As in the book which people generally thought the world of, but I personally loathed? The Yiddish Policemen's Union. It was one of those books where I read 100 pages (really depressing 100 pages) and said, "Nope." My mother told me life was too short to waste on books one doesn't like.
The other, and I know exactly why it was totally inaccessible to me, was Vernor Vinge's A Deepness in the Sky. It hits every bad trigger for me with the focus on betrayal. Couldn't finish it...not even to get beyond the trigger-bashing parts. Interestingly enough, Al Reynolds' Chasm City is also about betrayal, in part, but it didn't hit those same triggers for me. (And I generally like Vernor Vinge's work.)
I loved A Fire Upon The Deep, and have re-read it many times. A Deepness In The Sky - loved parts of it, but I've only read it once, and can't open it again. Even thinking of it makes me cringe.
I'm here to tell you that I don't think you'd like the rest of The Yiddish Policeman's Union any better than the first 100 pages. You gave it a fair shake.
There are books I'll say the equivalent of that about. For example, anyone bouncing off of the beginning of Dhalgren should slog their way through the first fifty pages or so -- when Kid gets into the city the narrative settles down into a much more straightforward style. But in this particular case the book is much of a piece, and it seems to me that anyone who really dislikes the first 25% will probably not like the rest any better.
Dhalgren is a book I haven't finished, but I keep meaning to come back to it; I enjoyed the texture of what I did read, but it obviously required concentrated attention in the absence of a traditional storyline.
Not so much that it “gets moving” later on. Chabon had me hooked from the very first sentence.
But it’s a book that deals with a stoic adherence to duty in the face of loss and hopelessness. If that’s the sort of thing that puts you off, there’s not really a point in the book where you’re going to be less put off.
A Deepness in the Sky was the book where Vinge's mustache-twirling villains became ridiculous to me, and where they became much more noticeable in his earlier work. The return of Morgoth in A Fire in the Deep is still okay, but that's Tolkien with Usenet, can't really screw that up too much.
I tried with two of those, didn't like any of it. It felt reactionary to me, but people told me his personal politics were something else.
Lately I've wondered if I read his description of the multiple-bodies kind of canine people wrong -- almost wondered about it enough to go back and re-read it.
Hm. I don't know what you've been told, but Vinge has used the political and economic analyses of David D. Friedman for forty years in his fiction; they're close friends.
Man, I agree about _The Yiddish Policemen's Union_. I did read the whole thing, but enjoyed almost no single instant of the process. On the other hand, I adore _A Deepness in the Sky_, but yeah, if betrayal is a trigger...way not a fun read.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
The other, and I know exactly why it was totally inaccessible to me, was Vernor Vinge's A Deepness in the Sky. It hits every bad trigger for me with the focus on betrayal. Couldn't finish it...not even to get beyond the trigger-bashing parts. Interestingly enough, Al Reynolds' Chasm City is also about betrayal, in part, but it didn't hit those same triggers for me. (And I generally like Vernor Vinge's work.)
no subject
I loved A Fire Upon The Deep, and have re-read it many times. A Deepness In The Sky - loved parts of it, but I've only read it once, and can't open it again. Even thinking of it makes me cringe.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-01-16 07:23 am (UTC)(link)Madbadger
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
But it’s a book that deals with a stoic adherence to duty in the face of loss and hopelessness. If that’s the sort of thing that puts you off, there’s not really a point in the book where you’re going to be less put off.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Lately I've wondered if I read his description of the multiple-bodies kind of canine people wrong -- almost wondered about it enough to go back and re-read it.
no subject
no subject
I feel much better about my powers of perception and critical reading now.
no subject