BTT: Influence

Are your book choices influenced by friends and family? Do their recommendations carry weight for you? Or do you choose your books solely by what you want to read?

I usually choose books myself because there aren't many people around me who read a lot. I love it when someone suggests a good book, and I'm always open to suggestions from friends, but I mostly have to rely on the internet and book bloggers for good book suggestions.

In recent days I've been looking at bukluv.com as another source of reading suggestions. Since I created the website a couple of months ago, quite a few of my friends have registered, and I can easily see what they're reading and that way I've been getting some great suggestions. Do take a few minutes to check out the site.

(Disclaimer: I am the developer of bukluv, so this actually is shameless self-promotion. *wink* But the site is free to use and I'm not making money out of it, so I suppose I shouldn't feel too guilty.)

How do you choose the books you read? Fellow bloggers? Friends suggestions? Or do you read whatever you like without paying much attention to others suggestions?

BTT: Which end?

It's been almost a year since my last post here, and work has kept me from reading much in recent months. Answering this week's BTT question will be a nice way to get things rolling again. :) This week's question on Booking Through Thrusday:

In general, do you prefer the beginnings of stories? Or the ends?

I guess the whole story matters to me, not just the beginning or the end. Some stories have a great beginning and then falter midway, and some start weakly and then end beautifully. Yet others may not be so good at the beginning or the end, but you can't put them down in the middle. So it all depends on the book.

If I really had to choose, I'd prefer a book with a great ending, because I wouldn't want to go through an entire book with high expectations only to be let down in the final pages.

I really must apologize for this bit of shameless self promotion here. ;-) But I guess the readers of this blog won't mind since it is about books anyway. :)

I've been working on developing a website where book lovers can write opinions in 250 characters or less. I would encourage you to go ahead and sign up for it and give it a try. The website is called bukluv and it only takes a minute to register. Also, we're working on making it easy for bloggers to share the reviews they've written on their blogs through bukluv, but that feature isn't ready yet.

Again, here's the link: Bukluv.

Once again, I apologize for bringing this up in a post about something else, but I thought some of you might like it. :)

BTT: Unread

Today's question on Booking Through Thursday:

Is there a book that you wish you could "unread"? One that you disliked so thoroughly you wish you could just forget that you ever read it? (Suggested by C in DC)

I'm one of those people who rarely stops reading a book after starting it, so there are a few books that I wish I had never picked up. As for "unreading", I don't think I want to forget that I read those books; at least I should be able to remember not to read the same books (or similar ones) in future.

If I had to mention books that I would rather never have read, I'd name Lucky Jim by Kingsley Amis, Nineteen Seventy Four by David Peace, Catch-22 by Joseph Heller and The Road to Gandolfo/Omaha books by Robert Ludlum.

Do you ever continue reading a book despite knowing that you won't like it, thereby adding list of books to "unread"? Or do you stop reading the moment you know the book isn't the kind you like? I believe I'm in the minority that reads books anyway even when the know they don't like it.

BTT: Gold Medal Reading

With the Olympics games going on in Beijing, this week's Booking Through Thursday question is about sports.

Do you or have you ever read books about the Olympics? About sports in general? Fictional ones? Or non-fiction? Or both?

Do you consider yourself a sports fan? Because, of course, if you’re a rabid fan and read about sports constantly, there’s a logic there; if you hate sports and never read anything sports-related, that, too... but you don’t have to love sports to enjoy a good sports story.

The only sports related book I remember reading is John Grisham's novel, Bleachers (review) about a high school American football team. However, this book was more about the people in the team than the game itself.

I do consider myself a sports fan, although nobody would call me a rabid one. I follow cricket and the EPL and there are a lot of football related feeds in my feed reader, but that never really made me look for sports related books. I rarely read biographies or memoirs, and sports related fiction isn't very common. So I think my sports related reading will mostly be confined to football blogs and the sports page of the newspaper. ;-)

On to an unrelated topic now... my friend Varun has written a short story on his blog called The Foreseen. Please drop by his blog to read it if you have the time. :)

BTT: Endings

Last week's Booking Through Thursday question was about memorable first lines from books. This week's question is quite similar, but I find it a lot more difficult to answer this one.

