I'm reading two things at the mo. Fiction: "Disavowed", and essays "The Hell of Women" by Boy-Żeleński.
I credit Rogue Squadron, not the Heir to the Empire trilogy, with getting me started on Star Wars books. I *love* the X-Wing series, particularly Michael Stackpole's series, but Aaron Allston's "Iron Fist" was a GREAT book. I've read Running Man, which I loved, and "From a Buick 8", which I'm not sure how to feel about. There are definitely MOMENTS in "Buick 8" that stand out, and where King's brilliance shines through. (This is the first King book I read.) So overall, I was kinda disappointed, but I could also see where I *should* read some of his other stuff.
The last novel of King's I read was 11/22/63, I thought it was pretty awesome. I guess I should have recommended the classics first. They've become such an integral part of my literary history that I don't even think of them as books that it's possible someone hasn't read, even when implicitly stated. I've been reading King since I was about 12 years old, which I'm sure has ****ed me up beyond repair, and I can't believe my parents allowed me to read him at that age, although I'm grateful that they did. King's 'newer' novels take a much different track than his earlier stuff. I would call the turning point 'Gerald's Game' (which was awful in my opinion and the opinion of many others, bad story and also just plain stomach-turning). Anyway - 'IT' for sure, 'The Shining', 'The Stand', the 'Night Shift' collection of short stories, 'The Talisman' with Peter Straub (that one's brilliant!), I think "Tommy-Knockers" wasn't his best book but very engaging, I'm sure I'm missing a few here. In addition to 'Insomnia', reading the 'Richard Bachman' novel "Desperation" in conjunction with the King novel "The Regulators" can be very rewarding, he did some interesting things with plot and character relation between the two books. "The Long Walk" is a fantastic short story, makes "Hunger Games" look unoriginal and silly. Although his earlier novels such as 'Carrie' and 'Salem's Lot' appeal less to me as they are more categorically 'horror' than his later novels which explore much more about the human psyche, the mysteries of space and time, and stretch his place within his subscribed genre - they are still classics and really enjoyable reads. Another short story collection he wrote, 'Full Dark, No Stars" is an exceptional piece of work, after reading you might be in awe of how he brings the first story around full circle to the last while incorporating the stories in between, all of which are seemingly unrelated unless read together in order. I also think 'Duma Key' was a little under-rated, I really enjoyed that one a few years ago too. There are also several you may want to read for cultural reference, such as 'Misery'. I could honestly go on and on about my reflections on King's work but that's probably a topic for another forum. I just highly recommend reading him if you're someone that enjoys literature that is (for the most part) easy to digest and at the same time intellectually stimulating. I bet 'Dreamcatcher' is full of typos, I haven't dared to read it since the first draft. I'm afraid I will be severely disappointed in my proof-reading skills.
I don't typically read a lot of "horror" novels but one of my mates does tend to lend me almost exclusively that genre so I'll probably see them at some point (11/22/63 does sound my type though as does some of his other stuff).
King's genre is broadly considered 'horror', but I think you'll find that he stretches the tenets of that genre considerably, which is a big reason why he is generally considered such a good storyteller. Clive Barker (whos writing I equally respect and enjoy) is also lumped into the 'horror' genre, yet I wouldn't call either of them horror novelists in the broad sense. A lot of novels by both authors contain many other elements more often attributed to science fiction and fantasy genres. That's not to say that some of his work, such as 'IT' isn't scary as hell though! I would say that if you want to read stuff that isn't generally considered 'horror', I think his writing really began evolving around 1996. Most novels after that point aren't very comparable to his earlier work. He begins to rely more on the 'horrific' elements contained within the human mind, rather than external elements (such as the clown in 'IT', the aliens in 'The Tommy-Knockers' or vampires in 'Salem's Lot' - much less things like possessed automobiles or evil monkey dolls).
Still reading slowly. Read about 1/3 of the way through "The 34th Rule" (DS9 #23) by Armin Shimerman & David R. George III (1999). Also recently finished watching Season One of ST-TNG (starting Season Two). Also just recently went through all three seasons of "Roswell" which was great adolescent angst and aliens. I see that there is a book "Roswell: Loose Ends" by Greg Cox. Maybe I shall try the book as the TV series was very cool as my adolescence was a long time ago. Is there a Roswell section on the BBS? For non-fiction, I am currently reading an ancient, used copy of "The Liveliest Art: A Panoramic History of the Movies" by Arthur Knight (1957) and perhaps would have been smarter to read the much later second edition.
Wow. "Loose Ends." Haven't thought of that book in a while. That was actually the first ROSWELL tv tie-in novel, as opposed to the original YA books that inspired the show. Funny trivia: Apparently, "Loose Ends" doesn't have the same meaning in French, so in France that book was published as "The Assassins Never Forget." Really!
I just finished a little fantasy novel called The Song of Mavin Manyshaped. I found it at a thrift shop somewhere and had never seen it before, so I picked it up on a whim. The author had some neat descriptions of shape-shifting, but the book itself wasn't all that great. It's actually the first book of a trilogy, but this one was enough I think. Now I've picked up The Dragonbone Chair by Tad Williams. So far it's promising, if a little stereotypical, though I haven't gotten very far.
I don't think it means something else. I suspect it simply lacks the added meaning it has in English, where it refers to any sort of unfinished business--as opposed to, literally, loose ends of string or whatever. Which makes me wonder now why they didn't just go with whatever the French phrase is for "Unfinished Business"? The titular "loose end," btw, is the guy who shot Liz in the very first episode of the TV show. We never did find out who that guy was or what happened to him, so I seized on that as the hook for my book. More history: I remember that the editor asked for four story ideas to choose from. Liz running into the shooter again was the one they picked. (I can't remember what all the others were, although I know one of them involved a chupacabra!)
"Nightshade" was average. Some sloppy editing, typos are distracting. I finished it and was entertained by the story, but nothing really blew me away. There were a few brief moments where I was impressed by the author's descriptions of scenes and emotions surrounding the characters, but overall the story just felt kinda rushed. I don't like to give negative reviews, I appreciate the couple days of literary entertainment, I just felt unfulfilled after finishing the novel. Oh well. Moving on to the new one, 'Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed' by David Mack. I missed that release date or I would have started sooner. Reviews look promising, I'm about to dive into it!
I'm still jealous that Hamilton beat me to the punch when it came to doing a "vampire-themed STAR TREK novel. And, of course, she's outselling all of us these days . . .
I think that was the first novel of hers that I've read to the best of my memory - which isn't great when it comes to what I've been reading for the last couple years, due to sheer volume. I'll definitely give her story-telling another shot when the opportunity presents itself. Like I said, "Nightshade" may have left me with a bad taste, but there were definitely moments of brilliance. A few chapters in to 'Disavowed' and I am really happy with my purchase. Besides continuing a story arc in which I've been waiting a while for new developments, the writing so far is excellent, I really liked the scene set in the underwater Andorian restaurant. I will say that a description of the Jem'Hadar at the beginning of Chapter 3 really threw me off, describing Taran'atars physical characteristics as things 'that likely evolved to thwart predators' (rough paraphrase) is clearly incorrect. Minutiae, I know.
I started reading Titan Fallen gods by Micheal A. Martin. The story is more interesting than the first time I read this book a few years ago.