Day 23, another book completed, I'm still on schedule (in fact, slightly ahead!) and I'm feeling pretty good about that! Tomorrow I start reading 'The Siege of Krishnapur' by J.G. Farrell which I'm really, really looking forward to. I loved 'Troubles' (have you read it yet? What are you waiting for! Go get yourself a copy, I'll wait here. Got it? Good. Let's continue) and after the disaster that was 'G.' I could really use an enjoyable piece of fiction. My book shelf has been mocking me with it's stacks of delicious urban fantasy, steampunk, romance, and mystery, but I haven't given in! I will stay strong!
I was actually surprised by the final section of 'G.' which turned out to be the most coherent part of the entire novel, and was almost lyrical in parts. The scene at the ball, in particular, had a lovely rhythmic flow to it that was almost beautiful. Not only was the phrasing more appealing, I felt for the first time in the entire book that the "principle protagonist" was more than just a politicized penis, that he was a character with intentions and (dare I say it?) emotions. I actually Felt Something for the character. It was oh so brief, and in no way redeemed the book for me, but I was relieved that the past eight days of reading weren't a complete waste. Not as relieved as I am that I will never have to read another book by Berger for the rest of my life, but relieved.
Showing posts with label G.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label G.. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Monday, October 3, 2011
Like Pulling Teeth
I was all ready to make comparisons between pulling teeth and reading deconstructionist fiction following my wisdom tooth removal today - but, the dental appointment was so much easier and more pleasant than reading 'G.'!
I love reading, and I've never really understood how someone could not enjoy it - fiction takes you out of your everyday life, while affirming your connections with the rest of humanity. It's a beautiful experience to read a book. Someone has imagined these characters, this world, these events and through the written word they have re-created their ideas within your own imagination - it is really an incredible feat, bordering on magic!
This novel is not providing anything even close to that. It's driving me a bit crazy. The story itself is not bad, but I simply cannot enjoy it with the constant interruptions of Berger writing about his writing. In fact, I will go so far as to say that I hate this novel. I had a moment of panic this afternoon when I decided that I would never read another book by Berger, and couldn't remember whether he had two Booker winners! Thankfully, another 124 pages and it's done. Plus, my next book is 'The Siege of Krishnapur' by J.G. Farrell, so things are looking up!
I love reading, and I've never really understood how someone could not enjoy it - fiction takes you out of your everyday life, while affirming your connections with the rest of humanity. It's a beautiful experience to read a book. Someone has imagined these characters, this world, these events and through the written word they have re-created their ideas within your own imagination - it is really an incredible feat, bordering on magic!
This novel is not providing anything even close to that. It's driving me a bit crazy. The story itself is not bad, but I simply cannot enjoy it with the constant interruptions of Berger writing about his writing. In fact, I will go so far as to say that I hate this novel. I had a moment of panic this afternoon when I decided that I would never read another book by Berger, and couldn't remember whether he had two Booker winners! Thankfully, another 124 pages and it's done. Plus, my next book is 'The Siege of Krishnapur' by J.G. Farrell, so things are looking up!
Friday, September 30, 2011
It is Art - I Hope
Four days into reading 'G.' and I'm only 62 pages in. Ugh. I could make excuses (I'm on pain killers, I had knitting club, there was a hockey game, the guy sitting next to me on the bus Would. Not. Shut. Up.) but the truth is I'm just not enjoying this book. Which makes me sad, so I'm hoping it's just a slow starter and within the next five pages it will totally grab me, then I'll stay up reading all night and 8 am will find me cursing my alarm clock and trying to justify taking a sick day to continue reading.
Ya, I don't think it's very likely.
I was really looking forward to "the story of G., a young man forging an energetic sexual career in Europe during the early years of this century" (from the book jacket). It sounds engaging and salacious; cultured, yet racy enough that I would blush to admit that I'm even reading it. So far, not so much. In fact, it just seems really pretentious. This novel is making me feel stupid and uncultured.
I can't figure out the narrative voice, for one thing. Berger keeps referring to "the principle protagonist of this book" which has me screaming 'Show, don't tell!' every time. It feels so clumsy, as though this was a working draft he accidentally sent to the publisher. There is a passage in the second chapter that really bothered me:
"Who are you? he asks the old man.
