{"id":23168,"date":"2019-12-31T08:03:48","date_gmt":"2019-12-31T16:03:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/michaelhans.com\/eclecticism\/?p=23168"},"modified":"2022-03-07T09:47:55","modified_gmt":"2022-03-07T17:47:55","slug":"2019-reading-round-up","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/michaelhans.com\/eclecticism\/2019\/12\/31\/2019-reading-round-up\/","title":{"rendered":"2019 Reading Round-Up 📚"},"content":{"rendered":"

Every year, I set myself a goal of reading at least 52 books over the course of the year —\u00a0an average of one a week. This year I made it to 62<\/a>. Here’s a (not very) quick overview…<\/p>\n

\"My<\/p>\n

Non-fiction: More than last year, when I just read one, but this still isn’t a category I gravitate towards terribly much \u2014\u00a0and even when I do, there’s a good chance it’ll be related to geekery or fandom in some way, such as with Star Trek: The Official Guide to the Animated Series<\/em><\/a>, or Randall Munroe’s How To<\/em><\/a>, which is technically non-fiction, but very, very<\/em> geeky non-fiction. Definitely the best of this year’s non-fiction was Erik Larson’s Dead Wake<\/em><\/a>, a narrative of the sinking of the Lusitania<\/em> (which I read while on a cruise ship for this year’s vacation, because that just seemed appropriate), but Art Spiegelman’s Ma<\/a>us<\/a><\/em> graphic novel about his father’s experiences in the concentration camps of WWII was a very close second. (I’m also bemused that for someone who’s not really into military or World War stuff, my top non-fiction reads were both World War-related.)<\/p>\n

Non-genre-fiction (where “genre” is shorthand — though, not very short, if you include this parenthetical — for science-fiction, fantasy, and horror): Not a single one this year.<\/p>\n

Quality genre fiction: Arguably (depending on one’s definition of “quality”, at least) the majority of my reading, in large part because while this is already my general wheelhouse, this year I decided<\/a> to read my way through all of the Best Novel Hugo Award winners. Over the course of the year I read 21 of the 75 winners<\/a> (28%), and while many haven’t aged particularly well, and I’ve discovered that I am not<\/em> a fan of early Heinlein, I’ve been enjoying the journey through classic SF and am looking forward to continuing with the project this year.<\/p>\n

Of course, the year kicked off with reading this year’s Philip K. Dick Award nominees<\/a>, which are always worth reading, even when individual nominees don’t work for me. This year, my personal favorites were Ian McDonald’s Time Was<\/em><\/a>, Audrey Schulman’s Theory of Bastards<\/em><\/a>, and Vandana Singh’s Ambiguity Machines and Other Stories<\/em><\/a>. As usual, my pick for the winner (Ambiguity Machines<\/em>) didn’t get it, but the actual winner (Theory of Bastards<\/em>) was well deserved.<\/p>\n

Outside of award winners and nominees, I particularly enjoyed Neal Stephenson’s Fall, or: Dodge in Hell<\/em><\/a>…admittedly, not a huge surprise, as I’m a big fan of Stephenson’s work, and he’s currently the one author whose works I’ll pre-order in hardback to ensure I get them as soon as possible every time.<\/p>\n

Fluff genre fiction: The rest<\/a>. As usual, dominated by Star Trek novels, as that’s my “comfort food”, and is always good for a break between choices that, as has been happening with the Hugo winners, are either high-concept brain-stimulating SF, or so dated that they’re painful to read, however well they were received at the time. Outside of Trek, I did particularly enjoy Diana Rowland’s White Trash Zombie<\/em><\/a> series. I found the first four at Goodwill, and then tracked down the last two once I’d made it that far through the series. They’re a fun addition to the zombie zeitgeist, and are worth the read if they catch your eye at all.<\/p>\n

Finally, some stats on my year’s reading, according to Goodreads<\/a>:<\/p>\n