If you grew up in Canada- particularly small-town Canada- it's likely you've come across the iconic sight of a tiny little restaurant nestled in a town of roughly 5000, with the wonton font sign that reads "Chinese and Canadian food" serving up ginger beef, general tso's chicken and chow mein under the glow of orange paper lanterns. It's a part of Canadian culture that, as it turns out, has some fascinating history behind it. Ann Hui's Chop Suey Nation looks into that history through two main storylines: one consists of her and her husband doing a Cross-Country road trip from B.C. to Fogo Island, Newfoundland, stopping at small-town Chinese restaurants along the way. The owner follows her father growing up in China, preparing food for a group of boys, eventually moving to Canada and opening a restaurant in British Columbia. Along the way, it also touches on aspects of Chinese-Canadian history like the exclusionary head tax and the "paper sons," something I, as a Canadian, had never heard of. I love reading about food history, but Chop Suey Nation is the first book I've read that closely examines my own country's culinary culture, though I'd still recommend it to non-Canadians interested in the subject. It does what every good story about food history should, telling the story of a people through the food they eat and how it has adapted over time.

SPOILERS

not in the post body but many in the comments!

I'm not the target market. I shouldn't have picked it up. But I was curious about what all the hullabaloo was about especially since the casting announcements and I'm annoying like that. The moment I hear they are adapting something I have to read it and then I'm not watching it. 😆

I don't have it in me to pick apart instances that are spoilers but I'll just talk about the overarching annoyance.

I hate everyone in these book! All the main characters suck ass! I'm mid way through Iron Flame and it's my eyes and ears that are flaming! The oh he's so beautiful every 2 minutes and the asinine mindless arguments and just the sheer pigheadedness of the lead characters and just the lack of personal space and ability to keep private things private. I actually don't mind the world building too much but I abhor the love story and I quite dislike everything else. I will finish it because I have to. And I don't know if I'll pick Onyx Storm or not, (I will) arghhhh damn the completist in me!

Klara and the Sun felt like such a special book but I'm afraid I will never be able to read it again (spoilers)

I decided to pick up Klara and the Sun after seeing the trailer for the film and it seemed like a fun watch.

I've just finished this about 5 minutes ago and I absolutely loved the book! It was as though I was reading life observed through the eyes of an overly anxious, hypervigilant child. Which I'm sure a lot of us can relate to. It's amazing, throughout the book it feels as though Klara has a feeling of underlying dread that she can't quite grasp and is constantly searching for answers around it. Maybe that passed on to me a little as I spent the entire time hoping things would work out for her more than I did Josie, as messed up as that sounds.

As you can guess, the ending absolutely ripped my heart out! After all they went through together she spent her final years mostly ignored sitting in a cleaning cupboard looking out of a tiny window... Like an old vacuum cleaner

Then after a tiny glimpse of hope that Klara would at least spend her days in the place she loves she was discarded and left in a dump with nothing but her memories to sit with and the worst part of it all, she was at peace in her loneliness because Josie was happy and alive.

I can't believe how it all ended for Klara and even more so I can't believe I'm sat here so heartbroken over the ending of a fictional robot. What a beautifully devastating read.

I think I'm going to check out more work by Kazuo Ishiguro because I don't think I've felt this way over a book In a long while.

For those that have seen the film, is it worth the watch even after reading the book?

[The Author] spent a decade deep in research, resulting in the first scholarly biography of Biddy Mason.

The City Council’s recent move to rename Pershing Square for Mason has refocused public attention on her history. Yet we’re no closer to identifying the single figure behind her emancipation, a historic case that broke the back of slavery in Southern California.

Hi everyone!

What are you reading? What have you recently finished reading? What do you think of it? We want to know!

We're displaying the books found in this thread in the book strip at the top of the page. If you want the books you're reading included, use the formatting below.

Formatting your book info

Post your book info in this format:

the title, by the author

For example:

The Bogus Title, by Stephen King

• This formatting is voluntary but will help us include your selections in the book strip banner.

• Entering your book data in this format will make it easy to collect the data, and the bold text will make the books titles stand out and might be a little easier to read.

