instead of a story

Alas, I am not a young writer; I have been writing for many years. But recently I came across Ray Bradbury’s advice for young writers, put in the simplified form of a challenge: read one poem, one short story and one essay per day, preferably from different eras and different fields and write one short story per week. I first saw a version of it as a 30-day challenge, but then saw something else that said Bradbury’s bigger theory was that if continued over the course of a year, nobody could write 52 bad stories in a row, which I dispute. But still, it’s a fun idea.

I already read every day, I already write every day; but it’s nice to get better at something and the discipline of it is (I think) oddly appealing.
In fact, what Bradbury said (at least in 2001 at The Sixth Annual Writer’s Symposium by the Sea) –  is considerably more elaborate and quite a lot less appealing – but probably even better as advice:

“I’ll give you a program to follow every night, a very simple program…one poem a night, one short story a night, one essay a night, for the next 1,000 nights. From various fields: archaeology, zoology, biology, all the great philosophers of time, comparing them…But that means that every night then, before you go to bed, you’re stuffing your head with one poem, one short story, one essay—at the end of a thousand nights, Jesus God, you’ll be full of stuff, won’t you?”

So anyway, I started my own version of the challenge last Friday (though truth be told, I didn’t do my reading before bed in every case, just at various times during the day). So far been a very nice thing to do. A sort of caveat is that so far I’ve been relying on books I already own and that therefore one might assume I’ve already read. In most cases I had, but as everyone who accumulates books knows (especially if some have been bought for a specific purposes, such as academic studies) there are things that remain unread, or at least not fully read for decades, while remaining on your mental I will read this list.

I only chose things that, if I had read them it was so long ago that I had little or no memory of them. As it turned out, I tended to have a very different idea of what they were like from how they seem to me now; it was interesting.

What struck me most forcibly over the course of a few days was how I value different things in different media. Understanding is the main one: reading a story and feeling that I didn’t fully grasp it really bugged me and spoiled my enjoyment of it. Reading an essay and feeling that I didn’t fully understand it made me think that the writer had failed to communicate their ideas as well as they might have (for someone of my mental capacity at least; I am not, and don’t pretend to be everyone’s ideal reader). But in poetry the feeling that comes from the work is (to me) almost independent of the meaning, which had little to do with how much I did or didn’t engage with a poem. I’m not sure I felt that way when I was younger and read a lot more poetry than I do now.

The first poets I really loved as a teenager were to an extent ‘difficult’ – Sylvia Plath, early WH Auden and TS Eliot. But at some point in my 20s my favourite poet became Philip Larkin (whose work I still love) and I think to some extent I absorbed his attitudes toward obscure or modernist poetry and began to value clarity of meaning more than anything. Now, decades later I find that clarity needn’t be one thing: no poem I read this week had anything more immediately vivid and clear than the opening lines from Seamus Heaney’s Cairn-Maker. Whether I ‘understand’ the poem as a whole I don’t know, but these lines feel miraculously precise and evocative and the rest of the poem is no less impressive: I loved it

He robbed the stones’ nests, uncradled
As he orphaned and betrothed rock
To rock…

Seamus Heaney, ‘Cairn-maker’, from Wintering Out (Faber & Faber, 1972).

So anyway, here’s my first week, or 8 days since apparently I can’t count. Hang around at the end for my own (lack of a) story:

FRIDAY

Essay: Camille Paglia – Sexual Personae: the cancelled preface (1990) Back in the early 90s, before libertarianism became almost exclusively a right-wing preserve I loved Camille Paglia’s macho & egotistical writing: it was exciting and stimulating. Turns out it still is, but to 21st century me it’s also as infuriating as it is interesting and it seemed like every time she makes a good point (which is often) she unfailingly follows it up with some reactionary/annoying point that feels uncannily like something from the unpleasant side of the current culture war.

Poem: Wang Wei – Written at My House near the Wang River at a Time of Incessant Rain (c.750 AD). This is a very pretty and mysterious poem, more a collection of brilliantly delicate images than any kind of narrative.

Short Story: JD Salinger – Pretty Mouth and Green My Eyes (1948). I love The Catcher in the Rye, but aside from that was always a bit disappointed by Salinger’s work. Having not read this since I was probably 21 I was quite taken aback by how good it is: incredibly bitter and ironic, I loved it.

