talkmagic.co.uk

Tastes in books are so personal, it's hard to recommend anything even to your closest friend. I don't read much fiction, and don't touch modern mainstream novels at all. I wouldn't read The Curious Incident... if you paid me, for instance, although it's obvious you enjoyed it.

Here's a varied list of novels I read during school days and enjoyed immensely:

And Then There Were None (Agatha Christie) -- Ten people stranded on an island start getting murdered one by one.

The Call of the Wild (Jack London) -- A pampered pet is thrust into the harsh life of the Yukon gold rush, and must learn to survive as a working sled dog.

The Hobbit (JRR Tolkien) -- Father of all fantasy adventures.

Treasure Island (Robert Louis Stevenson) -- Father of all pirate adventures.

The Jungle Books (Rudyard Kipling) -- A collection of classic short stories about animals. I love the Mowgli stories best, but the others shouldn't be neglected.

Alas, Babylon (Pat Frank) -- A small town in Florida struggles to survive in the aftermath of nuclear war. This was actually a set book in English class.

We Have Always Lived in the Castle (Shirley Jackson) -- A dark and disturbing story about two sisters who live alone, shunned by the town, after the rest of their family is poisoned. This was another set book.

Watership Down (Richard Adams) -- A clan of rabbits journey through many adventures to find a new homeland. Often mistaken for a children's book, but it most definitely isn't.

more than anything though - as this is about easy reads...

why not just a bunch of short stories? M.R. James, H.P. Lovecraft...great engrossing stories, but short...

MagicBell wrote:...Im talking here [about] people who dont read at all...

Do these people actually exist? I love books and don't remember the last time I was without a book; I am constantly reading something. I think it is a sign of the times that attention spans are getting shorter and shorter . These days, people don't curl up with a good book anymore; it's Wii this or Nintendo that. And very sad it is, too.

I find that most people I meet don't read. People live life too fast.


I can recommend books easily to close friends who read. In fact, I do so very often.
And of course it's all about personal taste, but as I said, curious incident is one that, in my experience, works well for the people in question.

Obviously any books you suggest aren't guaranteed suitable, but they may fit the criteria better than others.



I didn't find 1984 very accessible at all. It was very slow in many places, and although that suited me, I can imagine many would become bored. Animal Farm could be a bit too simple for these non-readers. I don't think they might appreciate it's meaning and reason for being that way.
Hitchhikers would be quite accessible to people who could stand it though.
Though im not too sure about TKAM. I think it's another readers book.

Watchmen is great, but not quite a book as such. Reading comics is not quite the same as books. Still, I too am lookin forward to the film and I think it looks like they've taken it in the right direction - a dark gritty mature film. Like the ones you all watch.


I'm not too keen on this "i don't like mainstream/popular books" thing. I think that's kinda narrow (no offence). I look through book sections in shops all the time and I think it's mostly a load of c*** (not the best), but I wouldn't write it all off. There are often real gems there among the riff-raff. Books are books, and whether they are unheard of or critical successes, they should be judged on their own merits like anything else.

At this time of year there's usually a sudden surge of books produced especially for giving as prezzies. Why Penguins dont freeze and similar types of 'coffee table' books are the usualones - they're usually very easy to read, can be picked up and dropped again after a few minutes with no problems as the contents are in small bites anyway.

Perhaps the smallest and quickest book to read would be, 'Everything Men Know About Women'.....

Chuck Palahniuk's books are easy reads. Funny and insightful, and they don't drag on (for the most part).

"Why girls can't throw" is good

"The Pact" by Jodi Picoult is bleedin' marvelous!

MagicBell wrote:I didn't find 1984 very accessible at all. It was very slow in many places, and although that suited me, I can imagine many would become bored. Animal Farm could be a bit too simple for these non-readers. I don't think they might appreciate it's meaning and reason for being that way.

That's why I didn't recommend them. 1984 is written in fairly simple language, but needs some background in "how to read literature" before you can enjoy it properly. Animal Farm is a straight allegory of the Communist Revolution and the rise of Stalin to power, and is mostly of historical interest now. If you don't know the detailed history of what it's about, it's not particularly interesting.

