the decision to kill Bunny –> paint Bunny as the villain –> Bunny also violates the aesthetics of the group
- various interpretations exist alongside each other: supernatural involvement? magic? drugs? All of it?
- Fantasy reading of it: https://www.tor.com/2022/02/04/how-donna-tartts-the-secret-history-hides-fantasy-in-plain-sight/
- Euripides: https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0092 –> great tragedy, chorus in plot, Dionysus –> frenzy
- Nietzsche: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/51356/51356-h/51356-h.htm
- Nietzsche –> Apollonian and Dionysian –> Apollo: rationality, order, art, msic, poetry, logic; Dionysus: wine, irrationality, chaos, passion, dance, no control
- Richard not being part of the ritual makes him twice the outsider, by killing Bunny he finally joins the group for real
- before / after structure good
- fragmented narration of the murder –> suspense
- puzzle narrative
- Bunny murder not at the end, unexpected
- 5 Act structure by Aristotle
- “Goldfinch” by Tartt: character from “Secret History” shows up, nice!
- fascination of The Occult: secret knowledged, limited access –> speaks to us –> bigger than us
- several secret histories: the group has one, the ritual is a secret too
- book about obsession
What we discussed:
- chapters too long
- everybody’s toxic
- first part was great, second part just “what the hell”
- incest part a big NO
- all female characters are horrible?
- dark academia = toxic masculinity? objectifying women?
- “I was waiting for Charles to die”
- Henry killing himself out of character?
- Richard as narrator: do we truly know what happened?
- “I liked that not everything lined up” –> question everything also frustrating
- “book made me feel extremely stupid”
- passion of the characters: extreme emotions not something we feel yet still feel jealous about?
- layers: illusion of characters but also readers
- checklist for everything gothic, sublime, romanticism
- plottwists in the end not as grand as expected (like Greek classics, for instance)
- genre limits the book a bit?
- stylistically the book could’ve been more experimental
- Richard not likeable: motivation does not always make sense — what is he not telling us? Richard an opportunist but not as obvious and disruptive as Bunny
- dark academia: white, rich men?
- no one sees Camilla as a person? Implicit criticism?
Ratings:
- 4/5 Henry deserved better
- 3/5 Julian Daddy TM Issues
- 4/5 Henry ghosts
- 4/5 Bunnies
- 5/5 Mystery pill bottles on my shelf
- 3/5 It could’ve been shorter
- 5/5 I’m toxic af and I’m proud of it
- 4/5 everybody needs therapy please
- 4/5 If we were villains was better
- 5/5 Greek sacrifices
A few spots are left…hurry!
BSFG Winter Plan
Join us!
You want so join us for the Secret Santa? Sign up before the end of November!!!!
https://www.wichtel-o-mat.de/register/3rdowz724b6vs-20oztruqnp4sp
Summary Liu
What did you like about “The Three Body Problem”
- fuse science / histoy –> “completely mindblown”
- 2nd read: “I loved it even more”
- China, Cultural Revolution, other cultures in video game –> fascinating
- find out alongside characters –> interesting
- gigantic scope: China, Earth, Universe
- Well researched book
- books made us question things, researching, reading up
- unexpected twists and turns
- rooted in history and then extrapolated extremely
- alien civilisation and clashing political and existential questions
- lots of effort, impressive
- needs to be reread
- China content more interesting for some than the scifi bits
- reversed trope: Earth & humanity as a haven
- freedom not guaranteed
- writing style very precise
- felt very realistic
- we want to become badass STEM researchers now too
- dark parts of science but also humanity
- What is good? What is evil?
- What do you do when faced with an unbeatable enemy?
- quite dystopian: workers in dystopian system also on other planet
- book 2&3 escalate even more –> unimaginable scope
- the foe is not a nameless, lovecraftian horror but a society gone wrong
- Religious faith in the aliens?
- fighting for Earth?