What are your favourite final sentences from books? Is there a book that you liked specially because of its last sentence? Or a book, perhaps that you didn’t like but still remember simply because of the last line?

A lot of people mentioned last week that they hardly ever notice opening sentences. I look for interesting opening sentences, which is why I made a long list of favourite opening sentences. (Btw, why hasn't anyone recognised that last one? And here I was, thinking it was too easy...)

This question, however, wouldn't make much sense unless we change "final sentences" to "endings". No author is going to worry too much about how the last sentence is going to sound; it's the beginning that might catch (or not) somebody's attention. But endings are still very important, in that sometimes people might end up hating an excellent book just because the ending was bad.

If I really had to mention a famous last line, I'd say nothing can beat "they lived happily ever after", although I don't remember any book that actually ended that way. Nor do I remember one that starts with "once upon a time..." even though you could call it one of the most famous opening sentences. ;-)

Anyway, coming to our question, I can't say I have ever radically changed my opinion about a book because of the ending. There are many books, where I was disappointed with the way things were wrapped up. Bel Canto (review) is a perfect example of that. The book was rather good, but the ending came as something of a shock. The epilogue of the book just didn't fit in with the rest of the story.

A similar case is the last Harry Potter book. I didn't exactly hate the epilogue, but the story was wrapped up well by the end of the final chapter and the epilogue looked rather out of place. But both cases, the endings didn't make me like the books any less.

As for really good endings, I loved the way Nicholas Sparks left room for hope at the end of A Walk to Remember by giving an ambiguous ending.

Frederick Forsyth is an author who writes some great endings. His book, The Devil's Alternative waits till the very last paragraph to reveal the biggest plot twist. Now that's how a book should end.

I couldn't think of any last sentences from books, except for the "all was well" from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Do you remember any last sentences from books? And could a good last sentence have the kind of impact a great opening sentence has?

BTT: Memorable First Lines

Here's this week's question on Booking Through Thursday. And thanks Deb, for using another one of my suggestions. :)

What are your favourite first sentences from books? Is there a book that you liked specially because of its first sentence? Or a book, perhaps that you didn’t like but still remember simply because of the first line?

Many authors try to make a strong first impression for their book with the opening sentence. There are books with great opening sentences that end up disappointing, and some that begin in an ordinary way but are excellent books nonetheless. The opening sentence may not be an accurate indicator of how the rest of the book may be, but it definitely gives us our first impressions of the book.

Moby Dick is the book responsible for getting me interested in the first sentences of books. It had a short yet memorable opening sentence, something that you could always remember. After that I've always kept an eye out for impressive opening sentences and whether or not the book lived up to the standards set by those lines.

Two books I read recently -- The Gunslinger (review) and A Wrinkle in Time -- had memorable opening sentences, and after reading them I decided to post a list of memorable first lines sometime soon, so the timing of this BTT question couldn't be better. Here's a list of 10 of my favourite opening sentences:

1. "Call me Ishmael!" (Moby Dick, Herman Melville)
   
   I put this line on top of the list because I started noticing interesting opening sentences after I read this book. Three short words, but words that will always come to my mind whenever I think of memorable first lines.
   
   
2. "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife. (Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen)
   
   This one is the reason why I added that last part to the question. I didn't like this book all that much, and I never really got around to reading another Austen book after that, but I couldn't ever forget this line.
   
   
3. "At the age of seventeen, working as a delivery boy at Afremov's drugstore in Chicago was the perfect job, because it made it possible for me to steal enough sleeping pills to commit suicide." (The Other Side of Me, (review) Sidney Sheldon)
   
   Sidney Sheldon is the kind of author who gets you hooked to the story with the very first line. And he saved his best opening line for his autobiography.
   
