|Now||2019||Previous||Articles||Road Essays||Road Reviews||Author||Title||Source||Age||Genre||Series||Format||Inclusivity||LGBTA||Portfolio||Artwork||WIP|
Comments for Book Blogger Hop for August 19, 2011
Book Blogger Hop for August 19, 2011: 08/19/11
This week we're asked what's the longest book we've read. We're asked to throw out obvious answers like holy texts. I suppose the dictionary is another obvious choice. I have, though, read a few older editions just to see how the language has changed.
Tossing out the reference materials and series that are sometimes counted as one entity — I'm looking at you Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings — the longest stand alone book I've read (according to GoodReads) is Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. It comes in at 1450 pages. I don't remember it being that long, only because I read it twenty-six years ago. It was certainly a thick book but a very fast read.
A more recent long read was Don Quixote de la Mancha by Miguel de Cervantes. It took me about five months to re-read it. As I did, I made blog posts to track my progress.
Mostly though, I'm not reading long books. With school work, I just don't have the time to commit to a long book. Instead, I'm selecting books in 150 to 300 page range. At most, I'll tackle a 400 page book.
What about you?
Comment #1: Friday, August, 19, 2011 at 22:57:36
I keep forgetting about Les Miserables. I don't tend to go for long books anymore either.
Comment #2: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 18:05:25
I read Les Miserables in 7th grade. I'm glad it was assigned. It was a great book.
Comment #3: Friday, August, 19, 2011 at 23:36:47
Jenni Elyse http://www.jennielyse.com
I want to read Les Miserables. And, I put Harry Potter as one of my answers.
Comment #4: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 18:08:33
Les Miserables is a page turner.
Comment #5: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 02:21:56
1450...that's one long book. Maybe I've just been spoiled by my average 400-600 page books. No longer please :-P
Comment #6: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 18:13:22
Les Miserables was a school assignment but it was very good. Like you I gravitate towards 400 page books.
Comment #7: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 07:21:14
Thanks for coming by my blog!
Comment #8: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 18:17:27
Welcome to my blog.
Comment #9: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 09:49:57
Ah! I see what you mean about classics! Les Miserables has been on my list for a while but it really is such a daunting book to pick up due to the size.
Comment #10: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 18:18:49
Les Miserables reads like soap opera. Read it in chunks. It's actually very good!
Comment #11: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 09:54:55
Comment #12: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 18:24
Don Quixote comes in two parts. The first part is the one most everyone knows: Dulcinea and tilting at windmills. If you want a feel for the story, read the first part. If you decide to go for the whole book, find a nice one with illustrations and possibly annotations. The second half is 2/3 of the total length of the book. It's very complex and full pop culture references from the 1600s.
Comment #13: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 10:51:16
I haven't read either one of those but they seem to be coming up in these posts. Have a great week
Comment #14: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 18:34:05
Les Miserables I read for school. Don Quixote I read for fun.
Comment #15: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 12:36:07
Although I don't mind reading long books (especially if they are good!) I am with you on reading more shorter books. Thanks for stopping by my blog!
Comment #16: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 19:13:23
You're welcome. Happy reading!
Comment #17: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 14:34:50
Thanks for stopping by my blog. I must admit I'm not a fan of classics.
I much prefer shorter books. Like you I would much rather have a 300 page book.
Comment #18: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 19:18:43
There are short classics A Christmas Carol, for example. I don't only read classics but the two books that are the longest (and thus answer this weeks question) happen to be classics.
Comment #19: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 16:50:12
I have Cervantes on my reading list at the university this autumn, I am not looking forward to reading it ;)
Comment #20: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 19:22:05
Are you reading the full version or just the first part? The first part is relatively short and has all the memorable bits (Dulcinea, Sancho Panza, tilting at windmills).
Comment #21: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 23:02:13
Comment #22: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 at 10:48:30
I will read one or two door stoppers a year but I can only read a chapter or two a night. Something about a really long book puts me in a mood to read it slowly.
Comment #23: Saturday, August, 20, 2011 at 23:19:39
I totally forgot about LOTR, and really it was written as one book. You know, I think I read Les Mis in High School, but that was so long ago I definitely forgot about it!
Comment #24: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 at 10:51:31
Lord of the Rings may have been written as one book but it's usually sold as three separate books. Maybe in the future it will be commonplace to publish them as one volume. Since I read them as three separate books both times I read them, I'm not counting them as one book.
Comment #25: Sunday, August, 21, 2011 at 16:19:53
I have never read those books, nor would I like to read it if its that many pages. Like you I have no inclination to read a book that's that long at this point in my life.
Comment #26: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 at 11:03:01
When I read them, I read the long books slowly, maybe only 30 pages a week. They aren't ones I finish in a day or even a week.
Comment #27: Monday, August, 22, 2011 at 12:13:03
I'm with you, I just don't have the time to read long books. And maybe it's just me but I tend to really enjoy the beginnings of books, so the shorter ones I tend to like more.
Comment #28: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 at 11:07:21
Things can drag in the middle and endings of the long books.
Comment #29: Tuesday, August, 23, 2011 at 14:05:07
LES MISERABLES was my longest book for many years, but THE FIERY CROSS by Diana Gabaldon recently trumped it.
I tend to shy away from really long books because they usually take me anywhere from four days to two weeks to read. (Les Mis took me a month, but it was a notable exception. I read classic lit pretty slowly.) I think of how many other books I could finish in the time that it takes me to complete one chunkster, and it puts me off. I've made a real effort to read more long books over the last couple of years, though, and I've discovered some great ones.
Comment #30: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 at 11:10:40
Les Miserables I read in a week. It was for 7th grade English and I really liked the book. So I was doubly motivated. Most long books, now, I take months to read, anywhere from four to six months.
Comment #31: Thursday, August, 25, 2011 at 19:55:40
I'm right there with you with short books. I tend to be irritated if I order a book and it shows up and it's too big to handle in the tub.
Comment #32: Saturday, August 27, 2011 at 21:36:35
I don't read in the tub but I do like a book that's easy to hold.