SATURDAY

Essay: Robert Hughes – Paul Gauguin (1988) I half expected to find this a little dated given the advances in Gauguin scholarship since the 80s (especially as I recently read Sue Prideaux’s phenomenal and game-changing biography Wild Thing) but in fact Hughes’ disdain for the various conflicting legends of Gauguin and his focus not on his supposed primitivism, but his actual sophistication and technical skill make this an excellently concise overview of a sometimes misunderstood artist

Poem: Anne Sexton – For John, Who Begs Me Not to Enquire Further (1960). I love Anne Sexton and this is a typically raw, intense and enigmatic poem, which may (I’m not sure) be saying ‘don’t just dismiss me as my mental illness.’ The thought that lingered with me after reading it was a very relatable one; it’s the hope that gets you.

Short Story: Story: F. Scott Fitzgerald – A Short Trip Home (1927) This was very gripping and atmospheric, more of a tough thriller type story than I’d normally associate with FSF (who I like a lot). I really enjoyed reading it, but the ending felt like a letdown and definitely not something a (much less literary) genre writer would have done. After I’d read it I kind of felt like I’d missed the point somehow; not my favourite sensation after reading a story (this was a late night one though, so might have to revisit it when wide awake in case it was just me)

MONDAY

Essay: Olivia Laing – Lamentations (2017) This was an excellent little essay about religious art which I was bound to like, partly because I like religious art, partly because Laing’s point aligns with my beliefs – basically, there’s no need for afterlife, we have life – but mostly because she is a very good writer.

Poem: Douglas Dunn – 13 steps and the 13th of March (1985) and After the War (1972) – I ended up reading two Dunn poems because I’d just heard that he died. He’s not a poet whose work I’ve ever loved (though I’ve never disliked him either), but these were good. The first, from a book of poems about the death of his wife is very sensitive and restrained and moving, but I think I preferred the second, which was about childhood and war and trauma and had a kind of oblique intensity that I thought was very effective

Story: Will Self – Between the Conceits (1994) – One of my favourite stories I read this week. Self’s surrealism was perhaps over-hyped in the early 90s but I really loved his work. At some point (not for any particular reason) I stopped keeping up with his stuff, though I still like it whenever I read it (especially his journalism). This was very funny, very straightforwardly written and deeply weird, it reminded me, very unexpectedly, of Clive Barker, another of my favourite writers in that period, though their prose styles are wildly different

MONDAY

Essay: Christopher Hitchens – The New Commandments (2010) – I love Christopher Hitchens, both before and after his transformation from being a radical left-wing writer to being am unusual right-wing one (more is made of that transformation than I think should be – almost all of his political beliefs remained the same, from reading his excellent memoir Hitch-22 it was mostly a reaction – I think an unfortunate one, it certainly didn’t bring him any happiness – to the aftermath of 9/11). But this was a fun, very sensible and amusing deconstruction/reconstruction of “the” 10 commandments (which as he points out are really only 10 of the many commandments in the Bible).

Poem: Thomas Hoccleve – On Richard II’s Burial at Westminster (1413) – This was unexpectedly one of the poems I loved reading the most. Reading medieval English can be difficult but there’s something very vivid and moving about the language. This poem is basically a religious/political one that’s filled with a sense of relief, it’s about how Henry V was putting things back on track after a period of chaos and strife (which wasn’t however over) by treating the bones of a dead king with the appropriate respect.

Story: Aldous Huxley – Half-Holiday (1926) – again I loved this – Monday was a good reading day! My favourite Huxley isn’t the Brave New World/Doors of Perception/Heaven & Hell Huxley, but the one that wrote uncomfortable and sometimes bitter social comedies like Antic Hay and Point Counter Point. This was a typically sad little story about a poor, awkward young man with a bad stutter who fantasises about picking up fashionable, posh girls and tries to do so, with painful results.

TUESDAY

Essay: George Orwell – World Affairs, 1945 (1945) This was a depressing but extremely accurate prediction of what was about to happen (the Cold War), that was written after VE day but before the atom bombs dropped.

Poem: Seamus Heaney – Cairn-Maker (1972) I first read Heaney at school and therefore had a slight aversion to his work, but at some point in my 20s I ended up getting all of the books he’d written to date, which got harder to understand as they went along. This is a superbly-written poem, the imagery is so immediate that it took me by surprise. In the end I couldn’t decide if it’s a purely a descriptive poem or not – I think it probably isn’t but it worked for me on that level. I think it has the most precisely chosen words I read for this ‘challenge’- loved it.