The old man comes to the bed and sits on it. In face of the arrested time just ending, the boy may be as old as the man.
What the old man says I do not know.
What the boy says in reply I do not know.
To pretend to know would be to schematize.
Meanwhile development is so retarded, progress and consequence so slow that the determination not to cry out is left inviolate. It can endure for hours."
Followed a bit later by:
"Everything you write is a schema. You are the most schematic of writers. It is like a theorem.
Not beyond a certain point.
What point?
Beyond the point where the curtains are drawn back.
Come back to the boy.
Who says that?
The old man does.
What does the boy feel?
Ask the old man."
Who is telling this story, and why are they arguing with themselves? I've read that section three times, and it makes no sense to me from a story-telling perspective. The most I can say for it is that I completely empathize with the "development is so retarded, progress and consequence so slow that the determination not to cry out is left inviolate. It can endure for hours." because that's how I'm feeling about this story. Get on with it, already!! Oh, and the scene with the horse and "Two Men"?? What was that???
The relationships between the characters are all interesting, at least. Particularly the 'principal protagonist's' parents (who doesn't love alliteration!) have a neat love/hate thing going on, and his relationship with Miss Helen was very realistic (although I do feel a bit scandalized by the description of a five year old masturbating).
The political undercurrents, while not subtle, are also interesting. However, I suspect that my background education in European fascism and Marxism are not thorough enough to truly appreciate the politics of the novel. Perhaps if I weren't reading this on a schedule I would take some time to research the fundamentals and hard facts in hopes of a deeper understanding, but seeing how much I'm enjoying the novel based on it's own merits (!!!) I rather doubt that I would bother.
My general impression so far is that 'G.' is a work of "art" - but in a bad, stuffy, elitist way. My darling Father always says, "It's art, don't touch it". I believe Art should, however, touch you - it should bring you to a greater sense of beauty, truth, self, life, something! Art should be alive, and so I hold out hope that this novel finds a way to truly engage me. Otherwise, this could be a really long weekend.
Ya, I don't think it's very likely.
I was really looking forward to "the story of G., a young man forging an energetic sexual career in Europe during the early years of this century" (from the book jacket). It sounds engaging and salacious; cultured, yet racy enough that I would blush to admit that I'm even reading it. So far, not so much. In fact, it just seems really pretentious. This novel is making me feel stupid and uncultured.
I can't figure out the narrative voice, for one thing. Berger keeps referring to "the principle protagonist of this book" which has me screaming 'Show, don't tell!' every time. It feels so clumsy, as though this was a working draft he accidentally sent to the publisher. There is a passage in the second chapter that really bothered me:
"Who are you? he asks the old man.
The old man comes to the bed and sits on it. In face of the arrested time just ending, the boy may be as old as the man.
What the old man says I do not know.
What the boy says in reply I do not know.
To pretend to know would be to schematize.
Meanwhile development is so retarded, progress and consequence so slow that the determination not to cry out is left inviolate. It can endure for hours."
Followed a bit later by:
"Everything you write is a schema. You are the most schematic of writers. It is like a theorem.
Not beyond a certain point.
What point?
Beyond the point where the curtains are drawn back.
Come back to the boy.
Who says that?
The old man does.
What does the boy feel?
Ask the old man."
Who is telling this story, and why are they arguing with themselves? I've read that section three times, and it makes no sense to me from a story-telling perspective. The most I can say for it is that I completely empathize with the "development is so retarded, progress and consequence so slow that the determination not to cry out is left inviolate. It can endure for hours." because that's how I'm feeling about this story. Get on with it, already!! Oh, and the scene with the horse and "Two Men"?? What was that???
The relationships between the characters are all interesting, at least. Particularly the 'principal protagonist's' parents (who doesn't love alliteration!) have a neat love/hate thing going on, and his relationship with Miss Helen was very realistic (although I do feel a bit scandalized by the description of a five year old masturbating).
The political undercurrents, while not subtle, are also interesting. However, I suspect that my background education in European fascism and Marxism are not thorough enough to truly appreciate the politics of the novel. Perhaps if I weren't reading this on a schedule I would take some time to research the fundamentals and hard facts in hopes of a deeper understanding, but seeing how much I'm enjoying the novel based on it's own merits (!!!) I rather doubt that I would bother.