   
4. "The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed." (The Gunslinger, (review) Stephen King)
   
   I finished reading The Gunslinger a couple of days ago and I feel I'll always remember the book for this sentence, if only because it describes the entire plot of the book perfectly in 12 short words.
   
   
5. "If you are interested in stories with happy endings, you would be better off reading some other book." (A Series of Unfortunate Events 1 - The Bad Beginning, Daniel Handler)
   
   That's a clever way to get someone really interested in reading the book. Lemony Snicket keeps warning his readers not to read his books. So far the warnings have failed to discourage me from reading the series.
   
   
6. "Mr and Mrs Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much." (Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, J K Rowling)
   
   Perfectly normal people... that's a great way to start a book about wizards.
   
   
7. "Amerigo Bonasera sat in New York Criminal Court Number 3 and waited for justice; vengeance on the men who had so cruelly hurt his daughter, who had tried to dishonor her." (The Godfather, Mario Puzo)
   
   This book has more memorable lines than any other book I've ever read (maybe the Potter books might compete for that spot, but that's because I've read those too many times) and this opening line definitely deserves a place on this list.
   
   
8. "Billions died in less than twenty-four hours." (Autumn, David Moody)
   
   We're taking billions here, not millions. I'm not sure if I would have been convinced to read the book if I hadn't come across that line first. I ended up liking the book.
   
   
9. "All children, except one, grow up." (Peter and Wendy, J M Barrie)
   
   I was reminded of this line when I watched the movie Finding Neverland yesterday. I didn't like the book very much when I read it first, but after watching the movie about how the book came into existence, I'm prepared to give the book another chance.
   
   
10. "It was a dark and stormy night." (A Wrinkle in Time, Madeleine L'Engle)
    
    This line first appeared in Edward Bulwer-Lytton's 1830 book, Paul Clifford and has become one of the most famous examples of overly flamboyant prose. Even a Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest was started to recognise the worst extremes of this style. Madleine L'Engle used the same opening line in an allusion to Bulwer-Lytton's novel.
    
    

When I made the list I missed one very memorable line. I don't want to leave it out, so I'll type it here and leave it to you to guess which book it is from. It a really easy one, so don't google it before leaving you answer in the comments. Don't cheat, you're not winning any prizes for something this easy. *grin*

"You will rejoice to hear that no disaster has accompanied the commencement of an enterprise which you have regarded with such evil forebodings."

I'm already a day late in posting this reply, so I've had the time to go through other replies to this question. The majority feel that the first line isn't all that important; that the rest of the book matters more. Are you among that majority? Or do you believe that the first sentence has an impact on how we remember the book?

Please do leave a comment on what you think of memorable opening sentences and if you have your own blog, use the name/URL option to link to it so that it's easier to visit your blog. :)

BTT: Doomsday

This week on Booking Through Thursday, we have a question that deals with a situation that would give nightmares to many book lovers...

What would you do if, all of a sudden, your favorite source of books was unavailable?

I always borrow books from the town library. The only reason I call it my favourite source of books is because it's the only source available in this town. There aren't any bookstores in town and if the library burns down I'd have to travel 50km to the neighbouring city if I wanted to get some books to read.

Okay, those of you who are who are rolling around laughing at my predicament, stop right now! Grr...!!! It's not funny being the only book blogger in the world who lives in a place that only has one lousy library (most of you guys probably have more books in your homes than that library) and not even one bookstore.

Anyhow, to continue with the post, I don't expect myself to spend three hours on the two way trip to the next city. (I'm too lazy for that.) I'll probably dig out the e-book DVDs that I have and settle down in front of the monitor to read one of the 25,000+ books in that collection. It sounds crazy, but then... we're talking about doomsday, right?