• Enter as many books per post as you like but only the parent comments will be included. Replies to parent comments will be ignored for data collection.

• To help prevent errors in data collection, please double check your spelling of the title and author.

NEW: Would you like to ask the author you are reading (or just finished reading) a question? Type !invite in your comment and we will reach out to them to request they join us for a community Ask Me Anything event!

-Your Friendly /r/books Moderator Team

Just read this story/novelette and was gobsmacked -- I knew zilch about it going in (that's my preference when it comes to books or movies) so just bopped along with the plot and the characters and had that "tickling" in my brain wondering which girl was which and of course Morrison never affirms. Only afterward did I read the (protracted and annoying) analysis the New Yorker had published; only then did I realize the reader was the experiment. I wish I could take a poll; how many readers picked Twyla as .... I am still hankering to know the "correct" answer even though I know there IS no correct answer! Genius. Major props to Ms. Morrison

A difficult slog to be sure; as difficult as slogging up and down the Congo River in a steam paddleship in 1899. A book constructed in LONG, uninterrupted stretches of dialogue from our primary narrator, Marlow, as conveyed to us by a younger man listening to an old man recount his days of adventure.

Even though I deliberately approached this book with a patient mindset, reading slowly, as if being spoken to, much of this work was still very difficult to follow. Yet something in the opening few dozen pages, something about the language, the wicked playfulness, the sinister air of slavery and death in the air, caught me and held me at least long enough to finish it. And know that English was a second language for Conrad, wow.

Of course, everyone knows the film, Apocalypse Now, was based on this novella, and it was pretty cool drawing the comparisons. The "harlequin" character I immediately pinned as Dennis Hopper's inspiration, transposed into a 60's psychedelic explorer.

A young adventure-seeker, bound to sew his wild oats, meets ways with a Belgian ivory company (yes, THAT Belgium, notorious for colonial cruelty in Africa under King Leopold II) and signs up as a crewman on a steamer. One name keeps coming up as he steams his way up the "dark" river: Kurtz. The various companymen he meets at the few "stations" positioned on the banks of the Congo always seem to speak of him with reverance. It's weird, honestly. The gusto with which he is regarded. "He was a remarkable man." Long stretches devolve--or evolve?--into really abstract, trippy language. And you have to imagine yourself as a young man listening to Marlow speak this language. You would be intrigued and impressed, as well.

Again, a difficult read. Fun to draw comparisons with Apocalypse Now, and a work to be contemplated as the lofty creation of a fellow human being. Impressive, yes. Difficult, also yes. Worth it? I think so. There were some parts, especially, towards the beginning, that were, like, woah. This is something special.

I understood this book did not contain what I expected (I wanted for pop-ethology) but the evolutionary history of the horse was relayed intelligently and playfully. I enjoyed the prose and even where I saw the author coming to conclusions that I did not feel the presented evidence warranted, I still wanted to read her view.

Then came the final chapter about rewilding Przhevalsky's horses in Mongolia.

Among the possible explanations for extinction of original Mongolian Przhevalsky's horses was the fact that "Soviets insisted that the Mongolian people settle down and live permanently in collectives"

That's pretty weird but maybe they are talking about Mongolian People's Party bureaucrats, thought I?

But no

"in the midst of Mikhail Gorbachev’s openness policy, Soviet officials contacted the couple and suggested several possible locations in Siberia, Ukraine, East Kazakhstan, and Mongolia"

Soviet bureaucrats specifically under Gorbachev's leadership offering land in Mongolia?

And then a miracle happens

"Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Mongolia became an independent nation."

What?

And this is not a random aside. That is specifically linked to Soviets oppressing Mongolian horse culture and Mongolians regaining their ancestral ways following the dissolution of SU.

It is not an easy mistake to make. If that found its way into the published book how can I trust pretty much anything else that I read there.

I feel angry and cheated. I wish I could erase that book from my brain entirely so I would not have to second guess anything that I "learned" from it.

