Why Irreverence?

I think I've made it pretty clear that the classics are my happy place (and for those who don't understand why, check out this Book Riot post I wrote in defense of them), but I don't know if I've ever really explained why I decided on the irreverent angle.

Mostly because funny is always more interesting than unfunny, unless we're talking about funerals or war or things that are inherently not funny- books are not those things. I happened to have amazing high school teachers who made us do silly things like recite speeches from Shakespeare while wearing home made costumes (I remember one student who became so impassioned by Shylock's monologue in Merchant of Venice that he TOSSED a DESK at the TEACHER) and such like. Funny= attention getting= I liked those books. Ya dig?

So. There's that. There's also the more Important reason: reverence makes people not read these books, myself included. When people say things like "Oh, well, Finnegan's Wake IS impossible to understand and takes forever and was written by someone who was probably insane but he was a GENIUS and we must WORSHIP AT HIS LITERARY ALTAR and READ ALL HIS THINGS TO BE SMART," my reaction is: you are a prig and that book sounds like torture and you can't make me. Insert the name of any classic into that initial sentence, and you're likely to get a similar reaction from wide swaths of people who would otherwise read them.

Reverence can also make us dishonest. When people are all CHARLES DICKENS IS INFALLIBLE, readers feel like they can't comment on his wordiness, or his ridiculous portrayal of some women, or whatever because Not Liking The Dickens means you're stupid or you don't "get it." No one wants to feel stupid, so they just don't read the book. Or they read it, and keep their opinions to themselves- this stifles conversation that can lead to a deeper, more complex understanding of the work. I give you two fake conversations as an example:

FAKE CONVERSATION ONE
Reader: I read Pride and Prejudice, and I didn't like it. Everyone is so annoying.
Snob: JANE AUSTEN IS A GOD AND YOU, MERE MORTAL, ARE AN IDIOT.
Reader: *runs off to never, ever read Jane Austen again*

FAKE CONVERSATION TWO
Reader: I read Pride and Prejudice, and I didn't like it. Everyone is so annoying.
Other Reader: I can see that. I think Austen sort of intended it that way, though.
Reader: Oh, really? Never thought of that.
Other Reader: Yeah man, Austen is a TOTAL smart ass.
Reader: I LOVE SMART ASSES! MORE AUSTEN!

See? So that's basically why I push the irreverence here. More funny minus hero worship (even if it's warranted) can equal greater perceived accessibility and more conversation. Fun for all! We have to break down this idea that not enjoying something or not personally liking a work means that you didn't get that work. It's possible to understand the intricacies behind something and still think it's boring- and this is the space where people can come have that exact conversation.


Caveat: None of this is to say that I don't value literary criticism because I TOTES DO and I read plenty of it, but that's just not what this blog is about, capish?

Kierkegaard Say Wha?

Guys. I just took two weeks to read a 150 page little book by Soren Kierkegaard. Why the slacky slackerness of the pace, you ask? BECAUSE I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT.

Ok, that's a lie. I have an idea of what he's talking about: Abraham (ish?). Kierkegaard was a 19th century Danish Christian theologian and philosopher, and Fear and Trembling is an existential examination of Abraham's almost-sacrifice of Isaac. I picked it up because lately I've been all "Christian pop-culture is shallow and silly and thoughtless and I'm going to read All The Smart Jesus-Types," and for some insane reason THIS IS WHERE I STARTED *head desk.*

Anywoot, I'm not going to bother to summarize here because it's full of un-summarizable bits like this:

"Faith is just this paradox, that the single individual as the particular is higher than the universal, is justified before the latter, not as subordinate but superior, though in such a way, be it noted, that it is the single individual who, having been subordinate to the universal as the particular, now by means of the universal becomes that individual who, as the particular, stands in an absolute relation to the absolute." <--one sentence, very representative of the entire thing.

So basically the entire thing is about the individual in regards to the universal (which I assume he means as a synonym for God, but I don't really know because again, WTF?) as it relates to this small episode of Abraham's life. He also talks a bit about the concept of greatness and FROM WHAT I UNDERSTOOD his point there is that purposeful action leads to greatness as opposed to being a recipient of circumstances, etc. 