Story: Charles Bukowski – Swastika (the title is actually a swastika, not the word) (1969-72?) – God this was lame. Very enjoyable but completely silly story about an unnamed US president (Nixon, presumably) being kidnapped and having his body taken over by Hitler while he is put in Hitler’s body. Okay, Charles. I do like Bukowski but his quality control was non-existent.

WEDNESDAY.

Essay: Karl Marx – Investigation of Tortures in India (1857) I like Marx the journalist a lot; this was a good, clear (oddly Orwell-like, or the other way around, logically) examination of the scandal then coming to light of torture being used by the British administrators in India, for the purpose of extorting money. Typically there was an official inquest, but it blamed the Indian enforcers and so on and cleared the higher up white people of blame. Marx cuts through their bullshit nicely.

Poem: Sylvia Plath – Private Ground (written 1960/1, published 1971) – Sylvia Plath was my favourite poet for years, but the poems I remember are mostly famous ones from Ariel (1965). This one, about cleaning up a (family I assume) garden and draining the pond before winter, has superb word choices, especially for the dead baby fish (like orange peel). The overall mood is full of a chilly melancholy rather than Plath’s more dramatic horror etc.

Story: JG Ballard – The Reptile Enclosure (1963) – I’ve read so many Ballard stories over the years and I know I’d read this but I couldn’t remember what happened in it. It’s an excellent and very ‘Ballardian’ surreal little story that begins in a kind of mundane way being about a married couple who are unromantically putting up with each other, but typically ends in catastrophe.

THURSDAY

Essay: Charles Baudelaire – The Modern Public & Photography (1859) – This was an excellent & extremely prescient article about how the virtues of art and photography are different & how photography was being weaponised by the talentless in a war against art: seemed a bit over the top in a way but there was one paragraph which could have been written today about AI and would be just as true.

Poem: Andrew Motion – Leaving Belfast (1978) – this was a very nice, straightforwardly written but ambivalent poem about leaving Belfast and with it ‘the troubles’ – very effectively evoking the strain of living with an implicit but rarely openly stated threat.

Story: Thomas Burke – Tai Fu and Pansy Greers (1916) – I bought Thomas Burke’s sensational (and often pretty racist) short story collection Limehouse Nights when I was very interested in silent cinema (several of his stories were made into highly successful films like Broken Blossoms). The stories are all concerned with street life in what was then London’s Chinatown and the characters are down-and-outs, drug users, prostitutes etc: it’s shockingly un-genteel for English writing of the era. This was a sleazy, melodramatic but very readable and in some ways quite modern story. It felt quite Americanised in a Damon Runyan way, but I think that’s because it’s so rare to read the street slang etc of pre-war Britain, which was far more modern than the acceptable fictionalised speech of the era.

FRIDAY

Essay: Dawn Ades – Paolozzi, Surrealism, Ethnography (1985) – Dawn Ades is one of my favourite writers on art and this was interesting piece about the relationship between surrealism & ‘the primitive’ which was quite different from the usual modernist primitvism of Picasso or the German Expressionists. The strong anti-colonial aspect of Surrealism (which people often overlook) made their use of ‘foreign’ art quite different and in this case Ades talks about using ethnographic material as much to highlight the alien qualities of contemporary Western art and culture as to make foreign art seem alien and new

Poem: Alexander Scott – Departe, Departe, Departe (c.1550s) – I love reading medieval Scots even more than medieval English (though they are very similar; but there’s something so nice and distinctive about the way Scots has ‘Qu’ instead of W: I love ‘quhat’ instead of what, ‘quha’ instead of who etc). This is a beautiful, very conventional romantic ballad but I loved the way that reading (quietly but aloud to myself) it makes it comprehensible where at first it looks opaque. It’s full of odd words like ‘spreit’ which, from context you quickly realise is ‘spirit’.

Story: Milan Kundera – The Hitchhiking Game (1969) – This was interesting because it was the first Kundera story I ever read, back when I was a teenager. At the time I found him very grown up and kind of cool, but now he seems like the kind of unreconstructed 60s man who would call women ‘chicks’. It’s a good, horrible little story and (a distinction I’m not sure is worth making) sexist without I think being actually misogynistic: Kundera likes women, he just thinks of them as a species apart from men. But really, it’s a gripping little story about the illusion/delusion of romance, that’s looked at in such a ‘manly’ way that it’s kind of funny. When I was younger I would never have thought of Milan Kundera as a simple-minded, macho Hemingway kind of writer (no offense to either of them) but that’s how he seems in this story.