Bluntly, for a novel that's 20 years old, it's uncomfortably relevant to today. The depiction of a republic increasingly seeing political norms being violated, a little farther each time, and particularly being strained under the actions of men rich enough to be effectively above the law because everyone is either afraid of them or wants something from them. In particular, one thread is the richest man in the world attempting to straight up buy an entire election and the government itself. With Musk spending $450 million dollars to help Republicans, along with a considerable amount of activity that used to get you a RICO case, it's eerie.

I realize that these themes are present throughout the history of democratic politics to some extent, but the parallels to the modern day are simply striking. I'm not sure I want to read the rest... it might hit too close to home for comfort.

Also, for being the central figure, I have to say Harris doesn't paint an overly flattering portrait of Cicero. He's depicted as a brilliant man who has good principles and realizes what danger the Republic is in... then repeatedly ignores or compromises those principles in the pursuit of his political career. I realize it's realistic because people do that all the time, but it's also incredibly frustrating at times.

I really enjoyed the Good People by Patmeena Sabit! I finished in two days because I couldn’t put it down. Those of you that read it, what did you think about the ending?

My first reaction was disappointment that we don’t find out what happens, but after mulling over it, I think that is the point that the author was trying to make. In real life, we don’t find out what really happened in cases like these. I have my own theory on what happened, and would love to hear what others think of it. I don’t think the family did it. I could see just how much they loved Zorah despite their anger towards her.

While reading the later parts of the book, I could not shake the feeling that Zorah committed suicide and staged her death to make it look like a murder committed by her parents and brother. Over time, she had built up intense resentment toward them due to their strict rules. She was clearly struggling mentally in the year leading up to her death, and breaking up with her boyfriend pushed her over the edge. To start building a narrative against her family, she began telling others that her father had threatened to kill her. She also manipulated search histories to frame her brother and parents. She rolled down the window of the car before drowning herself to make it look like foul play. Given her behavior and psychological state over her final two years, planning something like this seems very plausible.

I would love to hear what others thought of the ending, and if you have any theories on what happened!

I've read so many interpretations of this book and I feel like the book requires you to really read between the lines.

I noticed how the main characters are or were involved in a toxic relationship.

The narrator with Maxim. There's a clear power dynamic between them because of the age gap, she's deeply insecure and he clearly doesn't see her an equal. Their relationship is very unromantic. The narrator herself points out that Maxim treats her how she treats the dog, Jasper. The real plot twist isn't that Maxim killed Rebecca, it's the narrator's reaction to that information. She isn't scared instead she's relieved Maxim never loved Rebecca. Even though she grows as a person, she grows in a very macabre way. She becomes confident and fiercly aids Maxim in escaping justice for his crime. She has no real identity of her own; her idenitity revolves around Maxim. A major reason why I think the narrator acts the way she does is because she's isolated - she has no other family or friends and Manderley/Maxim is the only home she knows. I can't help but feel slightly sorry for her.

The relationship between Rebecca and Mrs Danvers is an interesting one. Many people comment on the homoerotic subtext of Mrs danvers' sniffing Rebecca's lingerie but fail to mention that Mrs Danvers knew Rebecca since she was a child. This adds a slightly disturbing element to their relationship. I'm not entirely sure if Mrs Danvers is in love with Rebecca, it seems more like an obsession to me.

Rebecca is an imperfect victim. Many characters tell us or imply Rebecca was cruel, manipulative and a serial cheater. Despite this, Rebecca is still a victim of a dangerous man. Rebecca knows Maxim is too prideful - he won't divorce her because he's afraid of a public scandal. She threatens to destroy his legacy by having another man's baby so Manderley will no longer be the De winter's. Rebecca spits on the face of gender roles by taking control of Manderley. She isn't subservient to a man; she makes her own decisions. She's a foil to the narrator who seeks approval from her husband and is insecure and doesn't know her place in the world. The big question is if Maxim is right that Rebecca intended for Maxim to kill her, what lead her to believe he would kill her? Who has he killed or hurt before?

This book is so layered. There's so many things I have missed because I haven't read it in a while. I will admit the first time I read it I didn't appreciate it but now I definitely do.

