Re-Read Reflections!

[rune]

Ive been re-reading some of my favourite books and found that Ive not always enjoyed them as much the second time

Some books Ive loved just as much and probably on my 3rd re-read

But I wondered if others have found this. You wondered why you liked it so much the first time around!

 

[Rodders]

I think that rereads are pretty few and far between for most of us, so it's really nice to go back and experience that great book again.

I'd say that the books that i've enjoyed less on a reread would be those that i read as a child/teenager and i've found they they just don't hold up. Still, nostalgia's a powerful and enjoyable thing in it's own right.

With regards to books that i've enjoyed as an adult, i tend to find that they get better the more time i read them. Each subsequent reread allows me to gain more meaning from the book.

 

[Spade]

I read Orion by Ben Bova when I was 13. It was my very first adult book. I read it just a few weeks ago again at the age of 24. I was afraid I wasn't going to like it as much as I did the first time around, but I found that I still loved it. I really want to reread a few other books that I say are in my Top 10: Dune by Frank Herbert, The Dark Beyond the Stars by Frank M. Robinson, As On A Darkling Plain by Ben Bova, etc. Past these few, I'm afraid I'll run into one that I'll go "why did I like this???"

 

[Extollager]

I re-read a lot. Many of the books I love best can't be "fully" enjoyed on a first reading. Occasionally I will read a book that, I think, yields up all that it has to offer on one reading (e.g. some thrillers), but that's the exception, for me. Books of that sort I usually don't buy.

The question was about books that don't hold up on a re-reading. Edgar Rice Burroughs' A Princess of Mars came to mind right away. I got it from a library recently, but I didn't finish the rereading. I liked this book when I first read it at about age 14. I have to be in a very unusual mood to want to spend much time now with a book that you can enjoy only as a kid.

I find that it takes effort to get through Lord Dunsany's tales now. I was really taken with At the Edge of the World, a selection of his stories that Lin Carter edited for the Ballantine fantasy series, when I read it at 14. He was one of my favorite authors for several years. Dunsany's stories tend to seem empty to me now. I still have about a dozen of his books (all six Ballantine ones, etc.) but I'm really hanging on to them mostly just for sentimental reasons, I suppose. The Ballantines have attractive covers. And they don't take up much space.

I find I don't like the Fafhrd and Mouser stories any more, though I used to have all the Ace editions of these Fritz Leiber books. They too seem pretty empty and self-indulgent. De Camp's Tritonian Ring, borrowed from a library a few weeks ago, wasn't holding my interest as it did when I was 16 or so, and I dropped it. It's not that I can't read any sword-and-sorcery any more -- at least, if Moorcock's Jewel in the Skull is sword-and-sorcery, I found myself able to read that for the first time with some enjoyment this summer. I still like some of the Conan stories -- reread "The Tower of the Elephant" not long ago and that was okay.

I wonder if I would be able to reread Dune.

 

[Extollager]

Oh, and here's one. I read Gormenghast for the first and, so far, only time, in 1975. I have started rereads surely at least four times. Just can't stay with it. I think I might be able to get to the last page if I cheat and skip a lot of the Irma & Dr. Prunesquallor stuff, which evidently I don't find nearly as amusing as Peake did.

 

[D_Davis]

I read (re-read) Einstein's Dreams every year. It's usually one of the best days of the year.

 

[soulsinging]

I rarely re-read books anymore. I don't have as much time to read in general and so when I do it tends to be something new. But I have had a few books that got multiple reads. I think I read Jurassic Park 6-7 times in grade school, hah.

Sometimes I've found my opinion changing multiple times with each read. I read the Dragonlance Chronicles multiple times in hs and loved them, reread them in college at some point post-Tolkien and found them pretty cheesy, then went again more recently and found them to be pretty entertaining despite that. Oddly, I've felt the opposite with LOTR... enjoying it less on each reread and thinking it increasingly dull (though the Silmarillion is a different story).

 

[steve12553]

Certain books along with certain films lend themselves to multiple enjoyments. I buy books and store them in my bookshelves for just that reason. I have reread the Complete Sherlock Holmes by Conan Doyle at least 5 times through and get something different from it each time. Ive read the original Dune trilogy three times and will do it again. Both Asimov's future history (the Robot novels, Foundation et. al.) and Heinlein's future history have drawn me in more than once and I get back to them again. Some books dramatically reveal their essence on the first read and without suprises they just can't hold up.