***

So, I did the reading – but although I have written a lot in the past week (my favourite thing was writing up an interview I did with the Faroese singer Eivør, who was great) I didn’t write a story. I do write fiction occasionally (as a teenager I kind of assumed I’d be a novelist one day; so far, I’m not) and over the years have written quite a lot of stories of one kind or another, mostly horror.

I’m sure at some point during my – to put it in tedious online speak – ‘Bradbury journey’ I will write a story. I did have the germ (or seeds: which is smaller?) of an idea which could be a story but which I don’t feel inclined to develop at present, so here’s that:

The idea comes from the possible relationship between two sources: there’s a famous passage in the Bible (Mark 5:9, the internet says) in which Jesus meets a possessed man. Even for an atheist, the Bible is an endless source of fascinating ideas, but why this particular passage popped into my head I don’t know – maybe because it’s nearly Halloween? Jesus talks to the possessor(s) of the man – although I see online that people who don’t understand the meanings of words are following the tradition of referring to ‘a demon named Legion.’ FFS; it’s hardly unclear: the voice even says “we are many.” Look up what legion means! I don’t think it’s intended as the ‘Royal we’. Maybe if the translators responsible for the King James version, instead of writing “My name is Legion”  had used the just as accurate “We have many names,” people would get it. But it would be a sad loss; it’s a powerfully sinister and resonant phrase.

Anyway; I was also thinking about something I’d read where a newspaper (can’t remember which, I think the Times, but wouldn’t like to state it with authority) cited in a story either ChatGPT or Claude as a source, like they would any interviewee. The journalist did not take into account that the ‘Claude’ who a teenager is asking about their acne, the ‘Claude’ that someone is asking to sift through a lengthy legal document to point out its salient points and the ‘Claude’ who is being used to select military targets aren’t one person called Claude; Claude the agony aunt is not aware of the information that Claude the legal aid and Claude the missile-aimer are giving to different users, although if asked it could probably find out. Claude’s name, in other words is Legion: how that is developed into the narrative of a short story I don’t know, but I do know that it could be. So that’ll do for now. Onwards!

the book even of my secret soul (about books, again)

I love books. I want books. Post-Christmas I’m in the enviable position of having – not money, but in a way even better, virtual money that can only be spent on books. What I don’t have though, is a lot of space for books. So, periodically pruning the library (too grand a word) or book collection (worse?) or “my books” (better) is a painful necessity. But what to prune, and why? So far, every single time I’ve put together a box of books and dispersed it to charity shops I’ve almost immediately ‘needed’ one of the books I purged. On a few occasions (see here) I’ve bought back books (not the same actual copy though; I’m not that bad, yet) that I got rid of. And I’ll probably do it again, but I’m trying not to.

Why is it painful to get rid of books? Pompously, because the books you own are a reflection of yourself; of skins shed and personalities outgrown and discarded, and in a way a direct line back to your (possibly alarming) former selves with their sometimes alien tastes and enthusiasms.* Less pompously, because in general, I want more books, not fewer. I can’t think of an occasion when I got rid of a book simply because I didn’t like or just didn’t want it, though I’m sure it’s happened. And so, for decades I still owned (and may still have somewhere) the little red Gideons Bible that was given out to pupils when starting high school (do they still do that?). Its bookplate (ex-libris? Both terms seem very archaic) hints strongly at the typical kind of 12 year old boy that it was given to: Name: William Pinfold Form: human. Similarly, I may still have the books given to me in the street by Hare Krishna followers, which seems not to happen now but was a frequent enough thing in the early 90s that I can still remember without checking** that they were credited to and/or consisted of teachings by “His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami.” They often had nice, pleasingly psychedelic cover paintings but were invariably disappointing to try to read because, even when they had amazing titles like Easy Journey to Other Planets, they were all about Krishna consciousness – who knew?. But these are books that would be impossible to replace (in a personal sense; easy enough to get hold of different copies of them). More complicatedly – and just annoyingly, with space at a premium, I have multiple copies of some favourite books and will probably buy even more copies of them, if I come across them with covers that I like but don’t have and if they are cheap.

*case in point; I had forgotten how much I liked Camille Paglia in the days before libertarianism was an essentially standard right-wing-asshole viewpoint and when her provocative/confrontational ideas didn’t yet include being disingenuously frivolous about child abuse

** I’m only human though; I spelled his name wrong until looking out a picture of the book, Possibly absorbing his teachings might have helped?

