the last five books i've read
before i get into this i want to mention that i saw a film called the death of mr. lazarescu a few hours ago, and it's totally magnificent. i'd be posting about that instead, were i not feeling like i haven't yet completely absorbed it. anyway, it's HIGHLY recommended, and i will hopefully explain why over the next day or two.
meanwhile, the books i read were:
a scanner darkly, philip k. dick
hiroshima, john hersey
nova, samuel r. delany
the creative mind, henri bergson
things fall apart, chinua achebe
1. i wanted to read a scanner darkly prior to richard linklater's upcoming film version-- not only because i fear it will be bad, but also because i hate it when i visualize someone else's staging of a book inside my head (which would immediately happen once i'd seen the preview a few times). anyway, it's an interesting book-- probably the most difficult of the five or six dick novels i've read-- but by no means my favorite. the story is confounding even for its typically confounding author, concerning a drug addict/police officer who comes to realize he's been hired to spy on himself. usually dick is damn good at making all the mind-fuck-ed-ness readable, but i found this one less approachable than usual. i was expecting a page turner, and it wasn't that sort of thing at all.
it's also probably the most personal novel of his i've read, containing, even, an "afterword" concerning its parallels within his own life. i'd like to say that made the reading experience more intimate, but it honestly never quite stings the way that flow my tears, the policeman said (my favorite) does by its conclusion. i think part of the problem is that dick is most effective (for me at any rate) when things remain inside of his/his narrator's head. i find it enormously interesting to track his own processes of psychological erosion, but he's less successful with characters that aren't stand-ins for himself. the various "beautiful losers" that populate the novel are a bit too distant-- or too marked by their author's own judgments-- to become fully dimensional as characters.
2. john hersey's hiroshima originally appeared as a series of essays in the new yorker shortly after WWII. and as such, it's remarkably readable, and maybe even humble to an extent, in light of the subject matter. hersey sets most of his commentary aside in favor of the stories of six survivors of the atomic explosion, told with remarkable clarity. and the stories are amazing, as are the eerie, inevitable effects of trying to visualize the disaster. as his descriptions of aftermath scenarios become increasingly un-worldly, a dark sense of wonder sets in. i spent a lot of time, while reading this, considering the ethics, inevitability and (maybe even) use-value of that sense of wonder. and without getting into my conclusions (i don't have any), i think it is a worthwhile and deeply personal experience to go through. so i highly recommend this book. it's amazing, actually.
here's an essay about its publication, and this page includes a link through which you can download it as a PDF file.
3. i picked up samuel r. delany's nova, despite the fact that i really want to dive into my copy of his demanding epic dhalgren, which i know a few of you love dearly. but my friend gabe (who is basically the closest thing i have to my own, personal sci-fi expert) said to try some of his earlier stuff first. he suggested trouble on triton, which i damn near bought, but i liked the description of this one better. anyway, i think i chose the wrong one. this is one of his earliest novels, and contained none of the weird sexual politics or socio-political resonance i've heard associated with delany for years. maybe i missed something. instead, it was pretty dorky sci-fi stuff-- team of misfits sets out across the galaxy, half crazed anti-heroes, villain with mechanical arm-- total d & d type shit. some of it was ok i guess-- the gadgetry, some of the dialogue-- but frankly i think i just picked the wrong delany novel. can anyone suggest a more suitable preliminary to dhalgren? should i just dive into that one? should i head back to the used book store and pick up triton? or what?
4. i've been noodling through henri bergson's the creative mind for a few months now, but about two weeks ago i cracked down and really got into it. and i loved it! totally refreshing to read philosophy from someone (more or less) pro-art; or at least free of all that "inauthentic representation of a thing" jibber jabber that's plagued us artsy types from plato to baudrillard. i'm glad i read it within a few months of octavia butler's parable novels-- which assert that "god is change"-- because bergson strikes me as a kindred spirit. his theory of duration-- namely that the practice of metaphysics is inseparable from the movement of life as experienced-- is an encouraging one, and one that does away with a lot of the abstraction and mysticism i often find frustrating when reading such things. i have a few reservations about the book, mostly in relation to his notion of detachment, but i'd rather not get into them here. to tell the truth i have some ideas for fun posts regarding all of this, and i'd rather "think outloud" in non-review form. or in the comments if you wanna.