- Ecocriticism
- Forbidden literature –> current issue
- no limit of imagination
- Cultural Revolution a new angle
- within Chinese literature, the book is quite influential –> scifi
- Charakters not only intellectuals but also normal people
- Dehydrate! (Doctor Who vibes!)
- not super action packed but still fascinating
- main characters and time changesd all the time: jigsaw puzzle fascinating and annoying
- Ken Liu great translator, needs a shoutout. But: order of story differs, German translation supposedly has more content, more info here: https://www.wired.com/2016/10/wired-book-club-ken-liu-interview/ + https://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/ueqc7n/talked_with_a_mandarin_speaker_about_the_three/ –> English translation starts with Cultural Revolution, Chinese original has this in the middle but Liu wanted it to be different
What we discussed:
- being a writer in China is hard, judging the author?: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/06/24/liu-cixins-war-of-the-worlds
- too science-y for some, “I can’t look up everthing”
- computer game very different from the rest
- escalates too much maybe?
- too many coincidences to be realistic
- Beginning of book so very different from the ending, vibe changed entirely
- Trisolarians a bit silly? Why not evacuate earlier?
- No emotional connection to some characters
- Villain origin story fun but also…weird?
- Too many characters?
- Scope a bit much if you are used to more contained scifi, if you come from “Foundation” or “Expanse” universes, you’re grand
Ratings:
- 5/10 social score points: not interested in reading the sequels but a unique book
- 5/5 Chaotic Eras: “2nd reread and I will reread them all again”
- 4/5 Trisolarians: gonna read the sequels
- 5/5 jawdropping plottwists: “I was like daaaamn”
- 4/5 suns: interested in sequels, but could be a bit shorter
- 4/5 Stars: good but too scifi for me, still entertaining
- 4/5 too much info dump and science
- 4/5 solar systems: will read sequels
More recommendations:
- Chinese adaptation of the book pretty good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqK2oDPzfx4
- Netflix adaptation coming soon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lj99Uz1d50
Meeting today!
Summary Frankenstein
What we enjoyed about the book:
- convoluted narrative situation, embedded stories, framing device
- Waltons is a “massive Frankenstein stan”
- unreliable narrators are great
- “I liked it” despite it being a classic
- super influential
- timeless, so many retellings
- different than imagined –> adaptations have a huge influence
- very descriptive, good nature / emotion descriptions
- transcends the idea of monster vs. good person
- creature = monster? Victor = monster? creature = victim? –> blurred lines
- change of how we like / perceive characters interesting
- old book but writing style not too old fashioned
- more layers / questions what we know
- limits of science
- creature / creator, hubris
- exciting Gothic tale
- transcends the limits of the genre
- “such an iconic story”
- Mother of Scifi just slays
- subtexts: anticolonial, vegetarian, feminist
- impressive
- psychological dimension fascinating
- 1930s movie not like the book at all
- teenage angst novel
- What if Frankenstein raised the creature properly? Daddy Issues TM
- Do we create our own monsters?
- theatre adaptation with Benedict Cumberbatch great
- radical
- man giving birth to a creature
- queer reading so cool
- scope fascinating: Cologne, the Rhine, Italy, Arctic circle
- weird that he’s so shocked by the creature, Frankenstein made it???
- movie adaptations messing with our head
- Monster Theory!
What we discussed / disliked:
- Romantic English bit annoying
- very stupid Gothic idea: monster finds books in forest? Seriously?
- undefined Middle Eastern problematic, half Christian so good? Wild.
- backstory of French revolution weak
- travel log format annoying to some
- nobody writes letters like this, honestly
- Frankenstein & Walton: gay?
- scientification visible but details wonky
- did Viktor give the creature genitals? Envy?
- cottage philosophers romanticised af
- Viktor is just clueless and runs away from his problems
- very buff creature (OH ROCKY)
- super rich people problems in parts
- Daddy Issues TM
- monster just needed a pet and a hug to be ok-ish?
