William Faulkner's "As I Lay Dying" (1930)

I hate Anse Bundren. I finished this novel and that's what I thought, how much I hate Anse Bundren. His selfishness drives the whole novel in a place and time where men worked women to death. Of course his wife Addie wasn't lovable either, but I understood Addie. She just wanted to be alone and at peace. Why she married Anse though, that is never really explained and in some ways seems out of character for a school teacher who hated children to choose marriage which meant bearing children.

I don't think this is my favorite of Faulkner's, I preferred Absalom Absalom, but I am glad I've read this book.

Toni Morrison's "Tar Baby" (1981)

I really enjoyed reading this book because it presented cultures that were so different to mine and yet I was still able to empathise with the characters. I also enjoyed the mystical/mythical aspects of the work, although that might not be for everyone. This is a story that has remained with me because I cared about the people in it, and the way that it dealt with acts of evil committed by complicated people who were at their core not evil themselves. It shows how we can hurt the ones we love and take advantage of them and that sometimes, redemption is just plain refused.

Ivan Turgenev's "Spring Torrents" (1872)

Apparently this book is partly autobiographical, but what stood out for me was the timeless nature of the female characters. That a young, innocent beauty is always going to be out-played by a femme fatale when she sets to mind on acquiring her man, or rather, someone else's man. In a way this made me feel sad. The protagonist basically stuffs up his life because he was seduced by a woman who wanted to add him to her 'stable' and he couldn't resist her. She is likened to a hawk in the book - pitiless and victorious over her prey.

Anton Chekhov's "The Shooting Party" (1885)

This novel is one of the earliest detective stories ever written. I really enjoyed reading this novel, the only one Chekhov ever wrote. The thing I loved the most was the long passages where the narrator is blind drunk because the way Chekhov wrote you feel drunk reading it. Clearly this is a man who knew what being drunk was! I discovered at the back of my book that I had written a note of the full names of the characters because Russian names can be confusing.

We all know "The Cherry Orchard" but I think The Shooting Party gets overlooked and I say this as a fan of Chekhov's plays. For anyone looking for something a bit different to read this coming spring I really do suggest this book.

John Wyndham's "Survival" (1952)

Shudder. This was one creepy story. Just oooer... I can't give to much a way because I don't want to spoil the ending if you haven't read it, but just... Oooer. It's fine vintage sci-fi too with rockets to Mars for mining the planet and a ship captain like a salty space dog.

Edith Wharton's "The Reef" (1912)

I listened to this on BBC Radio 7. Frankly it depressed me somewhat with its constrained morality and manners. It was however beautiful writing and a study into the finer life of the upper class where vulgarity and emotion was forbidden. On the other hand for a modern woman it was frustrating to see how rigid society was, and how the characters failed to communicate their deepest selves barely only skimming it themselves. Still we are talking about a society that corseted women into alien shapes physically, so why not expect that to happen with women's souls as well.

Pope Benedict XVI's "Jesus of Nazareth" (2007)

This book is specifically about Jesus from the baptism in the Jordan river to his transfiguration on the mountain. I think the most important thing to say about this book is that it is both scholarly and Catholic. For those who deal with the New Testament as a mere text rather than the revealed Word this book is going to miss the mark because the Holy Father writes with the basic assumption of Catholic truth.

For the Catholic though, the tone of the book may feel a bit dry and scholarly. It's not a feel-good work filled with vague platitudes, instead it's an insight into the mind of Joseph Ratzinger who is at his core an academic. I think the best part of the book was his engagement with a Rabbi on why he couldn't follow Jesus. It highlights what Jesus said and did from a Jewish perspective, which of course was what Christ was living within. Things that we take for granted shine newly when you see how Jewish thought perceives them, tensions that you don't see from a Christian perspective.

I enjoyed this book, and it's something I will come back to an re-read in bits and pieces at a later time, but it isn't for everyone.

E. T. A. Hoffmann's "The Sandman" (1816)

This short story is part of Hoffmann's Tales of Hoffmann work. I think Hoffmann is an excellent teller of scary stories, certainly better than Lovecraft. Obviously I am reading him in translation rather than the original German so I can't comment on his finer point of language, but the translation I am reading is beautifully written. Best of all it's a genuinely creepy horror story, the Sandman comes and steals eyes from hapless children, is he real or a fantasy?

The best part about the story is its cutting insights into society. The beautiful but dead automaton Olympia does well in female social circles, only the young university students recognise her as a thing rather than a person. Ouch.

Gustave Flaubert's "Salammbo" (1862)

Salammbo is an epic historical tale revolving around the Mercenary War that Carthage fought around 240 BC. As a novel it's both vague and highly detailed, sublime and totally boring and leaves me with a huge sense of ennui.

The thing I noticed most is the detailed descriptions of the city of Carthage and the war machine that is trying to destroy it. The descriptions range from the beautiful, I can see ancient Carthage sitting at the side of the sea covered in moonlight, to the obscene, I see also in my mind's eye the effect of war on bodies and animals. Epic descriptions seems to be more important than individual characterisation or the pacing of the plot. But what I missed was a feeling of time, the whole novel feels timeless, weightless and vague. Yet it clearly is not. It is set at an actual historical period with historical figures, ie. the actual generals of the armies.

I do wonder how the readers of the novel in the 19th century felt about the honestly gratuitous violence, particularly the woman reader of that time. Was she shocked? Horrified? Disgusted? Because the descriptions that Flaubert wrote are just that. They also seem somewhat aloof, the wretched lives and deaths of humans and animals seem distant and quite separate from the reader. In fact, I think that's why the novel leads me to feel so bored with it, despite its horror, I just don't care about the characters. I don't care who wins the war. I feel overwhelmed by the pointless brutal deaths and lives to the point where I just feel blase about it.

Both the rich and happy are now as equally dead as the poor and suffering, one day we will be so as well. All that effort for a war that is just barely remembered, just as today's wars will become in time. More corpses, more sacrifices, but nothing essential is changed by it.

It's novel written for style and effect, with genuine substance, but it leaves me feeling dry and hopeless about the human condition. There's no redemption here, just ancient corpses on show.