BTT: Holiday Reading

Today's Booking Through Thursday question:

It’s a holiday weekend here in the U.S., so let’s keep today’s question simple – What are you reading? Anything special? Any particularly juicy summer reading?

I just finished reading John Grisham's book, The Testament. The library here allows me two books at a time and I've finished both so I have nothing else to read until I pick up the next two tomorrow.

I don't usually plan what I'm going to read, so I don't really know what books I'll be reading in the coming days. But now that I've got at least a month (maybe even three or four) with nothing to do but read, so I'll probably try to finish a couple of series I've started. I've read two of the Chronicles of Narnia books, so that will be the first priority. Then there's David Moody's Autumn horror series where I've read and enjoyed (and been terribly frightened) by the first book.

I've been thinking of re-reading all the books I own because I'll leaving to join my job soon and then I won't have much of a chance to read them again. This won't be too difficult because I only own twenty-odd books, and half of them are children's books. :-)

I've been thinking of writing a post asking for suggestions for reading and luckily I can work that into today's BTT question. This way I'll get even more suggestions. ;-) So what books would you suggest for me? Is there something you read recently that you really loved and think I should read?

PS. If you have your own blog, please use the name/url option in the comment form and link back to your blog. It's a lot easier for me to find your blog that way. :-)

BTT: Defining a Reader

Today's question on Booking Through Thursday:

What, in your opinion, is the definition of a “reader.” A person who indiscriminately reads everything in sight? A person who reads BOOKS? A person who reads, period, no matter what it is? Or, more specific? Like the specific person who’s reading something you wrote?

Let me start with the assumption that I am a typical reader. What do I, or for that matter, any reader, read? Books, obviously. Textbooks (usually only on the day before exams.) ;-) Newspaper in the morning. Feed reader twice or thrice a day. News aggregator on the internet. And pretty much anything that I can read.

Now, how am I different from other people whom I'd call non-readers? I have friends who read everything on that list except for books and I don't call them readers. They read all those other things to know what's going on... they read for the knowledge that they get out of those sources. But I doubt if any of them reads the newspaper out of love for reading.

I think that's what separates readers from non-readers. That readers read not just for knowledge, they also read for pleasure. They don't look at reading as a chore that has to be done, but as something that they enjoy doing.

BTT: Trends

Booking Through Thursday.

Have your book-tastes changed over the years? More fiction? Less? Books that are darker and more serious? Lighter and more frivolous? Challenging? Easy? How-to books over novels? Mysteries over Romance?

I'm not really sure how to answer this question. I started reading when I was nine years old with Enid Blyton's mystery novels. Obviously, I'm not reading the same books I was reading back then, but I think the type of books I read hasn't changed much. My reading preference has always leaned overwhelmingly towards fiction with mysteries and thrillers being my favourite genres, and that hasn't changed over the years.

I used to re-read books very frequently earlier, but I don't do that very often now. Another thing that has changed is that I'm a lot more like to try new authors or genres these days than I would have done in the past. And, of course, the books I read have become longer, darker and more serious over the years and now I'm not really averse to trying books that I perceive as "difficult" or "challenging".

What about you? How have your book tastes changed over the years? Please do leave a comment or a link to your answer if you've already answered this question on your blog.

BTT: What is Reading?

Booking Through Thursday. (Suggested by Thisisnotabookclub.)

What is reading, anyway? Novels, comics, graphic novels, manga, e-books, audio books — which of these is reading these days? Are they all reading? Only some of them? What are your personal qualifications for something to be "reading" — why? If something isn’t reading, why not? Does it matter? Does it impact your desire to sample a source if you find out a premise you liked the sound of is in a format you don’t consider to be reading? Share your personal definition of reading, and how you came to have that stance.

Novels and ebooks are the formats that qualify as reading as far as I'm concerned. In case of comics, graphic novels and manga, I feel that the images play a greater part in the storytelling than the words themselves. Audio books certainly do not fall into the category of "reading" material. I mean, how can listening and reading be the same thing?

