Now reading...

[Leeway]

I very rarely give up on a book, but 145pp into John Wain's The Pardoner's Tale, I had to throw in the towel, and admit that the book was simply wretchedly written. The structure of the book might be part of the problem. It opens with the tale of Gus and Julia. Gus rescues troubled Julia (but alas not her Mini) from a rising tide on a Welsh beach (shades of Iris Murdoch!). Gus's passionate pursuit of Julia through a variety of obstacles is one of the main narratives of the novel. It is all written in fevered adventure-story, matey sort of prose. At the start of the next chapter, we realize that the story of Gus and Julia is actually a novel-in-progress being written by Giles Armitage, whose own story is told in the 3rd person by yet another narrator (Wain?). This story is faux-James (or Iris? or Penelope?), and while pitched a bit higher than the Gus-Julia tale, is not much better. The two stories alternate throughout. I literally couldn't stand reading it. The prose is execrable, and the stories without depth.

Puzzling, since Wain is well-regarded. I have his bio of Samuel Johnson, which is quite good. I was expecting much more, otherwise I might not have made it to Chapter 2. I would like to think the novel is some sort of joke, but if it is, it exacts too high a price on the reader. Plus, the Chaucerian

reference implied in the title doesn't seem to have a place in the book. Is it a hoax or just very badly written, slung out for the pop book trade? I'm inclining to the latter. BTW, the publisher must not have put stock in the book; the hardcover glue binding literally disintegrated as I read. I also noticed that this title is rarely referenced in lists of his writing.

Maybe others have checked out Wain's fiction? I've read that his first novel, which has a jazz theme, is very good.

[BillF]

I haven't read The Pardoner's Tale, but written in 1978 it sounds well after Wain's vintage period - I always see him as a novelist of the 50s or 60s. Glad you've read Hurry On Down, which must be one of the best English novels of its times. The Contenders was sufficiently interesting to take me back for a re-reading some years later (as Hurry On Down had been.) The other Wains I've read - all from his earlier period - are now just a blur in my memory. I seem to recall that Strike the Father Dead had a jazz theme.

[A Lark Ascending]

Read this, Dave-boy; then hang your head in shame.

[danasgoodstuff]

Glyn Johns, Sound Man. Enjoyable but not very insightful on the people or very detailed on the technical end. Claims he was the first UK engineer to make the transition to producer. Some interesting observations on the many musicians and industry people he's met. Not afraid to say he doesn't like someone. I think he can afford to be candid.

[jlhoots]

Richard Price: The Whites

[ejp626]

I've been reading some relatively contemporary short stories -- Chabon's A Model World and Somerville's The Universe in Miniature in Miniature.

[BillF]

[Leeway]

THE MIGHTY AND THEIR FALL - 1955- Ivy Compton-Burnett

Written almost entirely in dialogue (or one might better say, aphorisms posing as dialogue), this is the story of the corruption of a family. The near-complete lack of narrative guideposts can be disturbing or confusing at times, but if one stays with it, ICB demonstrates a surgeon's hand in dissecting the power plays, hatreds, exploitations and general nastiness of family members bound together by self-interest, arrogance, and pride (or the lack of it). If you like that sort of thing, it can even be funny at times, with a mordant humor.

[BillF]

THE MIGHTY AND THEIR FALL - 1955- Ivy Compton-Burnett

Written almost entirely in dialogue (or one might better say, aphorisms posing as dialogue), this is the story of the corruption of a family. The near-complete lack of narrative guideposts can be disturbing or confusing at times, but if one stays with it, ICB demonstrates a surgeon's hand in dissecting the power plays, hatreds, exploitations and general nastiness of family members bound together by self-interest, arrogance, and pride (or the lack of it). If you like that sort of thing, it can even be funny at times, with a mordant humor.

I haven't read any Compton-Burnett, but she's on my list of authors to look into. Wikipedia says that Manservant and Maidservant (published in the US as Bullivant and the Lambs) is often considered to be her best work and the university library has a copy, so we shall see ....

[jlhoots]

Phil Klay: Redeployment

[Leeway]

Phil Klay: Redeployment

I thought that was some pretty strong/moving reading.

