14. About a Boy by Nick Hornby

Hornby, Nick. About a Boy. New York: Riverhead, 1998.

The thing that must be understood from the out set is that Nick Hornby is a good writer. He's funny in a dry way. His characters are, in a way, gross exaggerations of realistic behavior. So, when one reads About a Boy it is important to understand that the main character Will isn't meant to be everyday ordinary shallow. He's meant to be a a clever exaggeration that moves right through shallow and self absorbed and into something almost redeemable.

That being said, it is sometimes difficult to read a book like this. It's always immediately obvious why the character's decisions are going to end in nothing but pain and it's often painful 'watching' them make those decisions. What ultimately saves the book is the contrast between the two main characters. On one side is Will; the self-centered, indulgent, aimless man living in a vacuum. On the other is Marcus; the strange child of a suicidal hippy who is surrounded by equally strange people. Both characters are completely out of touch with the world, but in totally different ways. Somehow, they meet in the middle. Somehow that is beautiful.

13. Flatland by Edwin Abbott

Abbott, Edwin. Flatland. New York: Dover, 1952.

Flatland is a book that ended up on the list because multiple people recommended it to me. 'Multiple' meaning more than four. As much as I talk books with people, it is still rare to get more than two recommendations on a book not on the best sellers list in the last couple of years. There are a lot of books out there that satisfy a variety of tastes. Compound with that, that I know a variety of people with highly diverse interests. So, when I get more than four different recommendations for a book originally published in the 1880s it does peak my interest.

The way Flatland was always described to me was a 'geometric proof in novel form.' To that I'm adding it's a study in dimensionality and, for lack of more education in math, 'mathematical perspective.' These things are true. Lots of diagrams.

However, it is a mistake to say that this is simply a creative way of writing a mathematical proof. Unfortunately, that's all anyone ever seems to remember. This was written during the height of the Victorian Era: women are supposed to be fragile stupid flowers, a high importance is placed manners, men are the authoritarian heads of their households, and careful observation of expectations. So when I was about half way through and I encountered what a woman was in shapeland, I was shock and pissed. (see how I don't tell you what actually pissed me off, enticing yes?)

Anyway, I wasn't pissed long. Soon, it was pretty clear that Abbott was satirizing his entire culture: rules, expectations, everything. For such a short book there's a lot to it.