I read My Antonia, and at the start I wasn't thrilled, the meandering memories of early childhood felt pointless.

But by the time I got to the end, I turned right back around to page one and started all over- it was that good(and that depressing.)

The Author didn't start out by declaring a promise-n-progress, or spell out how every event related to themes- or to Antonia- the supposed focus. There was no handholding.

Once I began to recognize the pattern in events, pondering how each tied into another, and noticing how every single detail foiled into the deeper re-occuring meaning- it felt very rewarding and beautiful

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Losing The Past

At the center, this book was about past memories, their influence in shaping us years later, as well as the nostolgia and idolization we feel as we peer back at them.

Nostolgia, that pange we feel in our guts as we think back- is the pain of loss imo. We think back to our childhood, and are saddened that that world no longer exists.
We think about to our old friends we know no longer. We think about loved ones who've passed away.

There is a feeling of loss, which this book centers around, and I feel the author's thesis, is that that there isn't a real loss(or rather we should look at it as a glass half-full)- because those memories still exist within us, the version of the people we remeber, will always stay with us and shape us- and that's real.
It maybe faint or hard to see, but their footprints will influence the new roads of the changing world.

That is the "My" In My Antonia, the version of her he knew, will always stay with him, even if they never meet again. Just like Antonia's father will always stay with her.

And not always postively as well, Peter and Pauvel, the Russians, tried to escape their terrible past by going from country to country. New lands, new faces, etc. But the memory lingered and haunted them, to a deathbed.

As I read the second time around, Antonia felt beyond just a character, but a metaphorical vessal for nostolgia.

Each time Jim avoided visting Antonia due to his idolization and expectations, it was an idolization of those past memories, the expectations and loss, and each time he did come back, he re-examines the past, and although alot had changed- he still found the same fire he remebered all those years ago.

The poem the Tramp had in his pocket before comiting suicide, is a real poem that hits at the crux; Poem: The Old Oaken Bucket

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Story of Immigrants

I loved hearing about the immigrant experience during this era of America, Norweigien, Bohemian, and Danish immigrant waves- the attitudes of natives towards said immigrants, and the exploration of culture, religion, etc.

One of the saddening and interesting empahsis occured after Antonia's father had passed away.

Antonia worked in the fields while our MC went to school. And although Antonia enjoyed the work, I felt part of that point that she had no choice. This was the stark contrast marked in their childhoods.

And I was contstantly thinking about the expectations characeter's had of Antonia, Jim wanting her to behave as his childhood friend again, his grandmother wanting her to be "lady-like" instead of "working as a man" in the fields.

But she could not afford to, she did not have the privilages Jim had.

Although it did not absolve Mrs Shimmerda of her nasty attitude, I felt this theme also applied to her behavior, as the grandmother had put it, "But, you see, a body never knows what traits poverty might bring out in ’em."

It was these tragic differences that fascinated me, and left me with the conclusion that to be benevolant and kind takes strenght and privilage, while being in poverty can easily be interperted as uglyness.

These themes carried fourth in the city saga of the story,

“Maybe I be the kind of girl you like better, now I come to town,” she suggested hopefully.

The contrast between the city children and the immigrant girls, their work drive, family solidarity, Jim's ability to see the virtue and strenght in them that would cause them greater success over the native populations, while it was so easy for Natives to look down upon them, was a fantastic exploration,
And feels more relevant than ever today in the current climate of immigrant experiences and politcs

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quiet Feminism

Although never explicitly talked about, a large percentage of the cast of characters we women/girls. Although always framed as the immigrant experience, all the city experiences were centered around the immigrant girls, as they worked as helping hands to send money back to their farming families.

The thing I loved most, was there wasn't a single awnser or outcome. Antonia, Lena, Tiny, and all of the immigrant girls, compared and contrasted throughout the story- ended up in many different lives and situations.

Antonia back on a farm, Lena with her clothing buisness and Tiny as the hardened entrepreneur. Yet all of them and their differing outcomes were dealt such dignity, there wasn't a single way to win or to live, despite what other character's may have expected or thought.

All different and thriving in their own unique ways, different values, lives, etc.