So yes, I have quite a lot of books; but although ‘book collectors’ exist, I don’t qualify as one. Collecting is deliberate and with presumably, a specific end point in view; a collection. Collecting things is fun up to a point, but ultimately a thankless and frustrating task without the required personality type. It (fleetingly) irritates me when an author I like has written four or five books and the publisher changes the cover design or size after the first few, so the mismatched chaos of a complete collection is not for me. Not to mention that there are writers – Michael Moorcock, in print since the 1950s and as far as I know still writing, is the obvious example for me – who have, over the course of decades, written a ridiculous number of books, which have appeared under countless imprints in myriad editions and countries and therefore offer an opportunity for an epic and soul-crushingly futile quest for the true completist. I am not that completist.

who wouldn’t want a beautiful Aubrey Beardsley ex-libris in all their books? But who would want to actually paste them into all their books?

On the other hand, following the old stately home-library tradition of having a personalised ex-libris/bookplate/sticker thing, with its individualistic iconography always seems like a nice idea – even if it’s essentially just a picturesque way of writing your name in a book, which I would never do. It’s nice see a decorative ex-libris in an old book, but although the thought of having one’s own books personalised in that way is nice, the reality of actually sticking them in the books – fun for maybe the first ten or twenty, but after that too tedious to consider, is not so appealing. So, not a collector; but even not a true bibliophile either, at least in the sense that sometimes is written about. I do love books, but not all or any books, I don’t contemplate, like a wine taster, the smell of old books. There are of course books with distinctive odours, some pleasant (to me) like the dry and somehow slightly spicy smell (probably best to not think too much about) of old calf-bound volumes from the 18th century and earlier, others less so, like the peculiarly vomit-like bouquet of new children’s books. And though browsing through shelves and rooms of books can be and usually is an entirely pleasant pastime, after the excitement has faded there can be something a little depressing about looking through piles of chilly, mildewy, corrugated and fat-with-damp paperbacks in the bigger, more drafty and warehouse-like charity shops or auction rooms.

the uninspiring cover that inspired me to read beyond my taste, strangely

Still; books are artifacts in themselves and not just valuable for their contents. Though judging books by their covers is frowned on, that’s kind of what the covers are for. I’ve written about this stuff in several places before so won’t go on about it here, but there’s never been a time that I’ve read as hungrily or as indiscriminately as when I was a child, and until I found authors that were trustworthy – I will try to get onto the second part of that Robert Westall feature some time this year – covers were the thing that drew me in. I loved fantasy, history and sci-fi, so covers were what made books leap off the shelves of the local library or school library. And there were somehow never enough books to read, so that when, aged 12 – 14 or so, our English teacher required pupils to take books out of the school library every week, it was a perfect opportunity to branch out. After a fairly short time the kind of books I automatically wanted to read had been exhausted and it was necessary to try something else. It’s a strange thing, reading not-for-you books, kind of like trying on other people’s clothes, but I gave it a go, as I have a few times since then*. The book that stands out in my memory – or at least its cover does – is Desmond Bagley’s Bahama Crisis (1980). Being a newcomer to men’s thrillers (still an alien world mostly) I think I was expecting, without much excitement, James Bond (never a fan)-style action, but as I very hazily remember the book was mostly a soapy kind of story about the difficulties of running a hotel in the Bahamas.(??) I didn’t mind it, but although records tell me** that I got more Desmond Bagleys out of the library – I had to get something – none of them, or their titles or even their covers stick in my mind at all.

*reading not-for-me books, not trying on other peoples’ clothes                                                                             ** there’s a list in an old school jotter which I never threw away

It’s hard to imagine, as the world has become ever-more commercially driven, but it feels like publishers nowadays underestimate the seductive power of a good cover design (though what constitutes a good one is obviously subjective). There are several authors I liked as a young adult – Milan Kundera, Ian McEwan and Truman Capote spring to mind, but so (who would have thought it?) does Jean-Paul Sartre – who I might well never have read at all if I didn’t find the covers of their books so alluring. In retrospect the late 80s/early 90s seems like a golden age of book design to me, and don’t think it’s entirely because of the age I was when I first saw them. I was still only in my early 20s a few years later when book jackets became dominated by neon, acid colours and deliberately jarring designs and those left me cold at the time and look dated now. The covers I associate with that ‘golden age’ are entirely typical of the look that much literary fiction was going for at the time.