Novels, of course are the most important form of reading for me. And also the most comfortable. I guess nothing beats the feeling of holding a book in your hands.

A lot of people might disagree with me about classifying ebooks as reading. Staring at the computer screen for hours isn't nearly as good as curling up with a novel. But living in a place with a not-very-good library and not even one bookstore that sells novels means that I do sometimes have to resort to this format. If it hadn't been for Project Gutenberg, I'd never have been able to read so many books by H Rider Haggard or Jules Verne. Most of the classic books in the library look like they were bought at the time when the books were written. (I even came across a 75 year old copy of an H G Wells book once.) I'm much better off sitting in front of the monitor than trying to make sure the book I'm reading doesn't fall into pieces.

I might sound a bit opinionated here, shrugging off graphic novels, audio books and comics as not being reading material. No offence to people who love these formats. I've never read a graphic novel or listened to an audio book and I haven't read comics for some years now. Maybe I'll change my opinion once I've had an opportunity to sample these formats, but for now I won't say I've "read" a book if I've only "listened" to it.

I can't really give a proper definition for reading, but the most important conditions for something to qualify as reading is that it should use words to convey information and that the person "reading" it should be well... reading.

By my definition, then, a lot more things could be added to the list. Magazines, newspaper, Google Reader, blogs. I feel all these can be called reading too. What about you? Would you call this reading? What's your definition of reading?

BTT: Books vs Movies

Another interesting question on Booking hrough Thursday, suggested by Superfastreader.

Books and films both tell stories, but what we want from a book can be different from what we want from a movie. Is this true for you? If so, what’s the difference between a book and a movie?

The best thing about books is that they give so much freedom to the readers to interpret the events and characters whichever way they want. Because so much is left to the imagination of the reader, we feel a lot more involved with the plot.

A movie adaptation, on the other hand, is other people's interpretation of the book -- the directors interpretation of the plot or the actors' interpretation of the characters. I often end up liking the movie adaptation even though I didn't like the book very much.

Take Pride and Prejudice, for instance. I didn't really like Austen's novel very much but enjoyed the 2005 movie. Sometimes the opposite is the case. You could call me a fan of both H G Wells and Steven Spielberg, but I hated Spielberg's interpretation of Wells' classic, The War of the Worlds. And on many occasions I have liked both the book and the movie even though the movie's plot was a little different from the book, like in Jurassic Park or The Bourne Identity.

For me, books and movies are two very different forms of storytelling, but what I'm looking for in both of them is the same -- that I be entertained for the duration for which I am reading the book or watching the movie.

BTT: Vocabulary

This is something I've always been curious about, which is why I suggested this question on Booking Through Thursday. Thanks Deb for posting this question. :)

I’ve always wondered what other people do when they come across a word/phrase that they’ve never heard before. I mean, do they jot it down on paper so they can look it up later, or do they stop reading to look it up on the dictionary/google it or do they just continue reading and forget about the word? (see links to other responses here.)

That question itself pretty much sums up the things I've tried to do when faced with a word I've never seen before. Right now I usually try to guess the meaning from context or just ignore it so I don't have to stop reading. It's so very distracting to have to put down whatever you're reading to find a dictionary or switch on the computer.

I used to keep a dictionary beside me while reading, but having to open an enormous dictionary to find a word while in the middle of a book is very annoying. Pocket dictionaries aren't of much use either because they often don't have words I'm looking for. On one occasion, I even tried jotting down the words on a piece of paper, but ended up with far too many words on the list to have any reasonable chance of remembering more than a very few of them.

Using the define: operator in google helps find the definitions of some unusual words, especially obscure ones or slang words that aren't easy to find. Wordnet dictionary is another good way to look up words because it defines words in clusters rather than individual words. That way I can read the definition along with synonyms which makes remembering the words easier. The problem with using either of these is that they require that the PC remain on all whenever I'm reading, but they're dead useful when I'm reading something on the computer.

