8/5/2005

VENI, LEGI, CONCIDI

From Steven Taylor comes his Friday Fun Meme: ‘Books I Couldn’t Finish.’ Forthwith, here are mine:

  1. The Lord of the Rings. Never even made it through the first book. This, combined with the fact that I’ve never watched a full episode of Star Trek, puts a serious dent in my geek credentials.
  2. Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett. I tried to read this one twice. It’s sort of in my field, after all. But I couldn’t get past the first 100 pages. I’m guessing they were trying to be cheeky.
  3. The Novel by James Michener. If I couldn’t finish this, I figure I’ll never finish any of his other, heftier books.
  4. A Man In Full by Tom Wolfe. Eventually, I got to the point where I stopped caring about how–or even if–this mess would all tie together.
  5. A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole. Given the number of people who have told me this is one of their favorite books of all time, I feel terrible that I’ve never finished it. But there just must be something I don’t get.
  6. The Gospel of Thomas. It’s interesting for a while, then it just makes my brain hurt. There are parts of John’s Gospel, I’ll admit, that smack of John adding in some extra words to prove a point. But the whole Gospel of Thomas feels that way to me. Well, at least the parts of it I’ve read.
Posted by Mark @ 9:36 pm | | Permalink
This post is filed under: Books

4 Comments

  1. Re: Good Omens - yeah, they’re being cheeky. It’s a good read, but it probably helps if you’ve read some Gaiman and Pratchett before.

    Re: Gospel of Thomas - I think we all have some preconceived notions about what Jesus was like, and I know after reading the Synoptic Gospels I got the same feeling you did about John. But Thomas at least to me seemed older in a way, at least than John; it made me wonder if (and I know nothing of the historicity of the document) Mark’s was the doctored account rather than Thomas’, and people have been getting the wrong picture of Jesus all along.

    Also, would it be possible to make the box I’m typing this comment into a bit taller? It’s very hard to compose when you can only see four or five lines at once.

    Comment by Dave — 8/6/2005 @ 11:16 am

  2. Mark is generally accepted as the oldest of the Gospels, and the fact that the other two synoptics generally concur with Mark is taken as support for the Markan account over against Thomas.

    One of the main reasons why Thomas’ canonicity has been questioned is the fact that no other Gospels seem to have been drawn from it. John is different from the synoptics, but it’s not as different as Thomas is.

    Oh, and I hope the size of the comment box is more to your liking now.

    Comment by Mark Hasty — 8/6/2005 @ 2:04 pm

  3. Thanks for the upgrade.

    Yeah, that’s my understanding about Mark too. But what if the fact that the other Synoptic Gospels are based on Mark had to do more with the popularity of the work at the time, and how well it jibed with mid- to late-First Century (or even Second Century, depending on when Matthew and Luke were written) Christian thought than it’s authenticity?

    Could it be that Thomas was accurate, but the implications of its content were unpopular, so it was just ignored?

    Comment by Dave — 8/6/2005 @ 3:49 pm

  4. I might add some thoughts about this book meme on my nascent blog this weekend. I’ve not been able to read through Good Omens either, which is quite odd since I love Gaiman & Pratchett’s work. I have read The Gospel of Thomas. I thought it was pretty interesting & from what I understand there’s major differences between those who followed “Thomas” and “John.” IIRC, John makes a dig at the Thomas followers with the Doubting Thomas story…

    Comment by The Librarian — 8/6/2005 @ 10:48 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.