Today I faced a moment of decision at the library. Would I take home The Invisible Bridge by Julie Orringer? (Don't pass up a visit to amazon.com for an edge-of-your-seat interview with Orringer about her familial inspiration for this book.) I nearly bought it when I went on my book-buying birthday spree, but to be honest, I set it aside because the cover and spine of the one book available had a bad ding. I must confess that I want the books I buy to be PERFECT! I'm quirky that way.
The Invisible Bridge is an epic set in World War II Europe and it appears Orringer did painstaking research. I'm a devotee of historical research, so it came home with me and I have just two weeks to read another 600-page book!
So Chunksterism is the subject of this post. I want the opinion of all of my readers, but I must tell you I prefer NOT to read enormous books because of the huge time commitment involved. How will I know the time spent on just one book will be worth it?
I love short, pithy novels, but they're fairly uncommon. What drives me to take a book into my reading nook is dependent entirely on what the book is about and the recommendations of others.
I'd love to know your opinions about Chunksters and how you feel about the length of the books you read.
What Chunksters have you read this year?
I've read a few Chunksters this year, the most notable being Elizabeth George's latest, This Body of Death. Because I do most of my reading on a Kindle I sometimes don't realized when I've signed up for 400+ pager. Sometimes that's a good thing, sometimes it's not. On the whole I'm more inclined to tackle a fiction Chunkster if its an author I've read before. I've read 800 pagers in nonfiction without blinking an eye. Is that a double standard?
ReplyDelete