I was waiting for someone to say that. Not pretentious, just dull. The notion of a extra-dimensional indescribable horror does not terrify me; what's the point of fearing something that explicitly terrifying? It is so foreign to us, that the human mind cannot comprehend it so, naturally, we must fear it. Personally, fear comes from the human mind and the tiny flaws it sees in otherwise familiar surroundings. You've got to play on (and play with) human emotions and instincts.Falseprophet said:Although I have several collections of Lovecraft, I haven't gotten very far with them, mostly because he bores me to tears.
OT: I like books with a little more too them than a good story, but I do admit my choices are occasionally a little "pretentious" (although the authors and novels I choose are not.) I will admit that I read Jean Paul Satre's Nausea out of a desire to read something "intelligent" in a case of pretentious prejudice (positive prejudice, but prejudice nonetheless). Nausea is literary coal. You read page after page about the tedious life of an un-likeable Frenchman as he gets through existence until you hit a diamond of philosophical awe (followed by more coal, few little diamonds.) I struggled with Nausea, because it is a philosopher telling a story to put his point across, not a story that makes the point for him.
I could read Brave New World daily if I had the time, was recently impressed by "Snow" by Orhan Pamuk. I like books which give me an idea of life that I cannot have an awareness of from my existence so far. The Art of War is not a worthy read, more an aloof, practical common sense look at sending large numbers of men to kill each-other. I am almost tempted to call those who read it for pleasure "pretentious" but we've had enough of that in this thread.