I think his main purpose here was to show that having great "knight of faith" type faith is mega-hard (he makes a few references to lazy Christians who swallow Scripture without thinking about it). Which, ok, yes, there aren't huge amounts of people exalted for their faith in the Bible like Abraham. Kierkegaard seems to think that Abraham-sized-greatness is the goal (in fact, he left his fiance so he could devote himself to being more church-a-liscious, a move some people think he equated in his brain with Abraham's episode with Isaac). Maybe I'm alone here, but my goal isn't to be like Abraham. So. Don't know what Soren would think of me. 

Anyway, I may be totally off base here because again, it's a bit difficult to cut through all the commas and get to his point. I'm not a lazy reader- I did a good bit of reading secondary reviews/thoughts/stuff about this book, and it didn't really help. 

Oh, and he makes short work of some of Hegel's philosophy, so if you're anti-Hegel, this might be up your alley. 

I don't know stars out of your mom because my eyes crossed enough to make me not understand a good bit of it. (Also, I just realized that I spelled his name incorrectly, and I have fixed it)

The Iliad: Half Way Point

So I'm reading The Iliad with a Goodreads group, so we're going at their pace- two books per week. Except I'm a week behind. And...I just...I don't...I don't CARE.

Nothing about this epic poem is making me care. Lemme 'splain- The Iliad is a slice of the Trojan War pie, so when the reader enters into the scene the war has already been going on for a bit. Paris has already taken Helen away from the angry, angry Greeks and now the angry, angry Greeks are outside of Troy trying to make with the killing and the plundering and the hey hey. They have Achilles, The Greatest Killer/Plunderer/Hey Hey Hey-er in the history of same, but he's refusing to fight because another Greek stole his slave girl. So Angry Greek One is all "Gimme That Slave Girl" and Achilles is all "Hells to the No" and Angry Greek One is all "Except Yes" so Achilles is all "FINE BUT I AM GOING TO SPEND THE NEXT 200 PAGES SULKING WHILE YOU TALK ABOUT BRONZE ARMOR." And that is what has happened thus far.

Don't get me wrong, there has been much killing. Lots of "and the bronze spear went through his left nipple and the life went out of him," and "the bronze spear went through his helment and spilled his brains, and the life went out of him," etc. If your jam is battle scenes, THIS IS THE EPIC THING FOR YOU. There are also lots of interferences from the gods (their familial squabbling provides some of the most interesting parts thus far), and ONE very tender and small scene between Hector and his little family, just before he goes to war (there's also a small scene with Helen and Paris where Helen is essentially "Paris, you are a little bitch. Go defend your city because people are dying and it's your fault" which endears me to her a bit). Other than that, it's killings and very long speeches, Old Testament style. 

THAT IS NOT TO SAY that the poetry isn't beautiful because it is. It's just a chore, and I'm sort of bored, and I'm hoping that Achilles decides to get over the slave girl thing and kick some ass here soon. SO. Verdict at the halfway point: pretty words, lots of death-but-not-interesting-death, Achilles is a Whiny McWhinerson for being such an Epic Soldier of Great Renown. 

Bow to Me, Your New Short Story Queen

I have been on an accidental short story kick lately. Meaning, I keep picking up books I know nothing about, not reading the backs, and finding out that I MAY LOOK LIKE A NOVEL, BUT NO, I AM THIS OTHER THING THAT YOU DON'T GENERALLY LIKE.

In Our Time by Ernest Hemingway

I am usually all ERNEST, Light of my life, fire of my loins, etc. This collection of short stories left me more ERNEST, get me a sandwich and hand me the remote control. This was his first published collection of short stories, so it was his major reveal as The Author Who Uses All The Declarative Sentences, [stop]. They're all thematically about World War I, so there's that. Chalk this collection up as Very Important because it was Hemingway's debut-ish, but it wasn't his debut to ME and therefore I am underwhelmed. But I can see how America was a bit LOOK AT YOUR LACK OF SEMI-COLONS, COME INTO MY BOSOM. A good read if you're the kind of person who wants to read all of your favorite authors' works, but otherwise unnecessary.