5. chinua achebe's things fall apart wasn't at all what i was expecting. i don;'t know why i ever put any faith in the blurps on the backs of books anymore... this one had me expecting something rigid and mythic and archetypal; instead i found something nuanced and insightful and occasionally indeterminate. for a book about early colonial conflict in nigeria, it avoids the colonial side of things for its first two thirds, during which an engaging story emerges within the ibo village itself.
what amazed me most about the book is how difficult it is to find achebe within it. undoubtedly it is a critique of colonialism, but beyond that it is a clever, clashing mix of ambiguities. achebe doesn't shy away from the harsher sides of indigenous life, documenting often appallingly brutal behavior, but locating it within a web of ideologies and "superstitions" rich enough to complicate any crass condemnations. it is unflinching without being insensitive, and ambiguous without being apolitical. an extremely illuminating read.
meanwhile, the books i read were:
a scanner darkly, philip k. dick
hiroshima, john hersey
nova, samuel r. delany
the creative mind, henri bergson
things fall apart, chinua achebe
1. i wanted to read a scanner darkly prior to richard linklater's upcoming film version-- not only because i fear it will be bad, but also because i hate it when i visualize someone else's staging of a book inside my head (which would immediately happen once i'd seen the preview a few times). anyway, it's an interesting book-- probably the most difficult of the five or six dick novels i've read-- but by no means my favorite. the story is confounding even for its typically confounding author, concerning a drug addict/police officer who comes to realize he's been hired to spy on himself. usually dick is damn good at making all the mind-fuck-ed-ness readable, but i found this one less approachable than usual. i was expecting a page turner, and it wasn't that sort of thing at all.
it's also probably the most personal novel of his i've read, containing, even, an "afterword" concerning its parallels within his own life. i'd like to say that made the reading experience more intimate, but it honestly never quite stings the way that flow my tears, the policeman said (my favorite) does by its conclusion. i think part of the problem is that dick is most effective (for me at any rate) when things remain inside of his/his narrator's head. i find it enormously interesting to track his own processes of psychological erosion, but he's less successful with characters that aren't stand-ins for himself. the various "beautiful losers" that populate the novel are a bit too distant-- or too marked by their author's own judgments-- to become fully dimensional as characters.
2. john hersey's hiroshima originally appeared as a series of essays in the new yorker shortly after WWII. and as such, it's remarkably readable, and maybe even humble to an extent, in light of the subject matter. hersey sets most of his commentary aside in favor of the stories of six survivors of the atomic explosion, told with remarkable clarity. and the stories are amazing, as are the eerie, inevitable effects of trying to visualize the disaster. as his descriptions of aftermath scenarios become increasingly un-worldly, a dark sense of wonder sets in. i spent a lot of time, while reading this, considering the ethics, inevitability and (maybe even) use-value of that sense of wonder. and without getting into my conclusions (i don't have any), i think it is a worthwhile and deeply personal experience to go through. so i highly recommend this book. it's amazing, actually.
here's an essay about its publication, and this page includes a link through which you can download it as a PDF file.
3. i picked up samuel r. delany's nova, despite the fact that i really want to dive into my copy of his demanding epic dhalgren, which i know a few of you love dearly. but my friend gabe (who is basically the closest thing i have to my own, personal sci-fi expert) said to try some of his earlier stuff first. he suggested trouble on triton, which i damn near bought, but i liked the description of this one better. anyway, i think i chose the wrong one. this is one of his earliest novels, and contained none of the weird sexual politics or socio-political resonance i've heard associated with delany for years. maybe i missed something. instead, it was pretty dorky sci-fi stuff-- team of misfits sets out across the galaxy, half crazed anti-heroes, villain with mechanical arm-- total d & d type shit. some of it was ok i guess-- the gadgetry, some of the dialogue-- but frankly i think i just picked the wrong delany novel. can anyone suggest a more suitable preliminary to dhalgren? should i just dive into that one? should i head back to the used book store and pick up triton? or what?
4. i've been noodling through henri bergson's the creative mind for a few months now, but about two weeks ago i cracked down and really got into it. and i loved it! totally refreshing to read philosophy from someone (more or less) pro-art; or at least free of all that "inauthentic representation of a thing" jibber jabber that's plagued us artsy types from plato to baudrillard. i'm glad i read it within a few months of octavia butler's parable novels-- which assert that "god is change"-- because bergson strikes me as a kindred spirit. his theory of duration-- namely that the practice of metaphysics is inseparable from the movement of life as experienced-- is an encouraging one, and one that does away with a lot of the abstraction and mysticism i often find frustrating when reading such things. i have a few reservations about the book, mostly in relation to his notion of detachment, but i'd rather not get into them here. to tell the truth i have some ideas for fun posts regarding all of this, and i'd rather "think outloud" in non-review form. or in the comments if you wanna.
5. chinua achebe's things fall apart wasn't at all what i was expecting. i don;'t know why i ever put any faith in the blurps on the backs of books anymore... this one had me expecting something rigid and mythic and archetypal; instead i found something nuanced and insightful and occasionally indeterminate. for a book about early colonial conflict in nigeria, it avoids the colonial side of things for its first two thirds, during which an engaging story emerges within the ibo village itself.
what amazed me most about the book is how difficult it is to find achebe within it. undoubtedly it is a critique of colonialism, but beyond that it is a clever, clashing mix of ambiguities. achebe doesn't shy away from the harsher sides of indigenous life, documenting often appallingly brutal behavior, but locating it within a web of ideologies and "superstitions" rich enough to complicate any crass condemnations. it is unflinching without being insensitive, and ambiguous without being apolitical. an extremely illuminating read.