For a while, it's great; best read in short bursts to keep it as entertaining as possible.
For a while, it's great; best read in short bursts to keep it as entertaining as possible.
"The facts of history cannot be purely objective, since they become facts of history only in virtue of the significance attached to them by the historian." E.H. Carr
Ah, so you're saying I shouldn't have read it diligently day after day, for sometimes upwards of an hour each sitting? That may explain why I always found it funny when I first sat down to read, then increasingly bizarre and random as time wore on.Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
If you define cowardice as running away at the first sign of danger, screaming and tripping and begging for mercy, then yes, Mr. Brave man, I guess I'm a coward. -Jack Handey
Perhaps; I know that longer periods of reading were less funny to me, and that in general I picked it up and read it for some 15 minutes at a time between other books, so I guess the humour stayed fresh.
"The facts of history cannot be purely objective, since they become facts of history only in virtue of the significance attached to them by the historian." E.H. Carr
They were really funny. In my opinion, they were a much better, if far more psychedelic, version of the 2001 series.
Too bad the movie was unwatchable.
Couldn't stand them, more of a Terry Pratchett fan.
I've always found the two authors to be very similar in style. Completely mad, with vague real-life underpinnings.Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
The first 3 books are great, the last two aren't. Not even worth reading imho.
Early Pratchett is pure adams rip off, he has however developed his own style over the years and has written some truly excellent books. His best work is better than Adams imo.Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
Yes, Iraq is peaceful. Go to sleep now. - Adrian II
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is brilliant, no doubt. But for the best effect I think it does need to be read in short sections.
"The facts of history cannot be purely objective, since they become facts of history only in virtue of the significance attached to them by the historian." E.H. Carr
I loved all of it... sure some parts werent very funny, but I really loved all the references to the actuall "Guide"![]()
The weren't just great books - they were astounding books. The humour, the incredible depth of Adams's imagination and wit, the scope of the books, the insights, they are classics.
The Hitchhiker books are amongst the best I've ever read. The BBC radio series and TV series were both great as well. The recent movie sucked completely.
![]()
Unto each good man a good dog
Loved them. Some bits are absolutely hilarious, but if you continue reading them later bits may seem a bit 'dragged out', I found. After, recently re-reading them (also in a more relaxed atmosphere), I actually found them better and clearer than before. I really like his style of writing, as it all has a sort of wry sarcasm about it. Also, however chaotic, there seems to be a lot more continuity and logic to the stories then their origin (radio/tv/book) seems to suggest. But I guess you have to like Adams' work (or not). I found the movie quite amusing as well, by the way.
Bookmarks