/lit/ - Literature

>>16713346
Gaddis is trash and for pseuds.

>>16713354
sounds like my kind of book.

>>16713346
It's not called Junior it's just J R. Like the character's name is J R. It's good though so I dunno what that other guy is talking about. Nobody talked about this book for a while and now that it's being reprinted /lit/ has decided that it doesn't like it. I find it surprisingly easy and is for me a real page turner. A vast majority of the book is dialogue, which I'm sure you've heard already, and there are no chapters or any breaks that clearly distinguish scenes, causing the book to have these hazy transitions between scenes. This isn't a problem, though, as long as you pay attention to the transitions. Pay attention and the dialogue will flow beautifully, it's a fun read, enjoy yourself.

>>16713346
>he fell for the Gaddis meme
Lol

>>16713346
One of the absolute greatest pieces of English language literature ever.

>>16713755
how?

I would rather read Pynchon

>>16713799
typical redditor

>>16713346
A great story with many enjoyable scenes and amazingly crafted characters. It might take you a bunch of pages to realize how well written the dialogue really is. Don’t listen to Gaddis haters here, they don’t have a single good point (other than recognizing that some people maybe tend to overrate Gaddis a little bit).

>>16713346
I won’t undersell or oversell it. I’ll only say that it’s good, and damn funny if you pay attention. Guaranteed a laugh on every page.

Lit used to love this book before NYRB reprinted it, now they hate it since it is easy to get a copy

You're in for one of the most entertaining rides you can have via reading.

It tells a hilarious story of a child who runs a commercial empire from a payphone. Spectacular satire and very much in line with Gaddis' pessimistic worldview.

One thing to note that'll ease the process is how scene transitions happen; since the entire novel is unattributed dialogue, you might be in a room with three people, A, B, and C. They'll take turns conversing.

Then, unannounced, a person D will walk by an open window, and you'll hear what they're saying. Suddenly, the dialogue will focus with person D, and the scene changes from the room, to outside, on the sidewalk.

Once you get used to that, the book becomes quite easy to read. Every character has such a distinct voice and speech characteristics.

Just start reading it, it's incredibly hard to put down.

>>16713763
It's Gaddis to Der Ring des Nibelungen as Joyce to Ὀδύσσεια.

>>16713799
Agreed.

>>16713915
Why are the characters amazingly crafted? I found the cast of The Recognitions more... more.

>>16714475
This.

>>16714769
Yawn.

>>16714769
>no but listen, like Gaddis actually uses all these here character names all the time so it’s like really easy to figure it out hey...

I actually miss reading about those guys, such a great book

>>16714814
I haven’t read The Recognitions yet, are you implying that one was better?

A rejected screenplay with unattributed dialogue. It's really good though, one of my favorite novels.

>>16714711
It was easy to get a copy a while ago too and /lit/ loved it when it was still widely available from Dalkey. Your point is moot.

>>16715123
>a rejected screenplay
Imagine being this stupid
>inb4 a redrafted play
Imagine being this stupid.

>>16713346
Sorta related how is 'Women & Men" by McElroy for someone new to the whole postmodern scene? That and "The Tunnel" seem kind interesting, or should I just start with Pynchon?

>>16715175
Only purchase Women and Men if you have enjoyed all of the following
>Gravity's Rainbow
>Mason & Dixon
>Against the Day
>V.
>J R
>The Recognitions
>Infinite Jest
>The Pale King
>Don Quixote
>The Sot-Weed Factor
>Underworld
I would recommend checking out other McElroy first. Women and Men was okay, but it definitely felt too long. There are really great bits in there, believe me. But it's strewn with lots of underwhelming bits. Then you also have to get through the experimental second-person angel/alien narration and interrogation scenes. I found the driest part of the book Ayers rock sections. But I thoroughly enjoyed the weird sex yoga class bits, the retarded messenger boy passages, and the real strength of the novel is the suburban bit focusing on the two brothers and their mother. I think it is decent and worth reading but should not be an entry point. I would also suggest trying Lookout Cartridge or A Smuggler's Bible first.

>>16715313
Alright, cheers mate, that was helpful.

>>16715325
I'll add you don't necessarilly need to read all the novel I listed before you read Women & Men, but you will be more likely to drop it if you haven't read much in the postmodernist style.

>>16714838
I enjoyed it more for sure. The charcters in The Recognitions are more memorable and deeper. The who's-speaking technique is also a major part of The Recognitions as we watch Wyatt change through the book. I love both novels, but much of the love for JR came from being a New Yorker. But JR doesn't have an Anselm or Stanley or Basil, Recktall, Otto or Esme—and so on—even the minor characters, down to the drunk bums, are thrumming with life in The Recognitions. JR loses something in its constraints. I can't recall its last words, but no one can forget the ending of The Recognitions, nor the end for each of its main characters.

>>16715175
American Psycho is the entry level pomo novel. If you want the meme route after that do the Pynchonpath of Lot 49 to V to Gravity's Rainbow AKA V2. Lot 49 is short, clocking in at 150ish pages to AP's 350+, but the world Pynchon manages in such a short length is stunning.

The Tunnel is actually an easy read, don't let the memers scare you off it. It's a a marmorealization of Hell and it is as gorgeous as it is brutal.

But if you're intersted in postmodernism start here:

http://pnl2027.gov.pt/np4/file/430/Lost_in_the_funhouse_Barth.pdf

That short story is what set David Foster Wallace down his path and he never surpassed it, despite spending his entire life trying to do so.

>>16715123
>>16715152
It's a radioplay, retards. Literally. He worked it into an epic novel.

>>16715591
There's definitely a lot more one-liners in TR than in JR, I think because the dialogue manages to seem true-to-life it loses some of the impact that a clever line with good delivery manages to make exactly because it would never come to us at the moment. You don't really get something like "–-Merry Christmas, the man threatened." or "–-Am I the man for whom Christ died?" What you do get is Bast having a nervous break down in front of the elementary school's closed circuit broadcast ranting about how Mozart thought life was filled with enough shit to drown him, or Gibbs' Panurge-like curses where he manages to include the words "Bast" and "God damned" in nearly every clause.
I will say I never laughed so much or so hard as I did while reading two books: The Innocents Abroad and JR. In TR, the laughs are more bittersweet, more melancholic, but it has that strange spark that surprises you before you know what's just happened.

>>16715815
cringe

>>16715664
hehe V2

Why did they have to pick a woman to do the intro? I don't want a woman's name displayed that big on a book written by a man.

>>16716997
Try to find the Penguin edition from the 90s

>>16716997
>>16717018
the dalkey archive press edition is nice

>>16715721
I hope God strikes you down. Some retard on here might believe you, or God forbid you might believe it yourself.

>>16717018
Best edition, yeah.

>>16715146
RIP moot

>>16717313
Huh?

>>16714814
>It's Gaddis to Der Ring des Nibelungen as Joyce to Ὀδύσσεια
is The Recognitions to Faust? That's what wikipedia seemed to imply

>>16717796
No. Wyatt in a sense sells his integrity, but they don't map.