(three stars out of your mom)

A Curtain of Green and Other Stories by Eudora Welty*

Yes, MOAR THIS! I have a weakness for Southern Lady Writers and Eudora! You are my poppet. A Curtain of Green was her first collection of stories, but it lacks that "author's first work" taste. This woman has that magical ability to be both Very Literary and Very Entertaining (a dual set of talents that so many Serious Authors seem to lack). The tales are unpretentious, hopeful, realistic and totally Southern. Eudora is quoted in the introduction as saying "I haven't a literary life at all...But I do feel that the people and things I love are of a true and human world, and there is no clutter about them...I would not understand a literary life." Essentially, this is a nice (genius) lady, observing the world and writing (geniusly [not a word]) about it. Like, there's J. Franzen on one end of the Pretentious Literary Fiction spectrum, and then there's Eudora Welty and her work on the other end. Which is located on a different planet. Anywoot, I was especially fond of "Why I Live at the P.O.,""A Curtain of Green," and "Clytie." 

(five stars out of your mom)

*I'll have you know that the "and Other Stories" bit is very small on my copy, so I didn't see it and therefore didn't know it was short stories.

Modern Pairings- Goes Well With Cheddar

Modern Pairings is an irregularly scheduled feature wherein I read a modern or soon-to-be-released book that is Like a Classic Thing, and then I tell you- Read this, it is like this classic thing. 

I'm Sorry, What is That? A Good American by Alex George, Amy Einhorn Books/Putnam, February 7, 2012

Goes Well With: One Hundred Years of Solitude (sans the magical realism), East of Eden, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

Explain Yourself, Upstart: YOU MUST READ THIS *pokes you.* It is a multi-generational saga concerning the Meisenheimer family, starting with the matriarch and patriarch meeting and falling in love  in pre-World War I Europe. Love-type shenanigans ensue and they must FLEE to America, where they end up in Missouri. Cue children having, and their children having children, etc. See also: prizefighting, jazz, German food, family secrets, prohibition. Some parts are the heartbreakingest and other parts are the upliftingest and that combination gets me every time. Jette (the matriarch) reminded me of Ursula from One Hundred Years of Solitude, with her iron will and strange (nonmagical) longevity and having to see her family members off to war. The book has the vista-breaking scope and BIG HISTORICAL EVENTS AND HOW IT AFFECTS THIS FAMILY feel of East of Eden, with a touch of the immigrants-making-it-in-America-and-breaking-their-own-hearts of A Tree Grows in Brooklyn (that is not to say that it is JUST LIKE these books because it is very much It's Own Thing, but there are FLAVORS of these, hence "goes well with cheddar.")

I'm Sorry, What is That? Birds of a Lesser Paradise by Megan Mayhew Bergman, Scribner, March 6, 2012

Goes Well With: A Curtain of Green and Other Stories by Eudora Welty

Explain Yourself, Upstart: So, I am a bad reader of short stories. I rarely feel anything past "meh," with the exceptions being Salinger, Welty and Birds of a Lesser Paradise. There's also this thing where I'm not always pleased with how family and motherhood and relationships are portrayed in modern literature because it's so often HERE'S HOW SCREWED UP PEOPLE ARE SCREWED UP and HERE'S HOW MOTHERS ACTUALLY RESENT THEIR CHILDREN and while yes, those things can be true, I think more often life is HERE'S HOW SCREWED UP PEOPLE MEAN WELL AND LOVE THEIR FAMILIES and Birds of a Lesser Paradise is that (and also Welty is that). Sometimes women have children unexpectedly and it ends up being totes awesome (she says as she holds her unexpected twins [not really, I can't hold them both at once]) and sometimes your relationship with your dad is both I LOVE YOU and also YOU'RE SO FRUSTRATING and these stories are those things. And the writing is beautiful. And, like Welty, they are sometimes Very Southern, which I appreciate. So if both short stories AND contemporary literature gives you the "mehs," try this when it comes out. And then come back here and tell me how you hearted its face. 

Sad Bastards: Gertrude Stein

Sad Bastards is our (not regularly scheduled) feature wherein I tell you Five Things You Should Know About An Author To Sound Smart At Dinner Parties. 

Mean muggin'.

I had my first exposure to Gertrude Stein when I tried and failed to read Three Lives. That shiz is boring and awful and boring. And racist. But she lived in Paris! And hung out with Hemingway! And Picasso painted her! She has to be interesting, right? Um. Decide for yourself-

1. Stein met Hemingway, Ezra Pound, Sherwood Anderson, et. al. because she hosted salons in her apartment in Paris and she had lots of neat art. And by neat I mean her collection consisted of works of some of the best artists who ever lived, and the art brought the writers. It was like this: Stein lived with art critic brother--> Stein collected fancy art (Matisse, Picasso, Cezanne, etc.)---> Stein became famous because of her collection ---> smart people started hanging out at her house.

