[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by evollove

Has anyone tried to tackle James' late works (Wings, Bowl, Ambassadors)?

Washington Square's my first go with him and I have to say I'm loving it so far. He seems to have a very definite style which I can imagine divides people but I'm totally into it. Good way to start the new year. Will probably try The Portrait of a Lady after this one.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Genteel Death

You're so far stuck up your own arse you can't acknowledge there isn't a single society that misses any philosophers. Artists, yes, not some deluded intellectual. They come and go and are as relevant as Pitchfork hacks. Nobody loves them, nobody cares.

on the one hand i don't want to intervene in your perma-wars, but on the other hand i have to ask-- you're just trolling him, right?

Originally Posted by evollove

Has anyone tried to tackle James' late works (Wings, Bowl, Ambassadors)?

i haven't, but i might. you?

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

I have never managed to get more than 75 pages or so into any Henry James work. I just don't give a shit about his characters or writing style.

he's a bit like a gossipy neighbor, and i can see how that might not be the most compelling point of view, but his prose was really excellent and his observations sharp as fuck

[evollove]

Late James is notoriously difficult stuff. I'm not sure I've finished any of them, but I often find myself picking them up and reading a few pages at a random spot.

I've probably started more James than I've finished. He is an incredibly frustrating writer in that he's a genius who is often very boring. The good stuff is great, the slow stuff is torture.

But it's easy to figure out which book belongs to which category. If after five pages you're not sure who is doing what for what reason, move on. Chapter two will not go down easier.

But without James and Conrad, I find it difficult to imagine 20th century literary modernism happening. For a number of important reasons, no serious student of literature can avoid him.

As far as actually liking him, I'm not sure. Sometimes yes, often no. And if someone is not interested in history of lit (no reason why anyone should feel compelled to be interested), and if the style and themes of James aren't of interest, I think skipping him altogether is not a bad idea.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by evollove

But without James and Conrad, I find it difficult to imagine 20th century literary modernism happening.

explain?

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

he's a bit like a gossipy neighbor, and i can see how that might not be the most compelling point of view, but his prose was really excellent and his observations sharp as fuck

His writing really is something else. Some lines are laugh out loud good. I wouldn't say he's gossipy though, not like say Dorothy Parker or Oscar Wilde, more that the people he writes about tend to be. I'm just psyched that I've finally discovered him and now can't wait to read more. A great way to start a new year.

[evollove]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

explain?

Off the top of my sleepy head:

The depth of psychological investigation, the focused POV (sometimes coming very close to stream-of-consciousness), the intense interest in manipulating language to get it to do new things.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

His writing really is something else. Some lines are laugh out loud good. I wouldn't say he's gossipy though, not like say Dorothy Parker or Oscar Wilde, more that the people he writes about tend to be. I'm just psyched that I've finally discovered him and now can't wait to read more. A great way to start a new year.

i meant gossipy neighbor in the sense that james is concerned with the nuances of social relations rather than "big ideas," which seems to be what rob likes.

Originally Posted by evollove

Off the top of my sleepy head:

The depth of psychological investigation, the focused POV (sometimes coming very close to stream-of-consciousness), the intense interest in manipulating language to get it to do new things.

i was taking a brief peek at "the ambassadors" on the gutemberg project website and i can see what you say-- reads kinda like virginia woolf-- but his earlier stuff is pretty straightforward XIX century prose. interesting evolution.

you fuckers (all of you) are getting me back to want to read again, for which i'm very grateful.

[evollove]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

just psyched that I've finally discovered him and now can't wait to read more.

You'll almost certainly like PORTRAIT and probably most of the early works. Those were actually meant to be enjoyed, a goal he eventually abandoned in pursuit of other things. I think you might also enjoy one of his short story collections. Penguin's "Selected Tales" is a good one.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by evollove

But without James and Conrad, I find it difficult to imagine 20th century literary modernism happening.

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

explain?

I love Conrad but I've never really understood his supposed link with Modernism. Not saying there isn't one (have never really studied literature in a serious, academic way) but it seems any quality writer or artist working towards the end of the 19th C ends up being called a forefather of modernism at some point.

[evollove]

I'm not sure. Hardy next to Conrad seems like a crusty joke, for example.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by evollove

You'll almost certainly like PORTRAIT and probably most of the early works. Those were actually meant to be enjoyed, a goal he eventually abandoned in pursuit of other things. I think you might also enjoy one of his short story collections. Penguin's "Selected Tales" is a good one.

The books on my 'to read next' shelf are Edith Wharton's House of Mirth, the new James Ellroy and Edmund Wilson's Memoirs of Hecate County but I'm seriously thinking about getting Portrait next and leaving those till after.

