Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

"Exclamation marks, he had discovered, made even the most calamitous things sound as if they might be fun or, at the worst, a precursor to a joke."

I had chosen Atkinson's latest for the challenge anyway, but that line perfectly summarised why Foil and Hog were waiting expectantly for the punchline when Arms was shouting "Lads, the bags!" in shocked realisation that they had gone.

Death at the sign of the root? (I googled it, so it might not be). In which prompt/category did you place this book?

"Rook", I thought the title (with link) and cover (with link) showed up, doesn't it for everyone? # 96 (cover with an animal with a connection - > "if people were like bird watching", flight traffic controller, Hog's shirt, etc.). It also fits 93 and one more.

Thank you- I am using my phone, the link is not showing (don't know why)

Thank you for clarifying, good to know!

So much excitement for one evening! An escaped prisoner shooting at people (at her!) and the vicar succumbing to a heart attack. Lady Milton hadn't enjoyed herself this much in years.

That's why I considered suggesting this book to Mrs. Geraghty. Overall it's not bloody enough for her though, and no nudity.

At Swim Two Birds
On page 30 of this classic 1939 novel, a comment on (post) modern fiction reads like a description of fanfiction.

... it was explained that a satisfactory novel should be a self-evident sham to which the reader could regulate at will the degree of his credulity. It was undemocratic to compel characters to be uniformly good or bad or poor or rich. Each should be allowed a private life, self-determination and a decent standard of living. This would make for self-respect, contentment and better service. It would be incorrect to say that it would lead to chaos. Characters should be interchangeable as between one book and another. The entire corpus of existing literature should be regarded as a limbo from which discerning authors could draw their characters as required, creating only when they failed to find a suitable existing puppet. The modern novel should be largely a work of reference. Most authors spend their time saying what has been said before - usually said much better. A wealth of references to existing works would acquaint the reader instantaneously with the nature of each character, would obviate tiresome explanations and would effectively preclude mountebanks, upstarts, thimble-riggers and persons of inferior education from an understanding of contemporary literature.

_inbetween_ wrote: ""Exclamation marks, he had discovered, made even the most calamitous things sound as if they might be fun or, at the worst, a precursor to a joke." . . . "Lads, the bags!"

Great connection!

I'm drowning in connections, so many books have bird covers, need to get onto other prompts. Have you selected some titles yourself yet?

Another book FAH own and "read" in their sketches, and at first it seemed I could recommend it to one of them. But Eggshells doesn't deserve to be read, so I should do the opposite in case the first pages attracts someone.
It's the first of these (often Irish) books that contains an "Oisin", mention of a Connor on the women's loo, a duck and something I have to insert the quote for later - I'm not happy about the many links to prompts I found.

It's disappointing that the book didn't work out for you.

These days so many premises with promise don't get the execution they would need.
ETA: have you read it? Or "After the Silence" (that already drags from the start and I don't know if to go on)?

_inbetween_ wrote: "These days so many premises with promise don't get the execution they would need.
ETA: have you read it? Or "After the Silence" (that already drags from the start and I don't know if to go on)?"

It is disappointing indeed when the dust jacket summaries sound like the book will hold great promise, but the writer loses the thread or trails off in a bizarre direction. I don't mind losing the money on a book, but the hours wasted on the read upsets me. I wish the agent or literary manager would steer the author sometimes, especially when the writer is talented.

That's it, the thank-you list in books went from one name to three pages, but I keep wondering if they all improved on it, how bad it must have been originally. Most likely nobody says anything critical, and the role of the editor is gone or changed. Publishing houses want to quickly cash in on what's hot at the moment - and when you consider that more books than ever are sold but fewer books than ever get read, it makes horrible sense that the content doesn't count much. I'll stop here, I've already clogged up other platforms on that subject :)