Milan Kundera’s books are actually about 50% better when read with these covers

Have there ever been cooler looking books than the 80s Faber & Faber or “King Penguin” (whatever happened to King Penguins?) Milan Kunderas? Or Russell Mills‘ genius covers for Picador’s Ian McEwans? Is it just a coincidence that they have a lot in common Dave McKean’s graphic novel designs of the time like Violent Cases and Arkham Asylum or Bill Sienkiewicz’s Stray Toasters? And though Penguin Modern Classics still look good now have they ever looked better than the pale green spines and black and white photo covers of that period?

assorted Ian McEwans, graphic novels & Penguin Modern Classics
bilious mid-90s book design
Boris Vallejo good; John Norman bad

Of course covers can mislead too; much as Peruvian painter Boris Vallejo is some kind of genius, one quickly learned that his covers were no guarantee of quality. Everything about John Norman’s Gor series – the sub-Tolkien/Robert E Howard setting, the Vallejo (and Vallejo imitators – of whom there were many) artwork, the swords and sorcery and gratuitous violence and sex – were guaranteed to appeal to the male, teenage fantasy fan; and yet the books were bizarrely dull to read. Actually, to be fair to Norman, the sex in the Gor books is hardly gratuitous, since it’s basically the whole point of the series; but the endless, tedious essays about masculine power and the bondage fantasies that pepper his books; without the thrill of the quest or even an alleviating sense of humour, is definitely an acquired taste. It was good to read, years later, Micheal Moorcock – along with Tolkien my favourite fantasy author – writing about how boring and tacky the Gor books were. I didn’t think it could just be me. Of course, Moorcock attacked Tolkien too, but though his essay Epic Pooh is not only a good read, but also hard to argue with at times (Moorcock’s main point is that Tolkien is conservative in his worldview and reproduces the class outlook and prejudices of his generation in his fiction) somehow Tolkien’s books resist the criticism effortlessly, if you’re a fan. I think it’s because for Tolkien, the background and history and world-building (as I believe they say nowadays) was the main point of interest, whereas for most subsequent heroic fantasy authors, all that is just the window dressing, so that Middle Earth feels real and believable in a way that most fantasy “realms” don’t. I don’t think there’s any point in Lord of the Rings where the reader has a question that they feel Tolkien couldn’t answer satisfactorily. That said, I imagine sex-related questions would have made him uncomfortable, whereas John Norman might not be able to tell you the detailed history and folklore of Counter-Earth as Tolkien could with Middle Earth, but he could definitely tell you which ropes, gag or whips are favoured by which tribes.

So; looking through my books there are many different versions of myself; because you read books that reflect your interests but often you also get those interests from books themselves. From the age of 8 or so, the Fighting Fantasy role-playing game book series cut across many of my interests. But even then, those books appealed to the child-me in the first place because I loved history and mythology and legends and Asterix the Gaul. But I’ve written more about children’s books and related subjects here and here and here and here and probably elsewhere too, so will try not to repeat myself. It’s easy to think of books that had a big influence on my interests as a child – the version of me that wanted to be an archaeologist wasn’t just thanks to Indiana Jones; before I ever saw Raiders of the Lost Ark I was already fascinated by the Aztecs and Incas because of Tintin and the Romans via Asterix – but also those things plus Ancient Egypt, Ancient China, the Normans, medieval history and knights etc via a big book called The History of the World that I got at a Primary School “Bring & Buy Sale” when I must have been 8 or so. That book had – still has in fact – painted illustrations that I remember vividly; ancient Sumerians, Julius Caesar being stabbed to death in the forum, ancient Greek ladies in strange clothes that exposed their breasts; mysteriously exciting even to an 8 year old, Genghis Khan on his horse, Viking raiders etc, etc. The me who loved space stuff was partly thanks to excitement about the space shuttle program (admittedly that cooled off after the Challenger disaster) and Star Wars, but also 2000 AD comic and the very badly-bound but beautiful reprints of old Dan Dare comics that Paper Tiger published in the early 80s)

But all this is getting away from the point, which is that book ownership is not just about reading. Books like the Bible or Easy Journey to Other Planets are not being kept to read, any more than E.W. Hildick’s Deadline for McGurk, a towering masterpiece as a kid but probably unreadable as an adult, or the different variants of The Fellowship of the Ring or JG Ballard’s Crash that take up valuable shelf space. Getting rid of them would feel wrong, at least unless there was a good cause or if more worthy books come along and the space must reluctantly be yielded to them. That’s the not-so-great thing about having book tokens to spend; the need to consider, plan and use them wisely. I probably won’t.

Book lover’s regrets – should have bought it but didn’t! Perhaps the greatest book cover of all time