Skip to main content

Weekly Geeks: Ten things about books and myself

This is the first time I participate in a Weekly Geeks theme.This week it's a meme:

Tell us ten things about you with regard to books and reading. Let your imagination run wild!
 Here goes: 
  1. I collect bookmarks and I match them to the books I read.
  2. I have never read 40% of my books. That’s not counting books that are not meant to be read from cover to cover. 
  3. I read, on average, about 160 books a year. Generally only one or two will have been published in that year.
  4. Since the year 2000 I have cut my rereading from about half of all the books I read in a year down to fewer than 10.
  5. About 70% of my books were bought second hand.
  6. I have about 150 cookbooks and regularly use 3 of them.
  7. I am usually reading 4+ books at a time.
  8. When I was a child and young teen, I would go deaf when I was reading.
  9. I would love to own an e-reader.
  10. I think people who highlight words, dog ear or tear out pages, smoke or apply perfume while they are reading library books should be put in the stocks and pelted with rotten eggs. Same goes for people who think it’s okay to sell or trade such books.

Comments

Dorte H said…
Haha.

I know all about that teenage reading deafness - and I think my daughters still suffer from it even though they are in their 20s.
Bibliophile said…
Did you ever have their hearing tested? My grandmother did that with me. To this day she still doesn't believe me when I tell her I wasn't just ignoring her.
Geosi Reads said…
I like your number five. That is exactly what I do...lol!
Dorte H said…
Certainly not. My parents understood why, but my siblings thought I was trying to get away from household chores (well, perhaps that was ALSO true ;D)

Popular posts from this blog

Book 7: Shadow of the Sun by Ryszard Kapuściński (reading notes)

-This reads like fiction - prose more beautiful than one has come to expect from non-fiction and many of the chapters are structured like fiction stories. There is little continuity between most of the chapters, although some of the narratives or stories spread over more than one chapter. This is therefore more a collection of short narratives than a cohesive entirety. You could pick it up and read the chapters at random and still get a good sense of what is going on. -Here is an author who is not trying to find himself, recover from a broken heart, set a record, visit 30 countries in 3 weeks or build a perfectly enviable home in a perfectly enviable location, which is a rarity within travel literature, but of course Kapuściński was in Africa to work, and not to travel for spiritual, mental or entertainment purposes (he was the Polish Press Agency's Africa correspondent for nearly 30 years). -I have no way of knowing how well Kapuściński knew Africa - I have never been there...

Bibliophile discusses Van Dine’s rules for writing detective stories

Writers have been putting down advice for wannabe writers for centuries, about everything from how to captivate readers to how to build a story and write believable characters to getting published. The mystery genre has had its fair share, and one of the best known advisory essays is mystery writer’s S.S. Van Dine’s 1928 piece “Twenty rules for writing detective stories.” I mentioned in one of my reviews that I might write about these rules. Well, I finally gave myself the time to do it. First comes the rule (condensed), then what I think about it. Here are the Rules as Van Dine wrote them . (Incidentally, check out the rest of this excellent mystery reader’s resource: Gaslight ) The rules are meant to apply to whodunnit amateur detective fiction, but the main ones can be applied to police and P.I. fiction as well. I will discuss them mostly in this context, but will also mention genres where the rules don’t apply and authors who have successfully and unsuccessfully broken the rules. 1...

Book 40: The Martian by Andy Weir, audiobook read by Wil Wheaton

Note : This will be a general scattershot discussion about my thoughts on the book and the movie, and not a cohesive review. When movies are based on books I am interested in reading but haven't yet read, I generally wait to read the book until I have seen the movie, but when a movie is made based on a book I have already read, I try to abstain from rereading the book until I have seen the movie. The reason is simple: I am one of those people who can be reduced to near-incoherent rage when a movie severely alters the perfectly good story line of a beloved book, changes the ending beyond recognition or adds unnecessarily to the story ( The Hobbit , anyone?) without any apparent reason. I don't mind omissions of unnecessary parts so much (I did not, for example, become enraged to find Tom Bombadil missing from The Lord of the Rings ), because one expects that - movies based on books would be TV-series long if they tried to include everything, so the material must be pared down ...