[!@#$%!]

maybe a faint connection but i'm reminded that tears eliot used "mistah kurtz--he dead" as an epigraph for the wasteland.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by evollove

I'm not sure. Hardy next to Conrad seems like a crusty joke, for example.

Put like that, you're obviously right.

[evollove]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

tears eliot

Pun-tastic!

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by evollove

Pun-tastic!

i'd like to steal the credit but it was e.e. cummings who called him that in one of his notebooks and i can't call him anything else now

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

i'd like to steal the credit but it was e.e. cummings who called him that in one of his notebooks and i can't call him anything else now

Nothing wrong with plagiarism. Reminds me of an infamous exchange between George Bernard Shaw and Oscar Wilde. Shaw had said something outrageously witty and Wilde told him "I wish I'd said that," to which Shaw replied, "You will, Oscar, you will."

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

Nothing wrong with plagiarism. Reminds me of an infamous exchange between George Bernard Shaw and Oscar Wilde. Shaw had said something outrageously witty and Wilde told him "I wish I'd said that," to which Shaw replied, "You will, Oscar, you will."

bhaaaa haaa haaaaa haaa!!!

[evollove]

You know, I feel like such a fraud. I haven't read anything in months. I think literacy has plasticity and I'm in a lull, nowhere near peak performance. I can't believe I'm the same person who could once knock off 200 pages in a day. I haven't read more than one page since October, I think.

And for the past few years it was nothing but short stories. Before that, a very long Updike binge (21 novels, way over 100 stories).

I'd like to return to literature. Learn how to read again. It's the schoolboy in me. I'm inspired to read a James I haven't yet. Then Conrad's Under Western Eyes, which I've wanted to read for, well, years. (And I own a fucking copy! What's wrong with me? Did I really have to watch those stupid SNL episodes?) A Flaubert. Trollop for laughs. Maybe give Woolf's heretofore unreadable The Waves another go. Take a few days to read all of Euripides. Then I'll switch it up and turn to Kafka, Becket, Borges, Nabokov for new flavors. But nothing past 1950.

(That list: the cracker patriarchy really was a bad motherfucker, wasn't he?)

Hm. The more I think of it: is this tempting or would it be tedious? I might be a little unsure.

[Rob Instigator]

I have been reading accounts of harrowing experiences. I am 3/4 of the way through Hillenbrand's UNBROKEN, which is now a supposedly shit movie by Angelina Jolie.

The book is an amazing story though.

I am also reading Isaac Asimov's Guide to the Bible and I am about 3/4 of the way through the Old Testament. Awesome stuff, and I wish Sunday School was more like it than the brainwashing sessions of simplified theology that sunday school normally is.

[h8kurdt]

Originally Posted by evollove

You know, I feel like such a fraud. I haven't read anything in months. I think literacy has plasticity and I'm in a lull, nowhere near peak performance. I can't believe I'm the same person who could once knock off 200 pages in a day. I haven't read more than one page since October, I think.

And for the past few years it was nothing but short stories. Before that, a very long Updike binge (21 novels, way over 100 stories).

I'd like to return to literature. Learn how to read again. It's the schoolboy in me. I'm inspired to read a James I haven't yet. Then Conrad's Under Western Eyes, which I've wanted to read for, well, years. (And I own a fucking copy! What's wrong with me? Did I really have to watch those stupid SNL episodes?) A Flaubert. Trollop for laughs. Maybe give Woolf's heretofore unreadable The Waves another go. Take a few days to read all of Euripides. Then I'll switch it up and turn to Kafka, Becket, Borges, Nabokov for new flavors. But nothing past 1950.

(That list: the cracker patriarchy really was a bad motherfucker, wasn't he?)

Hm. The more I think of it: is this tempting or would it be tedious? I might be a little unsure.

Don't worry it happens. I'm coming out of my non-reading phase after months of not reading. One day the books you couldn't imagine reading a few weeks back suddenly look like the best idea you could do.

Seeing as I never contribute to this thread I'll add my current reading-

 

Brilliant so far. I've read a fair few books about film/films, but this one has to rank as one of the best out there. He manages to make each film he talks about the next one you want to watch.

I finished this last week and you guys should totally check it out-

 

A comic book that really is something else. There's no general narrative, there's no heroes, there's no major characters. Basically it focuses on one corner of a room in a house, and follows that corner through the decades. Mcquire zooms from 2030 all the way back thousands of years ago and the people there at the time. From a bison who sat in the very spot before the house was ever built, to a child simply playing with a toy. It may seem like you wouldn't be able to a handle on the characters that appear (sometimes for one page, sometimes spreading over many pages), but each person you find out yourself trying to figure a story to them. Here's a shot of a page to give you an example.

 

Brilliant. Done by the bassist in Liquid Liquid oddly enough.