Misgivings

  

At the beginning of the year I decided that this year's reading goal would be to work through a list of 100 books the BBC thinks you should have read but probably haven't.  Several of the works I had not read I have really liked, and several I haven't.  These are two that fall into the latter category.  

Kent said Catch 22 was really funny.  Maybe for a guy.  It didn't really do anything for me.  I read probably 50 or so pages (how much I should read being under 50), then skipped through the rest, reading bits and pieces.  The rest beyond was pretty much like the first, and I was done.  I read the last chapter and didn't feel like I had skipped most of it.

Several years ago I selected Reading Lolita in Tehran as a book group selection.  I loved it.  It was fascinating to read about Iranian women trying, in subtle and clandestine ways, to overcome the oppression they face.  I had not, however, actually read Lolita.  On the cover of the copy I have is a quote from Vanity Fair.  It says, "The only convincing love story of our century."  This disturbs me.  The protagonist is an aging man obsessed with a child, a twelve year old girl he considers a nymphet.  I could not get past the fact that the man telling the story is a pedophile.  And how awful is it to think that "the only convincing love story of our century" is about an illegal, disgusting relationship?  Seems depraved to me, but more and more I suppose that describes our culture.  Maybe the fact that I am raising a sweet daughter I want to shelter from such horror as long as possible colors my view here, but whatever the reason, I didn't make it to page 100, and I'm not going to.  

I like to consider myself intellectually open-minded and diverse in my reading tastes, but I couldn't bring myself to like either of these books.  Even if some snob at the BBC thinks I should.