Ratings (in weird categories):
- 5/5 creepy teachers of ancient knowledge for a classic
- 3/5 classics hidden in a random tree: not easy to read, too many layers?
- 4/5 moving to a different country to outrun your problems: “if it had been a 5 star three years aago, I would’ve remembered more”; important book
- 4/5 brutally but unsurprisingly murdered family members: “as a classic it was really good and easy to enjoy”
- 4/5 brides for his harem: Open questions, who made the monster the way he was? Frankenstein too much, just trying tro justify his bullshit
- 4.5/5 body parts: influence on scifi and Gothic so cool, approachable for a classic, fascinating narrative situation, Mary Shelley just slays
- 4/5 major daddy issues: writing style & Viktor annoying, skipped paragraphs
- STILL A BETER LOVE STORY THAN TWILIGHT
- 4/5 warm hugs for the creature: radical themes, ahead of its time, still relevant today, pacing off
Other books we talked about:
- Children Series by Tchaikovsky was recommended
- China Mieville: Looking for Jack
- Endgame by Beckett
- Audiobook of “In the Life of Puppets” by Klune
- “Equal Rites” by Terry Pratchett
- “Island of Doctor Moreau” by H.G. Wells + “Daughtrer of Doctor Moreau”
- November new Baldree cosy fantasy book coming ❤
Meeting Postponed!
Sadly, tomorrow’s meeting needs to be postponed. Sep 13, 5pm, Rabinstr. 8, Room 2.025
Addison Summary
What we enjoyed about the “The Goblin Emperor”:
- Very limited place-wise, condensed
- Political intrigue the focus and not major fights à strongest point of the book#
- Main character, Maia, is the best, very likeable, thrown into a very hostile environment
- Maia just draws you in
- So much potential: young character who lacks knowledge, nobody expected him to become the emperor (smart to introduce the world to readers!)
- Smart book
- Protagonist who faces racism and adversity
- Philosophical stance of the character is convincing
- Quiet, timid, pondering protagonist à important for a leader
- Could relate to the character a lot
- World building huge focus on language: status, gender à elaborate, “unlike anything I’ve ever read before”
- Readers expected something big to happen but it didn’t
- Navigating a new role and expectations while under intense scrutiny and facing racism
- Witness for the Dead great
- Questioning people very relatable
- Racism in a fantasy setting very smartly set up
- Goblin tradition: heritage, memory, ancestry, religion
- Industrialisation, feminism touched upon too à smartly done
- Felt organic in terms of world-building and character plots
- Society felt very real, patriarchal setting contested but not extremely or unrealistically so
- Female bodyguard one of the best characters
- “It just calmed me down”, nice
- Friendship wonderfully depicted
- Bureaucracy / politics fascinating
What we discussed:
- Too many names (list at the beginning of the book helpful) à makes sense though (protagonist and reader confused)
- Audiobook hard to follow because of the names, audiobook not recommendable
- Magic system and religious system could’ve needed more detail (we want to know more!)
- Not enough fantasy almost à not enough magic
- The beginning was a bit meh
- Sad it’s a standalone novel
- Ending felt a bit rushed
- Ending too smooth? Too much summary?
- Pacing in the ending off à too easy? (Maia grows into his new role of course, but it felt very easy)
Ratings:
- Not finished yet: 3.5-4/5 ghost detectives “because I like the focus on language and that it’s limited to the city and not the whole world, but the amount of characters confused me”
- 4/5 stars: “so much in there that I really enjoyed but so difficult to get into at first”
- 5/5: “I’m not usually a high fantasy person […] but I really enjoyed reading it”, “I also want to finish it because I want to know how it ends”
- 5/5
Other books we talked about:
- “The Hanging Artist” Jon Steinhagen: Franz Kafka is a detective and has to solve a crime (“actually better than I thought it would be”), German title: “Kafka und der Tote am Seil”
- “Dune” by Frank Herbert: full cast audiobook very good; rereading it for the second time fascinating
- “Daisy Jones and the Six” audiobook + TV series really good