BTT: Literature

After a three week break because of exams, followed by problems with the computer, followed by a few days of illness, I'm finally back in the blogosphere. Answering this week's BTT question seems to be the perfect way to get back into blogging mode. :-)

When somebody mentions "literature," what’s the first thing you think of? (Dickens? Tolstoy? Shakespeare?)

Do you read "literature" (however you define it) for pleasure? Or is it something that you read only when you must?

Whenever literature is mentioned, I am always reminded of books written in the 1700s or 1800s or even early 1900s. Shakespeare, Jane Austen and Fyodor Dostoyevsky are some of the names that I usually think of when I think of "literature".

As far as reading literature is concerned, I must admit to not reading too much of it. I have read a few books that could count as literature, but I generally prefer reading recently published books. I always find reading modern fiction easier than reading "literary" works.

BTT: Playing Editor

This week's BTT question (suggested by John Mutford from The Book Mine Set):

How about a chance to play editor-in-chief? Fill in the blanks:

___ would have been a much better book if ___.

I really can't answer this one. There are many books that I would have liked better if they had been different but I'm absolutely sure about one thing... allowing me to edit the books would most certainly not have made them any better! In fact, I would have spoiled the book completely and fewer people would have liked it. I would rather read a book the way it was written by the author and not worry about how it should have been written.

BTT: Hero

You should have seen this one coming... Who is your favorite male lead character? And why? (BTT)

I've been too busy to post here over the last month and I missed (yet again!) last week's question about favourite female lead characters. Good thing too, seeing that I couldn't remember a lot of characters I could have put into that list except for Robyn Ballantyne from Wilbur Smith's book A Falcon Flies which I read recently. These kinds of questions are always difficult because I always end up typing up a quick reply and then remembering more characters after I've published the post. Coming to today's question, there are a few characters I remember right now. Here's the list:

• Andy Dufresne from Stephen King's Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption. He's probably the most patient and determined character I've ever seen. How many people would actually spend two decades planning the perfect prison break?



• Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and Ron Weasley from the Harry Potter series. I couldn't resist putting all three on the list! ;-)



• Patrick Lanigan from John Grisham's The Partner. Sure, he may be a crook, but like Dufresne (who was actually innocent) he's one of the most determined and brilliant fictional people I've seen. You just have to read the book to know what I mean.

That's five people on the list already and I still haven't been able to decide who my favourite character is. I'm sure I'll find that I missed someone who would have topped that list once I go through the replies by other bloggers. For now, I'll give that title to Dumbledore. When I started reading the Potter series, this amiable wizard was the first character I liked and has remained my favourite throughout the series. Plus, he's the coolest headmaster I've ever seen!

BTT: Format

All other things (like price and storage space) being equal, given a choice in a perfect world, would you rather have paperbacks in your library? Or hardcovers? And why? (BTT)

I've never thought about it really. I've always read paperback, so that's the format I'll stick with. I would feel kind of awkward reading a hardcover. Paperbacks are more comfortable to read, easier to carry and lighter than hardcovers.

The one advantage that hardcovers have is that they can be preserved forever. But hey... weren't we talking about a perfect world? In a perfect world, I'd learn to say a firm NO when somebody tries to borrow books from me. Then I wouldn't have to worry about damaged books.

BTT: After the Honeymoon

This week's question from BTT (suggested by Chris):

Have you ever fallen out of love with a favorite author? Was the last book you read by the author so bad, you broke up with them and haven’t read their work since? Could they ever lure you back?

Robin Cook. That's the first name that came to my mind. I fell in love with his medical thrillers a few years ago when I read Fever. But once the novelty of his style wore off, I started asking myself why I wanted to read thrillers that sounded like biology textbooks. It's been a while since I read one of his books but I haven't completely given up his books yet. Maybe someday I'll go back and read one of his older books.