My general impression so far is that 'G.' is a work of "art" - but in a bad, stuffy, elitist way. My darling Father always says, "It's art, don't touch it". I believe Art should, however, touch you - it should bring you to a greater sense of beauty, truth, self, life, something! Art should be alive, and so I hold out hope that this novel finds a way to truly engage me. Otherwise, this could be a really long weekend.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Second Book Completed, Book Skipped, Book Commenced
I finished reading 'Troubles' at 11:45 last night - talk about cutting it close! For reasons which had nothing to do with the book, I had a difficult time maintaining a reading schedule this week, resulting in a 'mad sprint' to read over 200 pages in the last day and a half. Hardly fair to the novel, which was Fantastic and deserves to be savored! I don't usually re-read books, but I can tell you that I will most definitely be revisiting the Majestic!
For me, this novel was everything that a great piece of 'literature' should be, with the added attractions of being funny and set in Ireland. I enjoyed the lyrical phrasing and the 'news paper' breaks, which provided a broader view of the situation. I enjoyed rooting for the Major to win the girl. In fact, I loved all the characters.
I particularly liked the parallels of the Majestic and the country both crumbling around their respective residents. There were problems when the Spencers/British took over, but rather than working to correct these problems they just went along their merry way, until the situation was so far gone there was no help for it. It was a beautifully rendered allegory that brought depth to the story without overburdening it.
Most importantly, though, I enjoyed reexamining my own opinions of the Troubles, particularly in the context of post-WWI Britain. I've never given much thought to how it must have been for a veteran of the Great War to find himself caught in such an intangible civil war. It's really quite horrific. I still firmly side with the "Shinners" but it has given me a broader view of the social ramifications of the 'war'. I've usually thought of the conflict in terms of Sinn Fein/IRA versus the Black and Tans, but of course each side also had civilians. While it is easy for me to see the side of the Irish, I appreciate the viewpoint of the colonizing British a bit more now.
Anyhow, I absolutely loved, and I would most definitely recommend, J.G. Farrell's "Troubles" - and I'm looking forward to reading the second book of his so-called 'Empire Trilogy' in a couple of weeks!
For now, continuing with my reading list, I had to skip ahead chronologically again, having been unable to lay my hands on a complete copy of V.S. Naipaul's short story collection, "In A Free State". All I could locate was a volume of "Selected Short Stories" which only contained part of the collection, which is no good to me. I will, of course, come back to it as soon as possible. In the meantime I have moved on, so my third book is "G." by John Berger. I am not previously familiar with this title, so I'm looking forward to it. Read on!
For me, this novel was everything that a great piece of 'literature' should be, with the added attractions of being funny and set in Ireland. I enjoyed the lyrical phrasing and the 'news paper' breaks, which provided a broader view of the situation. I enjoyed rooting for the Major to win the girl. In fact, I loved all the characters.
I particularly liked the parallels of the Majestic and the country both crumbling around their respective residents. There were problems when the Spencers/British took over, but rather than working to correct these problems they just went along their merry way, until the situation was so far gone there was no help for it. It was a beautifully rendered allegory that brought depth to the story without overburdening it.
Most importantly, though, I enjoyed reexamining my own opinions of the Troubles, particularly in the context of post-WWI Britain. I've never given much thought to how it must have been for a veteran of the Great War to find himself caught in such an intangible civil war. It's really quite horrific. I still firmly side with the "Shinners" but it has given me a broader view of the social ramifications of the 'war'. I've usually thought of the conflict in terms of Sinn Fein/IRA versus the Black and Tans, but of course each side also had civilians. While it is easy for me to see the side of the Irish, I appreciate the viewpoint of the colonizing British a bit more now.
Anyhow, I absolutely loved, and I would most definitely recommend, J.G. Farrell's "Troubles" - and I'm looking forward to reading the second book of his so-called 'Empire Trilogy' in a couple of weeks!
For now, continuing with my reading list, I had to skip ahead chronologically again, having been unable to lay my hands on a complete copy of V.S. Naipaul's short story collection, "In A Free State". All I could locate was a volume of "Selected Short Stories" which only contained part of the collection, which is no good to me. I will, of course, come back to it as soon as possible. In the meantime I have moved on, so my third book is "G." by John Berger. I am not previously familiar with this title, so I'm looking forward to it. Read on!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)