[For an audio/vlog version of this story, click here.]
Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, A Christmas Carol, Animal Farm, Brave New World, Crime and Punishment, Great Expectations, Heart of Darkness, Metamorphosis, 1984, Steppenwolf, The Brothers Karamazov, The Handmaid's Tale, The Man with Two Left Feet, War and Peace.
 |
| It's an addiction that our writer feels he should be doing much more of. |
Those are a selection of the fiction books I've read over the last few years. I currently have another few on the go, but I've yet to finish them, hence they're not included.
I refer to them to point out that I do read such works. Yet, I'm usually more content delving into nonfiction, with history, politics, biographies and memoirs being my particular favourites.
I'm not a fan of what I consider to be overwrought text, of overly descriptive prose. Or, to try to put my own creative touch on it, passages that are a fog of flowery language. A little alliteration can work well, after all.
Some novels are more guilty of this descriptive debauchery than others. The ones mentioned at the start are generally in the clear on this charge. And, thus, they are clearer and more enjoyable to read.
That I'm not a follower of flashy fiction matches with my fairly minimalist lifestyle and overall personality, I surmise: 'Keep it simple, stupid.' Being mostly economically inactive these days means I've little choice but to live a simpler existence.
Another factor for my nonfiction preference is that in my younger days, I was more of a newspaper man when it came to reading. I was generally too restless to sit down for long periods with a novel or something similar. When I did start to read long-form literature, I gravitated more towards nonfiction, largely because, I figure, it was like reading a newspaper, just one with a higher word count and a more focused theme.
There's nothing too revelatory in that. As the great English writer Dr Samuel Johnson put it, 'a man should read whatever his immediate inclination prompts him to.' He does qualify this by stating that those who wish to expand their knowledge will most likely have to read material that isn't always to their inclination. But when it comes to reading for enjoyment or relaxation, then obviously it makes sense to go with material that matches your likes.
The chief reasons why I'm forced into the inferior option are, for one, that it's hard to get hold of English-language books in Colombia, particularly in peripheral regions. Additionally, as a mild rover with no fixed abode, it's not that practical to be hauling books around with me from place to place.
Digitised versions weigh nothing, bar the memory they take up on my phone and on cloud storage. And with a restricted budget, the availability, for free, of thousands of classics at gutenberg.org is quite the resource.
So, whether it's nonfiction or fiction, having material to read isn't my problem, even if it isn't in my preferred format.
That I don't get through as many books as I'd like to is more to do with my being what I'll term a ruminating reader. My mind is guilty of wandering, not necessarily in an easily distracted sense, but more a case of thinking about what I'm reading and applying it to situations in my own life. I assume that's a normal enough practice, isn't it?
__________________________________________________________
Listen to The Corrigan Cast podcast here.
Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".
I refer to them to point out that I do read such works. Yet, I'm usually more content delving into nonfiction, with history, politics, biographies and memoirs being my particular favourites.
Fact crazier than fiction
One reason for this preference is that the writing style of nonfiction is usually, although not always, a little more straightforward than novels. Or at least nonfiction doesn't tend to go into overdrive just to describe certain everyday activities or sights, such as supping on a cup of coffee or staring up at the sky.I'm not a fan of what I consider to be overwrought text, of overly descriptive prose. Or, to try to put my own creative touch on it, passages that are a fog of flowery language. A little alliteration can work well, after all.
Some novels are more guilty of this descriptive debauchery than others. The ones mentioned at the start are generally in the clear on this charge. And, thus, they are clearer and more enjoyable to read.
That I'm not a follower of flashy fiction matches with my fairly minimalist lifestyle and overall personality, I surmise: 'Keep it simple, stupid.' Being mostly economically inactive these days means I've little choice but to live a simpler existence.
'Digitised versions of books on a device are far inferior to having a real copy in hand, where you can physically turn the pages.'This isn't to suggest that nonfiction is prosaic compared to other genres. Stories about events that are happening and have happened, about people who are living and have lived, are just as compelling as, if not more compelling than, those that people have concocted in their imaginations.
Another factor for my nonfiction preference is that in my younger days, I was more of a newspaper man when it came to reading. I was generally too restless to sit down for long periods with a novel or something similar. When I did start to read long-form literature, I gravitated more towards nonfiction, largely because, I figure, it was like reading a newspaper, just one with a higher word count and a more focused theme.
There's nothing too revelatory in that. As the great English writer Dr Samuel Johnson put it, 'a man should read whatever his immediate inclination prompts him to.' He does qualify this by stating that those who wish to expand their knowledge will most likely have to read material that isn't always to their inclination. But when it comes to reading for enjoyment or relaxation, then obviously it makes sense to go with material that matches your likes.
Digitised dilemma
One of the biggest impediments I have to reading more these days is in getting access to the books I want, in physical form that is. Digitised versions of tomes on a device are far inferior to having a real copy in hand, where you can physically turn the pages.The chief reasons why I'm forced into the inferior option are, for one, that it's hard to get hold of English-language books in Colombia, particularly in peripheral regions. Additionally, as a mild rover with no fixed abode, it's not that practical to be hauling books around with me from place to place.
Digitised versions weigh nothing, bar the memory they take up on my phone and on cloud storage. And with a restricted budget, the availability, for free, of thousands of classics at gutenberg.org is quite the resource.
So, whether it's nonfiction or fiction, having material to read isn't my problem, even if it isn't in my preferred format.
That I don't get through as many books as I'd like to is more to do with my being what I'll term a ruminating reader. My mind is guilty of wandering, not necessarily in an easily distracted sense, but more a case of thinking about what I'm reading and applying it to situations in my own life. I assume that's a normal enough practice, isn't it?
__________________________________________________________
Listen to The Corrigan Cast podcast here.
Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".
No comments:
Post a Comment