 

[Connavar]

I have been thinking about re-reading the books, authors who mean alot to me, big favs books i have hard time remembering clearly now. Only fav book i read more than 10 years ago is my only childhood fav novel in The Count of Monte Cristo lets just say im dreading the re-read.

Re-read are only for my best authors, it takes times from new reads.

So i will get back to this thread. Im geussing my first SF books like Foundation will not look better in second read after i know more what to expect of good SF writing.

 

[Montero]

I do a lot of re-reading, partially budget considerations, partially preference/taste.
I would rather re-read a good book than a new OK book. I'd read a bit more new if I could afford it, but still do quite a lot of re-reading.

I know I have found some books don't re-read well (the original question) but can't put a name to any specific one at the moment. In general, the Lensman series for sure. Some of my several shelves of Star Trek spin off novels from 15+ years back.

Ones I have recently re-read (again) and enjoyed (again) are several McMaster Bujolds, both Vorkosigan and fantasies.
Barbara Hambly Ladies of Madrigyn and sequels (first time in years, still good)
John Barnes Thousand Cultures series (still good)
Pratchett remains a reliable re-read - and I often spot something I didn't notice before. It is sometimes a matter of having had new experiences since I last read it.

Currently on a new book (Julie E Czerneda Riders of the Storm) then am planning to re-read Philip Pullman, Northern Lights etc (which will be the first re-read of those)

 

[chrispenycate]

If I'm not going to reread, why do I have bookshelves? Well, partly because the only English spearing lending library within fifty kilometres has exactly six SFF books in the SFF section (I'm considering dying and leaving them my collection, as fitting revenge), but anyway, with the price of imported books, I'm just about forced to.

But there is another reason. Coming on here, and starting to write, I read books differently. I always had a tendency to spot technical errors and punctuation imperfections, but now I spend more time analysing what works, what grates.

And the strange thing is that it also gives enjoyment, just a different type.

 

[Overread]

I've not re-read many books, in fact I think (from the ones I can recall) I can count them on one hand - I also tend to find that I re-read a book partly and then stop, not necessarily because I disliked rereading, but more because I already know where the story is generally heading (if not the specific details) so its very easy to put the book down and have something fresh catch my attention.


Myself I found myself doing the above with Dune at least twice, despite really liking the story (and the strange story is for all those that abhor computer games for destroying minds my dune book was the promo content of a game I bought ).
His Dark Materials on the other hand was a book I re-read (well the first book at least) and found it a little less than I recalled. I think it might be the style of writing or that I've become a bit more of a Tolkien/Hobb fan in expecting more character building and world building alongside the story. Also I think there are some stories that grip us for the first time (esp in your younger days) because of the revelations in the story and in ourselves and our outlook on things - and that element is very hard to recapture again later on.

However I'm always happy to re-read Asterix and Obelix comic books - I think I've 5 or so hardback ones from my dad and I've read and re-read those many times over the years (and I really must add more to that mini collection).
I also suspect that I'll be adding Discworld books to this collection of regularly re-read books (now that I've finally caught up to the latest book in the series); great books to dip in and out of and great travelling companions.

 

[j d worthington]

I've been contemplating putting a little one-liner up here the past couple of days, and decided, "what the heck?"... so here goes:

"Generally speaking: if a book is worth reading, it is worth reading again." By which I mean, I have long since come to the point where, if a book does nothing more than entertain me... then I consider it a loss; time wasted. Which is why, I suppose, I tend to avoid so much popular writing these days.

Mind you, there is absolutely nothing wrong with entertainment, or with books or stories (or movies, or plays, or...) whose sole aim is to entertain. But... all they are for, in the final analysis, is passing the time; preventing boredom. Reading them, one doesn't accomplish much else. One hasn't added a darned thing to one's understanding or appreciation of life, or the human condition, or the universe, or even how to craft a literary work of substance. Now, for those who are not looking to do these things... then entertainment is really what they are looking for, and by reading such books, they find it. Whether or not that book would entertain them on a rereading largely depends on the book, and on that particular reader's range in reading. (For example, those who have chiefly read modern, kinetically-oriented works will likely always have trouble with "leisurely, old-fashioned prose"... even though the latter often offers much more than the former.)

