Desipio Message Board

Quote from: Jon on January 29, 2010, 11:18:06 AM

Quote from: Gilgamesh on January 29, 2010, 11:07:54 AM

Quote from: Gil Gunderson on January 29, 2010, 11:06:06 AM
January 12 – A long-distance radio message is sent from the Eiffel Tower for the first time.
February 18 – Japanese immigration to the U.S.A. is forbidden.
May 26 – At Masjid-al-Salaman in southwest Persia, the first major commercial oil discovery in the Middle East is made. The rights to the resource are quickly acquired by the United Kingdom.
June 30 – The Tunguska event, also known as the Russian explosion, occurs near the Podkamennaya Tunguska River in Krasnoyarsk Krai, Siberia, Russian Empire.
September 27 – Henry Ford produces his first Model T automobile

October 14 - The Chicago Cubs win the World Series.

See y'all on the other side.

Douche.

Shut your cat-foaeces toilet hole, douche.

DPD

Quote from: Yeti on March 10, 2010, 08:28:15 AM

Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on March 10, 2010, 08:25:42 AM
DOUBLESTANDARDSBUMP!

predictably predictable, Thrill

Stop stealing my bit!!!!!!

Quote from: morpheus on March 10, 2010, 08:45:13 AM

Quote from: R-V on March 10, 2010, 08:32:16 AM
The media sucks, Milton's a jag, and Yeti needs a new bit.

Yeti, have you considered "barely closeted GAY MALE HOMOSEXUAL" as your new bit?

If Yeti's anyone but Steve Allen, he's stealing my bit!

Man, Stiv Bators died about 2 decades ago...

Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on March 09, 2010, 02:47:16 PM

Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 02:29:28 PM
Is it too soon for me to say "Overrated: Catcher in the Rye?"

Catcher in the Rye is overrated.  Just like Walter Payton was.

Get back to the M*A*S*H thread.

Quote from: Kermit IV on March 09, 2010, 02:28:18 PM

Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 02:11:19 PM

Quote from: Pre on March 09, 2010, 02:04:26 PM

Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 01:30:17 PM
The tangent I'm going off on here is this: how do you recommend something to someone without using the phrase "I'm not sure if this book is for you" which implies that you're somehow smarter/better than that person? It's a real problem and this problem, in and of itself, adds to the insufferable douche factor of the whole recommendation conundrum.

So the issue with these authors and their books is that you almost have to bump into someone that happens to have already read these books as recommendation is all but out of the question. Which is another reason why I'm glad this place exists so I can talk about these pointless things with people who know what I'm getting at. Maybe.

It's weird, because movies aren't at all like that.  People never take offense to being told that they
wouldn't enjoy a movie.  I think a lot of it is that few people are actually interested in reading
literature over escapist candy novels but are also self conscious about admitting it to others or
sometimes even themselves.  I don't get it.  I like escapist books just like I love escapist movies.  I
also have no interest in the world in trying to finish War and Peace again (made it 100 pages maybe)
or anything like it and I'm not ashamed of that.

I think a lot of things are just so different that the only way someone is going to know if they like it is
by trying and that applies to everything from sky diving to 1100 page novels revolving around a tennis
academy.  There's similar things that you can use to estimate if you'll like it, but if you're unfamiliar with
the general concept then you just have to try it.

If you like to sky dive then you'll probably like to bungi jump.  Liking the Da Vinci Code isn't going to mean
you'll like Focult's Pendulum, but liking House of Leaves probably means you'll like Infinite Jest.

Maybe one of the problems is school.  I know some high school teachers act like if you don't love whatever
classic novels they chose to teach then the problem is that you're failing to get it versus maybe it just sucks.
So a bunch of people probably grow up thinking that they're not smart enough to appreciate good novels
instead of the fact that The Scarlet Letter sucks balls and they should feel good about hating it.  And they
get such a stale view into the world of literature that they think those of us that enjoy it are reading a
bunch of classic/modern day Hawthorne style tripe.

A thousand times THI

And a million times THI

Fuck the vapid popcorn novel that was The Great Gatsby, too.

Is it too soon for me to say "Overrated: Catcher in the Rye?"

Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 02:12:21 PM

Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 01:30:17 PMSo the issue with these authors and their books is that you almost have to bump into someone that happens to have already read these books as recommendation is all but out of the question. Which is another reason why I'm glad this place exists so I can talk about these pointless things with people who know what I'm getting at. Maybe.

Maybe not.

Who's to say this place exists? Maybe we're all just Pirate Prentice's interpretations of BC's fantasies.

Are you saying we should start keeping sex slaves just in case? Because I am willing to do this.

Quote from: Pre on March 09, 2010, 02:04:26 PM

Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 01:30:17 PM
The tangent I'm going off on here is this: how do you recommend something to someone without using the phrase "I'm not sure if this book is for you" which implies that you're somehow smarter/better than that person? It's a real problem and this problem, in and of itself, adds to the insufferable douche factor of the whole recommendation conundrum.

So the issue with these authors and their books is that you almost have to bump into someone that happens to have already read these books as recommendation is all but out of the question. Which is another reason why I'm glad this place exists so I can talk about these pointless things with people who know what I'm getting at. Maybe.

It's weird, because movies aren't at all like that.  People never take offense to being told that they
wouldn't enjoy a movie.  I think a lot of it is that few people are actually interested in reading
literature over escapist candy novels but are also self conscious about admitting it to others or
sometimes even themselves.  I don't get it.  I like escapist books just like I love escapist movies.  I
also have no interest in the world in trying to finish War and Peace again (made it 100 pages maybe)
or anything like it and I'm not ashamed of that.