[Leeway]

10:04 - Ben Lerner (novel)

Lerner's 2014 novel is prefaced by a Hasidic saying:

"The Hasidim tell a story about the world to come that says everything there will be just the same as it is here. Just as our room is now, so it will be in the world to come; where our baby sleeps new, there too it will sleep in the other world. And the clothes we wear in this world, those too we will wear there. Everything will be as it is now, just a little different."

I loved that last line. It reminded me of the discussion here on the Org Board of MOPDTK's album "Blue," a note for note transcription of "Kind of Blue," around which the argument swirled, "same but different."

Anyway, it's sort of the metaphysical premise of Lerner's metafictional fiction; deflections of reality that leave the story same but different, real but unreal.

[ejp626]

10:04 - Ben Lerner (novel)

Sounds interesting. Quite a long queue at the library, so I may get it in a few months.

I'm nearly done with Somerville's The Universe in Miniature in Miniature. Quirky. A lot like reading early Jonathan Lethem, which is good and bad.

[kinuta]

Hawks On Hawks - Joseph McBride

[kinuta]

1913 : In Search Of The World Before The Great War - Charles Emmerson

Fascinating up to now.

[paul secor]

Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice

I'd never read any Jane Austen before this and enjoyed it thoroughly.

[Leeway]

THE GOLDEN CHILD - 1977- Penelope Fitzgerald

Fitzgerald's first novel, an amusing satire on museums (or at least the British Museum), blockbuster exhibits (think Tutankhamen), and globe-trotting academics (think French deconstructionists), wrapped in a rather silly, certainly implausible, murder mystery.

[BillF]

THE GOLDEN CHILD - 1977- Penelope Fitzgerald

Fitzgerald's first novel, an amusing satire on museums (or at least the British Museum), blockbuster exhibits (think Tutankhamen), and globe-trotting academics (think French deconstructionists), wrapped in a rather silly, certainly implausible, murder mystery.

Good summary, Leeway. The book's readable, but not treasurable like Offshore and The Bookshop IMHO.

Edited March 8, 2015 by BillF

[erwbol]

Thomas Pynchon - Inherent Vice

Finished the first of the four Fall Revolution novels by Ken MacLeod yesterday. Now quickly on to Pynchon's Inherent Vice so the movie's Blu-ray won't spoil the book for me.

A waste of money and effort. At one point I felt like reading some non-fiction, so I put it away for a day or two. This is normal for me. When I picked Inherent Vice up again the book had lost its hold on me. It feels like this could have happened anywhere in its 400 or so pages.

[sidewinder]

Dipping into Steve Isoardi's 'Central Avenue Sounds' (signed by some of the participants) and the Horace Tapscott bio 'Songs of the Unsung'.

Edited March 8, 2015 by sidewinder

[ejp626]

In the on-deck circle, Julian Barnes's A History of the World in 10½ Chapters and Djuna Barnes Nightwood.

I made it through the first chapter, which was a very tedious retelling of the Noah and the Ark story. I realize there is no way to tell the story literally in a way that doesn't sound absurd, but somehow the tone was so off and Barnes kept layering on one thing after another -- that's why there are no basilisks and no unicorns and so forth. Maybe what really killed it for me was the combination of the Ark legend with Kipling's Just So Stories (how Noah's beatings gave the zebras their stripes; how hiding from Noah caused chameleons to change their color; etc.). See Timothy Findley's Not Wanted on the Voyage for tackling the same legend/myth (including an on-board unicorn!) but somehow done in a far superior manner.

I'll probably slog through, but this generally reinforces my opinion that Julian Barnes is a writer who thinks he is far cleverer than he actually is. While it's been a long, long while since I read it, I am actually revising my opinion of Flaubert's Parrot somewhat downwards in retrospect. I'm probably going to strike him (Barnes) off the list and not read anything further by him.

I am looking forward to the reread of Nightwood, however. Pretty sure I will find that a lot more rewarding.

[Leeway]

Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice

I'd never read any Jane Austen before this and enjoyed it thoroughly.

Congratulations on making Jane's acquaintance. Additional pleasures await. I had a mind to read through her novels (it's been a while) after "Clarissa," since Austen was a fan of Samuel Richardson's writings, and I thought it would be fun to trace connections or influences. I may still do that, especially as I picked up a set of Austen's Oxford Illustrated pb edition of the novels at a library sale.