2. During World War I, Stein and her life partner Alice Toklas bought a car that they used to drive supplies to French hospitals to aid the war effort. They called the car "Auntie," after Stein's aunt who "behaved admirably during emergencies."

3. She is said to have invented the phrase "the Lost Generation," and was godmother to Hemingway's son Jack.

4. Stein survived living in the south of France during the Nazi occupation, despite being Jewish and a lesbian. Some historians say she wasn't harmed (and neither was her art collection) because she was a famous American. Others say it was because she was good friends with the anti-Semitic Bernard Fay, a member of the Vichy government who had connections with the Gestapo.

5. In 1934, Stein said this to the New York Times: "I say that Hitler ought to have the peace prize, because he is removing all the elements of contest and of struggle from Germany. By driving out the Jews and the democratic and Left element, he is driving out everything that conduces to activity. That means peace." The statement sounds pretty heavy with irony...but in 1938, Stein quietly lobbied the Nobel committee to award Hitler the Peace Prize. In 1940, she compared Petain (head of the French Vichy government) to George Washington.

(for more about Stein's possible Nazi connections, read this from the Institute for Historical Review)

So basically, the Nazis were all this:

And Gertrude Stein was all: I'm in the South of France! I know famous people! At any rate, she was certainly a complex person. My admittedly brief experience with her writing leads me to believe she's more famous for her odd political beliefs, eccentric personality and her entourage of authors than she is for any personal talent she may have had.

Books About Other Books and People and Stuff and Things

Along with reading the classics, I also like to read books ABOUT the classics for my nerdiness, it knows no bounds. I recently read two that I thought were interesting, so I'm going to tell you about them. Obviously. Because this is my blog, where I tell you about things.

Melville House, December 16, 2011

Kurt Vonnegut: The Last Interview is actually a series of interviews conducted from the 1970s until his last one, which was conducted in 2007. The interviews were originally published in a variety of places (my favorite being a co-interview he did with Joseph Heller that was published in 1992 in Playboy, the topics including blurbing each other's books, whether young women are sexier than old women, and the soul-sucking nature of divorce). 

If you're a Vonnegut fan, I suggest you check this out. It's Vonnegut, unedited and unadorned! It's one-liner tastic! Examples:

Interviewer: What is a twerp in the strictest sense, in the original sense?

Vonnegut: It's a person who inserts a set of false teeth between the cheeks of his ass.

Interviewer: I see.

Vonnegut: I beg your pardon; between the cheeks of his OR HER ass. I'm always offending feminists that way.

And also, this gem:

Vonnegut: I think it can be tremendously refreshing if a creator of literature has something on his mind other than the history of literature so far. Literature should not disappear up its own asshole, so to speak.

It should be noted that as the interviews go on, Vonnegut tends to recycle the same stories and jokes. It makes sense- he was getting along in years, was tired of making up creative answers to the same old questions, and his opinions about humanity hadn't really changed. This collection is SUPES funny and a great look into Vonnegut's thoughts on everyday things AS WELL AS, you know, the atomic bomb and stuff.

Penguin, October 2011

THIS IS THE INTERESTINGEST. However, I don't think it will convince anyone who hasn't read Moby Dick to do so, for the following reasons: 1) If you haven't read a book, assumedly because it's long and hard and maybe boring, would you ever pick up a book that was trying to change your mind? Maybe no. 2) Philbrick spends a lot of time saying things like (I summarize) THIS IS THE LONGEST *butworthit* and MELVILLE WAS MAYBE A LITTLE CRAZY *noitsreallyworthit* and EPIC WORK OF GENIUS *butmaybenotthathard*.

Aside from that, if you HAVE read Moby Dick, I recommend this. If you loved it, it will further articulate why you loved it. If you hated it, it's a well thought-out defense that may provoke your thinky bits. He goes into the symolism (or lack thereof) of the white whale, Melville's mania surrounding the production of the novel (anyone else think Melville sounds a little manic depressive here?), the development of Ahab, etc. He makes a good case for Moby Dick being the Great American Novel, not just because it was written by an American, but because it's subtly about America and American values (the real ones, not the Republican ones [no offense]).