MagicBell wrote:I'm not too keen on this "i don't like mainstream/popular books" thing. I think that's kinda narrow (no offence). I look through book sections in shops all the time and I think it's mostly a load of c*** (not the best), but I wouldn't write it all off. There are often real gems there among the riff-raff. Books are books, and whether they are unheard of or critical successes, they should be judged on their own merits like anything else.

I only spoke the truth. I honestly don't read much fiction (it's perhaps 10 per cent of my reading matter), and I don't enjoy mainstream fiction at all. But I'm using the word "mainstream" in its technical sense.

"Mainstream" doesn't mean "popular", it means something like "non-genre". In other words, not mystery, not science fiction, not horror, not fantasy, not action-adventure, etc. A mainstream novel tells a realistic story about realistic people in the present or historic past. It concentrates on the characters and their relationships to each other, and how they change.

The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime is considered mainstream. Most of the titles nominated for the Booker Prize, Orange Prize, and similar prizes can be safely described as in or near the mainstream.

Everything in the world should be judged on its own merits, and I never said these are bad books. All I'm saying is that (as someone on the autistic spectrum) I don't enjoy stories about people and their relationships, so I don't read them, and therefore I'm not in a position to comment on them.

Do they have to be novels? New Scientist do some excellent toilet reading in the shape of "Does Anything Eats Wasps?" "Do Polar Bears Get Lonely?" "Why Don't Penguin's Feet Freeze?" and "How To Fossilise Your Hamster".

Tomo wrote:Do they have to be novels? New Scientist do some excellent toilet reading in the shape of "Does Anything Eats Wasps?" "Do Polar Bears Get Lonely?" "Why Don't Penguin's Feet Freeze?" and "How To Fossilise Your Hamster".

I borrowed the Hamster one from the library. It was fairly entertaining, though I wouldn't want to spend money on it.

A lot of children (especially boys) who are dedicated book-haters only find a love of reading when they're introduced to non-fiction about topics they enjoy. But I didn't want to get into non-fiction here, since the original posting was very specifically about novels.

Why Nothing Can Travel Faster Than Light...: And Other Explorations in Nature's Curiosity Shop is also very readable and quite enjoyable.

I thought Philip Reeve's Mortal Engines was tremendous

Catcher in the Rye by J D Salinger
Oswald by Norman Mailer
Carcano M91/38 Short Rifle Maintenance by J R Hartley

(got to cut down on the coffee)

Robbie wrote:The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime is considered mainstream. Most of the titles nominated for the Booker Prize, Orange Prize, and similar prizes can be safely described as in or near the mainstream.

Everything in the world should be judged on its own merits, and I never said these are bad books. All I'm saying is that (as someone on the autistic spectrum) I don't enjoy stories about people and their relationships, so I don't read them, and therefore I'm not in a position to comment on them.

I wrote very carefully to try to avoid sounding like I was having a dig. It was just my opinion on certain viewpoints.

As someone on the autistic spectrum (are you really?), do you not find that reason to be interested in the Curious Incident? It's about a severely autistic boy.
Its also surprising because most people diagnosed as being autistic are supposedly boys/men, and to add further, it's apparently become more and more common, so as someone of a more mature nature, you seem to be in an even smaller minority.

But considering you said "on the autistic spectrum", I'd imagine it's probably pretty mild.

Lastly (for you), the stuff about 1984 was for someone else who recommended them.


Tomo - yeah i was particularly looking for novels, although I did buy 'does anything eat wasps?' cause it was on the cheapo, and they're actually sometimes quite interesting. They are articles from New Scientist after all.
Mind you, I quickly get bored of them, it's just the first browse when you find a couple of interesting questions.

pcwells wrote:I thought Philip Reeve's Mortal Engines was tremendous

So did I. After finishing the Dark Materials trilogy and moving onto the Sally Lockhart quartet, I went into my local book shop and Mortal Engines caught my eye. I bought it on spec, and it was fantastic! Hugely recommended.

After that I bought Shadowmancer by GP Taylor, but threw it out of the bath and down the stairs when I read the bit where the hero saves the poor miners from the evils of tarot cards. Piffle. And rather badly written piffle with an awful ending.

After that I thought I'd better spend some time in the grown-up section of the book shop. The assistants were starting to gossip about me.