[ejp626]

Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice

I'd never read any Jane Austen before this and enjoyed it thoroughly.

Congratulations on making Jane's acquaintance. Additional pleasures await. I had a mind to read through her novels (it's been a while) after "Clarissa," since Austen was a fan of Samuel Richardson's writings, and I thought it would be fun to trace connections or influences. I may still do that, especially as I picked up a set of Austen's Oxford Illustrated pb edition of the novels at a library sale.

I believe I've read 3: Pride and Prejudice, Northanger Abbey and Sense and Sensibility (probably). I plan on reading or rereading all her novels, more or less in order, though I would recommend Northanger Abbey to be read first. It is in many ways her first novel, which she later re-edited and improved after the success of her intervening novels. I actually don't care that much for Northanger Abbey, and think the pleasures of the later novels far outweigh it, so you probably don't want that to be the last Austen novel you read.

Edited March 9, 2015 by ejp626

[BillF]

Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice

I'd never read any Jane Austen before this and enjoyed it thoroughly.

Congratulations on making Jane's acquaintance. Additional pleasures await. I had a mind to read through her novels (it's been a while) after "Clarissa," since Austen was a fan of Samuel Richardson's writings, and I thought it would be fun to trace connections or influences. I may still do that, especially as I picked up a set of Austen's Oxford Illustrated pb edition of the novels at a library sale.

I believe I've read 3: Pride and Prejudice, Northanger Abbey and Sense and Sensibility (probably). I plan on reading or rereading all her novels, more or less in order, though I would recommend Northanger Abbey to be read first. It is in many ways her first novel, which she later re-edited and improved after the success of her intervening novels. I actually don't care that much for Northanger Abbey, and think the pleasures of the later novels far outweigh it, so you probably don't want that to be the last Austen novel you read.

I have never read Austen for pleasure, but always on academic courses, both as learner and teacher. I recall that passages from her novels were masterpieces (if I can use that term in the context) of perfectly judged prose and it's at this level that I most appreciated her. As for her plots, I found it difficult to remember the tiny (trivial) details and only managed to teach her with the aid of a (carefully concealed) plot summary. I found some support for my misgiving from a university tutor of mine who pointed out that the biggest event to happen in Austen's oeuvre was a fall from a wall a few feet high. He also found her prissy and said that after reading her, he felt like "taking a bath in Rabelais." I much prefer her forerunners in the development of the English novel, in particular Fielding. Joseph Andrews is marvellous.

[ejp626]

Jane Austen: Pride and Prejudice

I'd never read any Jane Austen before this and enjoyed it thoroughly.

Congratulations on making Jane's acquaintance. Additional pleasures await. I had a mind to read through her novels (it's been a while) after "Clarissa," since Austen was a fan of Samuel Richardson's writings, and I thought it would be fun to trace connections or influences. I may still do that, especially as I picked up a set of Austen's Oxford Illustrated pb edition of the novels at a library sale.

I believe I've read 3: Pride and Prejudice, Northanger Abbey and Sense and Sensibility (probably). I plan on reading or rereading all her novels, more or less in order, though I would recommend Northanger Abbey to be read first. It is in many ways her first novel, which she later re-edited and improved after the success of her intervening novels. I actually don't care that much for Northanger Abbey, and think the pleasures of the later novels far outweigh it, so you probably don't want that to be the last Austen novel you read.

I have never read Austen for pleasure, but always on academic courses, both as learner and teacher. I recall that passages from her novels were masterpieces (if I can use that term in the context) of perfectly judged prose and it's at this level that I most appreciated her. As for her plots, I found it difficult to remember the tiny (trivial) details and only managed to teach her with the aid of a (carefully concealed) plot summary. I found some support for my misgiving from a university tutor of mine who pointed out that the biggest event to happen in Austen's oeuvre was a fall from a wall a few feet high. He also found her prissy and said that after reading her, he felt like "taking a bath in Rabelais." I much prefer her forerunners in the development of the English novel, in particular Fielding. Joseph Andrews is marvellous.

I think there is room for all, especially Austen, but that quote about Rabelais is hilarious!

I probably did not get around to Joseph Andrews, but I did read Tom Jones in my salad days. Would be nice to get through it again (and Joseph Andrews), but I'm not making any such commitments at the moment...