Fiction read (January - June 2019).

Well, for the first six months of 2019, my reading hasn't been too skimpy. Alas, about half of this occurred in January and February, when I breezed through the final books of The Wheel of Time. The latter four months I spent much more time reading nonfiction & literary criticism, which isn't included here.

Overall, there's 9,250 pages of fiction here (arguably less, since I used the paperback versions of the Jorden/Sanderson). That's an average of about 51 pages per 182 days. That's just a tad less than the final six months of 2018 (viewable here), and less than the first six months of 2018 (see here). Alas.
  • Robert Jordan & Brandon Sanderson, The Gathering Storm, 1100 pg
  • Robert Jordan & Brandon Sanderson, The Towers of Midnight, 1200 pg
  • Robert Jordan & Brandon Sanderson, A Memory of Light, 1300 pg
  • Robert Silverberg, ed. Legends 3, 400 pg.
  • Robert Silverberg, ed. Legends 2, 350 pg
  • Robert Silverberg, ed. Legends 1, 300 pg.
  • Glen Cook, Port of Shadows, 400 pg.
  • Marion Zimmer Bradley, Darkover Landfall, 150 pg
  • Kim Stanley Robinson. Aurora, 500 pg.
  • C. J. Cherryh, Downbelow Station, 300 pg.
  • Arthur C. Clarke, Rendezvous with Rama, 200 pg.
  • Zoe Heller, Notes on a Scandal (What was She Thinking?), 250 pg.-
  • G.D. Sanders, The Taken Girls, 400 pg. 
  • H.P. Lovecraft, The Dream Cycle of H. P. Lovecraft, 400 pg.
  • H. P. Lovecraft, The Transition of H. P. Lovecraft, 400 pg.
  • Shirley Jackson, We have Always Lived in the Castle, 150 pg.
  • Jeff VanderMeer, Annihilation, 200 pg
  • Jeff VanderMeer, Authority, 350 pg.
  • Jeff VanderMeer, Acceptance, 350 pg
  • Jeff VanderMeer, Veniss Underground, 200 pg.
  • Jeff VanderMeer, Shriek: An Afterword, 350 pg.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Genre Fantasy Bestsellers through 1990

Image
I've been studying Keith Justice's Bestseller Index , which compiles information from two separate bestseller lists -- New York Times Book Review and Publishers Weekly -- up through 1990, and the results are ridiculously fascinating. For instance, you wanna take a stab at which SFF author has the most individual books appear on a bestseller list? No, it ain't Heinlein, Clark, Herbert, or Asimov. It's not even Terry Brooks or David Eddings. No, the answer is Piers Anthony ... and even if you somehow pulled that name out of thin air, you'll still never guess how truly dominate Anthony was. Up through 1990, Anthony had more than double than number of distinct bestsellers than the next most frequent bestseller, Anne McCaffrey. Whereas Anthony had an astounding  22 different books appear on a bestseller list, McCaffrey had "only" 9.** Now, caveats. These numbers need to be taken with one (or two) grains of salt. For instance, although Anthony had 22 two distin
Read more

A Look at Charles R. Saunders and "Sword & Soul"

Image
So, I've been reading lately about Charles R. Saunders, the black author of sword-and-sorcery fiction, and man .... poor guy. If there's been ever a case of someone being born about 30 years too soon, it's Saunders. Usually, when people mention about black S&S authors, they mean Samuel R. Delany. This makes sense. As a queer, Marxist deconstructionist, Delany established his street cred first by writing SF before wading into the "gutters" (ahem) of S&S fantasy. (Sidenote: are there any black fantasy writers except maybe Jemisin who didn't first establish their street cred by writing SF?). Although I personally never much cared for Delany's  writing style or Nevèrÿon books , which are basically what happens when someone who holds a subgenre in contempt decides to write in that subgenre, it is true that academic critics love Delany .... especially critics who hate S&S themselves. So if they mention Saunders at all, which is rare, it's usuall
Read more

A Good Week For Publication

So, wow. The Journal of Tolkien Research has just published my article, " Harken Not to Wild Beasts: Between Rage and Eloquence in Saruman and Thrasymachus ." What astounds me is that I finished the piece only two weeks ago and already got back the peer reviews. Of course, no real reason WHY the review process has to take months, but it just usually does. Kudos to the anonymous reviewers, great praise upon them, for working so quickly. I might even more appreciative of their promptness than of their kind remarks; I barely had to do any revisions to the article. The process went so fast, in fact, that the publication barely feels real. One of the great advantages of an online open-access journal, too, is instantaneous publication. As I'm learning with the several other articles I have in circulation, the publication process generally takes even longer than the review process. Anyway, this has been a good week. I finished my review of Harry Potter essays, and the edito
Read more