Antonia's ending purposefully contrasts her begining, the same elements, farm life, family, city-sick husband, many children, all the same ingrendients, but a very different outcome. Thriving instead of suffering, warmth instead of cold, happiness bubbling out.
Its the same setting, but one step further, one generation ahead- and we can see the hard work paying out.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion

There is so much more I could rant and ramble about, every detail, every moment seemed to foil into one theme or another.

A juvinille part of me couldn't help but wonder what life might've been like if Jim and Antonia had gotten together. And a wishful part of me couldn't help but wonder if Antonia's protectiveness over Jim was a bit of jealousy as well as keeping him at arms lenght, knowing his destiny was different, and trying to protect that.

This ended up such a beautiful novel, at the end of it I felt the pange of notolsgia thinking of the start.

For anyone who has read it,

What were your greatest takeways? Favorite characters, memories, themes? Why did Jim never talk about his parent's or memories prior to moving in with his grandparents?

I had the sense of coming home to myself, and of having found out what a little circle man’s experience is. For Ántonia and for me, this had been the road of Destiny; had taken us to those early accidents of for tune which predetermined for us all that we can ever be. Now I understood that the same road was to bring us together again. What ever we had missed, we possessed together the precious, the incommunicable past.

I've heard good things about Liane Moriarty. However, I've been disappointed by two of her books now, specifically how they ended, despite really enjoying them at the beginning. The books being Apples Never Fall and The Husband's Secret. I need to vent about the latter.

First, I wasn't really sure how Tess connected to the story. She really only plays a peripheral role, whereas I'd been hoping that she might play a more active role in helping either Cecilia or Rachel. I actually think she could have had her own book. Starting a business with your cousin, who you're in a codependent relationship with? That could have been quite interesting on its own. We wouldn't even necessarily need the affair storyline, to be honest.

I had other quibbles as well. But my biggest issue was Janie's storyline. Now, in the epilogue we learn that John Paul didn't actually murder her; she happened to have Marfan Syndrome. I guess this is to let him off the hook to us, if not to him. However, he was still violent towards her, and I don't like the implications that it was partly her fault for leading him on and laughing nervously, nor that he gets to be very sorry about it later. I don't believe he killed a woman out of spite once, and has never shown even slightly controlling tendencies since.

For those of you who've read her other books, are they worth reading? Someone on Goodreads claims that it's similar to Big Little Lies, but that the latter is better.

My partner and I are currently listening to The Last to Drown by Noelle Ihli. For those who are unfamiliar, it is about a woman who goes on a rafting trip at the same location there was a mass murder 7 years previously.
Her backstory includes being a widow. The specific story is her husband and his friends were going caving at ‘Cookie Dough Cave’- a dangerous cave system with slick walls known for its narrow passageways. He ends up getting stuck with his hands pinned by his sides, upside down, unable to turn back due to the position. She is alerted by his friend and makes it to the cave in time for the rescuers to allow her to talk to him via a microphone they have placed by drilling alongside the tunnel.
The reason I am giving so much detail is to highlight the similarities to the real life Nutty Putty Cave Incident.
Now, obviously we understand drawing from real life to write a story. Our issue was with the fact the specifics seem to be inconsequential to the plot. She needed to be a widow but the author could have chosen ANYTHING as the reason. I was less aware of the specifics of the real story, but even the name tipped me off. It was my partner who knew about the hands being pinned, the hole drilled for the microwave to the wife, all the little extra details that put us off.

I do have to admit we’re not positive it doesn't mean anything to the story- we ended up not continuing it due to feeling weird about this backstory. Happy to hear anyone tell us differently!

Just for curiosity and fun, which cities in the world would you day are the most bookish? It's hard to define exactly what makes a city bookish, but I'd argue it has to include at least some of the following: good bookshops, a decent public library system, some beautiful spaces for readers, some culture of writing or literary performance. (I'm expecting suggestions to include NYC, London, Paris, and Berlin but looking forward to hearing what others think).

Edit: what a lovely thread. Thank you to everyone who suggested places. Lots of incredible cities mentioned and now I wish I had the money and time to visit them all.