I think a lot of things are just so different that the only way someone is going to know if they like it is
by trying and that applies to everything from sky diving to 1100 page novels revolving around a tennis
academy.  There's similar things that you can use to estimate if you'll like it, but if you're unfamiliar with
the general concept then you just have to try it.

If you like to sky dive then you'll probably like to bungi jump.  Liking the Da Vinci Code isn't going to mean
you'll like Focult's Pendulum, but liking House of Leaves probably means you'll like Infinite Jest.

Maybe one of the problems is school.  I know some high school teachers act like if you don't love whatever
classic novels they chose to teach then the problem is that you're failing to get it versus maybe it just sucks.
So a bunch of people probably grow up thinking that they're not smart enough to appreciate good novels
instead of the fact that The Scarlet Letter sucks balls and they should feel good about hating it.  And they
get such a stale view into the world of literature that they think those of us that enjoy it are reading a
bunch of classic/modern day Hawthorne style tripe.

A thousand times THI

And a million times THI

Here's an interesting, totally unrelated webcomic:

Is this now the thread where I ask questions of/for assistance from Desipio members? Because that was clearly re-purposed to be a place to put links of interest.

Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on March 09, 2010, 10:42:12 AM

Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 10:27:10 AM
I have to admit, GR was the first Pynchon I ever read. It makes everything else he's written a lot easier to digest. And I'm pretty sure it also made it easier to finish Ulysses as well.

We get it. You're gay for avant-garde, poop-loving novelists of pale, British Isles extraction. We're all very impressed.

Well, Master of All the Internet Surveys was taken, so I needed something else to do with my life.

Other books of his I've read CAN be confounding at times, but not nearly as confounding as Gravity's Rainbow.

Quote from: PenFoe on March 09, 2010, 10:26:21 AM

I've read the first 15 pages of this book probably 5 times.
I think page 40 is my record.

Nothing written here so far is really making me regret this.

As always, RV: listen to Pen. Then do the opposite.

Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 10:24:40 AM

Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:53:38 AM

Quote from: Slack-E on March 09, 2010, 09:42:16 AM

Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:26:59 AM

Quote from: Jon on March 09, 2010, 09:16:52 AM

Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:14:37 AM

Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 07:06:48 PM

Quote from: Jon on September 18, 2008, 06:40:04 PM

Quote from: 5laky on September 18, 2008, 05:03:44 PM
The constant theme of all his books seems to be paranoia and not only are his characters paranoid, you get paranoid because you're not sure what reality or alternate reality the narrative is taking place. For example: talking light bulbs.

This.

And the transition from rational narrative to "what the hell is going on" is seamless in a lot of passages. Gravity's Rainbow is secretly about 500 pages longer than it looks because you end up going back and rereading the last page or so to figure out what you must have missed.

The best part is that the paranoia he instills in the reader is completely intentional. I remember reading the first 20 or 30 pages and thinking, "OK, so far I think I have a pretty good idea of what is going on here." And that went straight to hell immediately after the mention of Slothrop's memories circa 1944 and Blicero's disgusting exploits.

And that's where it gets fun.

Figured this deserved its own topic. Infinite Jest may be my favorite book, and everything I've read compares DFW's style to Pynchon, so I figured what the hell.

What a slog it was getting through this book. Whereas Infinite Jest was 20% maddening and 80% high entertainment, this was the opposite. I understand that the whole idea of the book is confusion and paranoia (along with boners and sexual depravity) and it's supposed to be a challenging read, but I just didn't care enough about the characters (as I did with IJ) to flip back through the book to figure out which of the 8,000 characters or narrative threads the current chapter was about.

Hooplehead.

So what you're saying is that you enjoyed the pedophilia aspects of the book? You sick bastard.

I liked the poop sex.

Which character did you feel the least apathy toward? I was a big fan of Roger Mexico.

I really enjoyed the Mexico-Pointsman stuff. Pirate was another guy I would've liked to have seen more. When the book starts with Pirate I figured it'd be about him and his strange ability, which would've been cool. But you don't see him again for 500 pages.

The interesting thing for me was all the styles of writing Pynchon can pull off. I just wish he would've written more in the styles that I enjoyed.

I don't think you're wrong at all. This book was the most challenging I've read and way more of a challenge than IJ. I hope you don't write off Tom though - have you read any of his other stuff?

I have to admit, GR was the first Pynchon I ever read. It makes everything else he's written a lot easier to digest. And I'm pretty sure it also made it easier to finish Ulysses as well.

Quote from: R-V on March 09, 2010, 09:53:38 AM


The interesting thing for me was all the styles of writing Pynchon can pull off.

That's one of my favorite aspects of his work. In Mason & Dixon, he convincingly writes in an 18th century style for the majority of the book, but still manages to make it interesting and readable. I'm currently reading Against the Day, and the first 30 pages or so is written in a 19th Century Young Adult Novel style (complete with overwritten passages and a sort of joyfyul bonhomie), which matches the innocence of the characters portrayed, before following another character to a much more wordly place, where the style makes a seamless switch to a darker, Realistic tone. The switch is suprisingly smooth - I was reading about the next character for almost four pages before it occured to me that the book was no longer oddly overwritten and precious.

I really enjoyed watching Slothrop disintegrate into like 5 different characters towards the end of the book, though it's been a while since I read it. Trying to decide just how much of the events in the book were "real" and how much were just his imagination was also pretty cool.