Robert Ludlum is another author I felt this way about. I loved The Icarus Agenda, liked The Bourne Identity to some extent and started getting tired of his cloak-and-dagger style by the time I read The Matlock Paper. But it was later, when I read The Road to Gandolfo/Omaha that I really got annoyed with him. Like in the case of Cook, I haven't completely given up, but it will take a lot of convincing before I read his books again.

BTT: Quirky! & Huh?

This week's BTT question:

Sometimes I find eccentric characters quirky and fun, other times I find them too unbelievable and annoying. What are some of the more outrageous characters you’ve read, and how do you feel about them?

Not an easy one, this. I really have trouble remembering characters I read in books. But I'll try anyway.

1. Hercule Poirot. That's the first name that came to my mind. I've been reading too much Agatha Christie over the last month and I'm almost getting used to Poirot's strange behaviour. But he's definitely one of the most quirky (and funny) characters I've seen.





2. Luna Lovegood. One of the most eccentric and yet one of the most likeable characters I've ever come across. You only need to read the Harry Potter series to know what I mean.





3. Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore. Now that I'm talking about the Potter series, how can I miss Hogwarts' very, very strange Headmaster? I mean, if he doesn't make it to this list, then who will? ;-)





4. General MacKenzie "The Hawk" Hawkins I didn't much like the two books -- The Road to Gandolfo and The Road to Omaha -- in which the Hawk made an appearance. But there's no denying the fact that he is one of the craziest characters to have lived within the pages of a book. unlike the other three characters I've mentioned, I'll put General Hawkins in the "unbelievable and annoying" category.

That's about all I can think of right now. Maybe I should do this meme next week, so I get enough time to remember some more characters, but I've already missed last week's BTT, and I don't want to miss another one this week. Here's my reply to last week's question.

What's your favorite book that nobody else has heard of? You know, not Little Women or Huckleberry Finn, not the latest best-seller... whether they've read them or not, everybody "knows" those books. I'm talking about the best book that, when you tell people that you love it, they go, "Huh? Never heard of it?"

Mark Haddon's touching book about an autistic child, The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time always brings that kind of reaction when I mention it. The closest that anyone got to placing the book in the literary world was when a friend asked me if it was a Sherlock Holmes story. At least he got the source of the title right! :-) (The title was taken from a sentence in Silver Blaze, a short story featuring Sherlock Holmes).

Another book that gets that reaction is Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park. Every time I mention that book, people try to correct me, saying it's a Spielberg movie and not a Crichton book. Ditto for Conan Doyle's The Lost World. Nobody seems to know that Conan Doyle first thought of the word "Jurassic Park", which Crichton used in his book that was finally made into a Hollywood movie.

Considering the popularity of The Da Vinci Code, I'm always surprised to find that very few people have read -- or even heard of -- The Rule of Four by Ian Caldwell and Dustin Thomason. Both the books cover very similar topics and (at least in my opinion) The Rule of Four is almost as good as (if not better than) Dan Brown's best-seller, but it is the Da Vinci Code that everyone talks about. I guess the lack of controversy is why The Rule... isn't as famous.

BTT: Let's Review

This week's BTT question (suggested by Puss Reboots):

How much do reviews (good and bad) affect your choice of reading? If you see a bad review of a book you wanted to read, do you still read it? If you see a good review of a book you’re sure you won’t like, do you change your mind and give the book a try?

Well, that depends. If I read a bad review of a book by one of my favorite authors, or a good one for an author I don't really like, I wouldn't take much notice of the review. But when it comes to newer authors, then reviews generally do influence my choice.

Usually, though, it's the other way round with me and reviews. I read reviews on blogs after I've finished reading the book so I can see how other people felt about the book. That way, there's no risk of coming across spoilers and I won't have unreasonably high (or low, in case it got bad reviews) expectations of the book. :-)