Hi all,

When looking up books on Amazon or when getting emails with book recommendations from Amazon, eReaderIQ, BookSirens etc. how can I tell if a book was created by AI and not a real human author?
Some of the books in those recommendations look AI generated either by their cover (yeah, yeah, I know I shouldn't judge a book by its cover :-) or by their synopsis but others aren't that obvious so how can I tell? Are there any giveaways? Are book stores supposed to mark such books?

Thanks

and now it changes how you feel about the chapter you just read and you re read it to see if you missed out where the gender pronoun is mentioned.

This happened to me with the book only one left by Riley Sager. I thought Kit was a dude and the beginning of the book was him feeling embrassed about him hooking up with the 20 year old neighbour. And then he goes to the rambling mansion where his job is assigned and thinks to himself that in other circumstances he d have found the gardner cute. So i liked how his sexuality is not highlighted or pointed out, its just mentioned casually that he was sleeping with the neighbour because of no other options and then found the gardener cute. No where does the narration spell out he is gay.

But then later i find out the pronoun ' she' is used . And now its all confusing. Suddenly i get more the embrassment she feels about hooking up with a 20 year old neighbour because there was no one else. I feel like in gay relationships , its a bit different ( of course the character has to be of age so at least 20) but its more common for a 31 year old man to have a casual relationship with a 20 year old and not be embrassed about it ? But maybe i'm mistaken.

Unrelated but im finding this book a bit of a drag but i bought so i have to read it. Anyone else finding it a drag ? It sure was hyped up on socials.

I’m sure someone has thought of this interpretation before, and if anyone can point me to a more thorough exploration of what I am picking up, I’d be appreciative. I thought of this on a re-read of the Stranger during which I also re-watched The Battle of Algiers. That really made me viscerally understand the world Mersault was living in. I’m familiar with the absurdism reading, but I feel like The Stranger can also be read as an example of how colonialism dehumanizes colonizers and makes their existence so meaningless as to be absurd.

I haven’t read The Wretched of the Earth since university, but one of my big takeaways from the book is colonization violates both the oppressor and the oppressed– the oppressed are materially dehumanized through violence, while the oppressor is psychologically dehumanized through the violence they inflict. To inflict that violence and deny its abnormality prevents you from being fully human, you have to shut down those human parts of yourself to function.

Now, Meursault isn’t in a position where he’s actively engaging in violence, but living in Algeria, he is a beneficiary of a constant state of violence, he lives as a privileged minority in a country where the majority of the people are oppressed by state violence. So maybe there is something about existing in that space that deadens what is human in you, to the point that you end up being influenced by the prejudice and violence of those around you and a stressor like a hot day, in such a way that you casually kill someone...

I dunno, have I gone off the rails? Could Camus have intended this reading/criticism of colonialism? I've seen criticism that the victim is dehumanized, nameless, deprives of a history-- but perhaps that was the point?

I would like to talk about the ending to fruit fly. I don’t feel like it stuck the landing, although I had been obsessed with it for the first 300 pages
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
1.) How did the confrontation in the kitchen resolve?

I can accept ambiguity around whether Leo was stabbed, but how did she escape her home? If Leo wasn’t stabbed, did Leo just drop the issue and leave? The author built up all this tension then abandoned it for a time skip.

2.) Why did Roan, who was financially and emotionally abusive, not regain control of the narrative after she left and tell everyone that she had stolen Leo’s story? one expose about Leo could’ve brought her down, or just one person verifying that she wasn’t actually a therapist.

3.) The magazine interview was poorly written.

4.) What’s up with her hallucinating in the closet? So, she actually was manic and her husband didn’t totally fabricate it? Given she was staying up all night and stalking someone, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to assume she was manic. What narrative purpose did this scene in the closet serve? it just kind of un resolves things.

nit pick, but why up her SSRIs to stabilize her elevated mood, if she’s manic?

5.) The ending, where Leo was stalking her in retaliation, was corny.

I feel like the book should’ve ended with a more fleshed out version of the confrontation in the kitchen.