But, due to several experiences in my life, I've long had an extremely strong sense of my own mortality, and my interests are in tackling things which, in some way, enrich my life in the long run; whether that be in causing me to rethink attitudes about one thing or another, or aiding me to appreciate aspects of life or art I'd never considered before, or simply challenging me to think more clearly or expand my horizons a little more.

As a result of this, the bulk of material I read is something I will, if I can manage it, probably re-read at one point or another; some of it is stuff I return to again and again, gaining new levels of appreciation with each reading. On the other hand, books which were things I particularly enjoyed when younger and just looking for entertainment (though I wouldn't have expressed it that way then; I just liked reading!)... are likely things I will never crack open again, and have mostly gone to others who will enjoy them. A few exceptions exist, which I hold onto for sentimental reasons; but they are a relatively small percentage of what I own.

And yes, Chris: it does; and often of a very rich type....

 

[Rodders]

As a teenager of read a lot of Edmund Cooper books. I would like to get his back catalogue and reread them all.

 

[Connavar]

I've been contemplating putting a little one-liner up here the past couple of days, and decided, "what the heck?"... so here goes:

"Generally speaking: if a book is worth reading, it is worth reading again." By which I mean, I have long since come to the point where, if a book does nothing more than entertain me... then I consider it a loss; time wasted.

I feel the same and why i dont re-read often yet. I see my brother,people here re-reading long fantasy books for entertainment and they need to remember them before they read book 10 in the series.

I re-read more for the same reason as you, i have seen there is limited time to read and re-read in a lifetime and i dont want to waste time on books that feel like loss of time. I can only re-read books that meant most me to writing ability wise or
socially,politically,emotionally,character wise. In short books that was more than entertainment.

There are certain popular fiction books i read for fun and i know i will never re-read. Books i read because i like the genre and not think the writer is worth reading over and over.

This is why i keep books only of the best authors, authors i know i will re-read atleast once. The rest i trade for newer books. It depends on what kind of reader you are. If you only read for fun, to spend time. Or if you are constant reader, passionate about reading and spend alot of time on reading. Like many people in these forums they dont read only because they are bored.

 

[Extollager]

JD wrote, "But, due to several experiences in my life, I've long had an extremely strong sense of my own mortality..."

This reminded me of a sequence in the Peter Brook TV miniseries of The Mahabharata, in which one of the wisest characters is questioned by an ancient entity. The question is something like this: "What is the greatest wonder of all?" and he answers, "People see others dying every day, but no one believes that he will die."

My own main mortality-themed issue has to do with the mathematics of being someone who acquires books faster than he reads them (partly because so much of the reading that I do is rereading books I already own). Yet I don't want to depart with a lot of unread books on hand. Why, then, do I buy so many? Well, much of it is that genuinely interesting and worthwhile books, which I do fully intend to read, keep coming out. But also I get pleasure from thinking about buying books and then buying them. In short, though I may be one who regrets it when "other people" read so much to stave off boredom, such as you describe, I myself probably buy books sometimes... to stave off boredom.

 

[Extollager]

JD noted, "those who have chiefly read modern, kinetically-oriented works will likely always have trouble with "leisurely, old-fashioned prose"... even though the latter often offers much more than the former."

This is a good point and it suggests that overindulging the taste for the easy-reads is not simply an "indifferent" matter. If one is "teaching oneself" to derive pleasure (only) from the kinetic reads (I think of Andrew Klavan's thrillers, since I've actually read two or three of them), one may actually diminish one's ability to experience the pleasures afforded by works that offer more.

 

[Metryq]

Yet I don't want to depart with a lot of unread books on hand.

"And if I can't take them with me, I won't go!"

 

[Extollager]

Yeah -- I dare say there are more stories about ghosts hanging around personal or institutional libraries than around, say, gas stations.

Thought experiment: Read M. R. James's "The Tractate Middoth." Then write a story about a haunted gas station.

 

[merritt]

I re-read all the time, many books I have read 3+ times.
Because I am old & forgetfull, I have boxes of books in my attic that I go thru looking for titles I don't remember.