![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Musing again on the subject of giving up on things. OK, so we know that how far you go along with something depends on circumstances. Just how sucky it is to start with dictates how far you persist. Things like reputation, importance etc may play a part too. Given that, the 10 minutes I gave Caprica was probably not enough and I may have to return to it.
But what has been interesting me is the other end of the giving up spectrum. As what point when you have been persisting with something should you just suck it up and see it through to the end. Is there such a point?
I got over 80% of the way through Nick Harkaway's The Gone-Away World. If I can read 400 or so pages of a book, surely I can read the last 100. Yet I had no desire to do so. I had no interest in what was happening or the fate of the characters. I even read the epilogue to see if there were hints of big things or revelations in the last part of the book. It is clear there is a big revelation at the end. Even that wasn't enough to make me go back and find out. Yet I got through that first 80%. Should I have kept trying?
Some explanation can be offered by the structure of the book. The first chapter opens ad a high action hard SF tale. Then it goes into a 300 page flashback tracking the life of the main character up to that point. Yes 300 pages. Effectively a whole book of a typical litfic coming of age story embedded in the SF novel. I actually rather like this type of story and wasn't put off by its intrusion into the SF novel I had started reading. In fact, it was a pretty well done example of its kind. But then the book eventually reconnected with the story started in the first chapter. At that point it also fell apart. You can get by telling a life story without much plot - the traversal of a life provides the structure. But you do really need one to tell an adventure story. Well usually anyway - Gene Wolfe seems to be able to get away with it, but Nick Harkaway couldn't pull it off.
Have any of you read this book? I wouldn't mind a CliffsNotes summary of the ending to confirm my suspicions even if it isn't worth reading through those last 100 pages.
But what has been interesting me is the other end of the giving up spectrum. As what point when you have been persisting with something should you just suck it up and see it through to the end. Is there such a point?
I got over 80% of the way through Nick Harkaway's The Gone-Away World. If I can read 400 or so pages of a book, surely I can read the last 100. Yet I had no desire to do so. I had no interest in what was happening or the fate of the characters. I even read the epilogue to see if there were hints of big things or revelations in the last part of the book. It is clear there is a big revelation at the end. Even that wasn't enough to make me go back and find out. Yet I got through that first 80%. Should I have kept trying?
Some explanation can be offered by the structure of the book. The first chapter opens ad a high action hard SF tale. Then it goes into a 300 page flashback tracking the life of the main character up to that point. Yes 300 pages. Effectively a whole book of a typical litfic coming of age story embedded in the SF novel. I actually rather like this type of story and wasn't put off by its intrusion into the SF novel I had started reading. In fact, it was a pretty well done example of its kind. But then the book eventually reconnected with the story started in the first chapter. At that point it also fell apart. You can get by telling a life story without much plot - the traversal of a life provides the structure. But you do really need one to tell an adventure story. Well usually anyway - Gene Wolfe seems to be able to get away with it, but Nick Harkaway couldn't pull it off.
Have any of you read this book? I wouldn't mind a CliffsNotes summary of the ending to confirm my suspicions even if it isn't worth reading through those last 100 pages.