Books Left: 94

After losing my first copy on an airplane and taking my sweet time to read through the rest, I’m finally finished with Iris Murdoch’s Under the Net. I usually don’t touch on the lives of authors when I write in the blog, mainly because I don’t want to fall under the “what is the author saying here?” trap. I’m mentioning Iris briefly because I found it fascinating that she wrote so many books. There was also a “controversial” biography written about her by someone who apparently didn’t care for her much. A film was made about her life in 2002 starring Kate Winslet. I haven’t seen it, but I want to now because I like biopics and I like Kate Winslet. I fear though that the movie will get me in tears, because Murdoch dies from Alzheimer’s Disease. Nothing quite gets me sobbing like horrible dementias. (I cried for about a half hour after I watched Awakenings.)

Is the book well written?

Let me say this: it isn’t poorly written. I never found myself noticing any particularly profound language, perhaps with the exception of the short passage where Jack sends a drunken letter to his ex in the mail (which I read out-loud in the video post). I liked the description of the letters falling down once the sender has let go. It’s more physical than sending a text message, where you just type a few words, hit send, and somehow know that in seconds they are appearing on someone else’s phone perhaps miles away.

Is it groundbreaking in some way?

My gut wants to say “yes” but I’m not sure if my gut is the right organ to use to answer this question. To be completely honest, I don’t know. I think it’s impressive that Murdoch wrote the book at 25, that it’s humorous and well thought out and deals with fascinating themes, in particular assumptions: the actions someone takes when they believe things that are entirely untrue. But is that enough to call it groundbreaking? I don’t know.

Is it an enjoyable read?

I enjoyed Under the Net for the most part. It took me a while to read, although this was hindered by the fact that I left it on the airplane. I found some of the parts dull, like when Jack is running through Paris following someone who might be Anna. I loved the characters: Jack, Hugh, Madge, and most of all Mars. I felt that each character was worthy of his or her own “spin-off” tale. Mrs. Tinkham in particular, the woman who runs the newsstand and collects stories.

Does Under the Net deserve to be on the list of the top 100 books of the 20th century? Maybe. Possibly. A very tentative yes.

Books Left: 95
Current Book: Sophie’s Choice by William Styron

Sophie’s Choice was tough. Not just because it was long, but also because I felt like it was a book I should enjoy reading. I tried very hard to like it, to feel connected with the characters, and in the end I just wanted it to be over.

Is the book well written?

I did not think Sophie’s Choice was particularly well written. I spoke before about how I understand and almost appreciate Styron’s telling of the story as though it were Stingo telling the story of Sophie to a friend.

It still needed some major editing. When finishing the book, I felt nothing. Here I was reading about a woman making the worst choice any human being would have to make, and I had no emotional reaction. Am I that thick-skinned?

Styron could have made so much more of a powerful emotional impact, if he’d told the story in chronological order leaving out the plethora of unnecessary details that filled the pages. Instead of reading quickly because I was invested in the characters, I read quickly because I had hundreds of pages to go in this overly long book.

Does it speak about the human condition?

This is one thing I’d say Sophie’s Choice does well. The comparison between the Holocaust and Slavery in the South is fascinating. The book speaks about how human beings, time and time again, are able to commit horrible acts against each other.

Is it groundbreaking in some way?

No and no. (Yes, I think a teenage girl did a better job of writing about the Holocaust than a Pulitzer Prize winner. Note that Styron did not win the Pulitzer for Sophie’s Choice. Makes me wonder what the Modern Library was thinking. And yes, both books were published before Styron’s.)

Is it an enjoyable read?

Not at all. I couldn’t wait to be finished.

I was thinking of saying “maybe” as my answer to if Sophie’s Choice belongs on the list of the top 100 books in the 1900s, but after going through my criteria I’m changing my answer to no. How is a novel going to say something about the human condition when it’s written in such a way that the message does not make any kind of impact?

Books Left: 97
Days Left: 690

I know I just wrote about The Postman Always Rings Twice yesterday, but the book is extremely short and I finished it on the metro on the way to work this morning, and I already picked up the next one. The 116 pages were a fast and emotional yet well-crafted read. It was like being on one of those tall wooden roller coasters where you can feel the beams shake as you fly up and down the hills with knots in your stomach.

The answer to the question regarding if this book deserves to be on the top 100 list is a resounding yes. Not only did I enjoy the read but it made me think about the issue of morality and how complicated it can be. I saw Frank (the moral vacuum) and Cora (the wife) see themselves in an impossible situation with no way out and while I would never resort to murder I can understand how it can feel to be trapped.

We have all felt trapped by our circumstances at one point or another. Currently I feel trapped by the snow that continues to pile up in my front yard, and on the streets and sidewalks and all over everything making it nearly impossible to go anywhere!

The Postman Always Rings Twice is considered a quintessential work of hardboiled fiction, which is also referred to as noir or pulp fiction. What makes this detective fiction hardboiled as opposed to over-easy is the lack of fluff. The crimes are not glamorous or clever. The writing is to-the-point without elaborate descriptions. The sleuths are not particularly quirky, if they even exist at all. It makes sense to me that a standard piece for a popular genre receive recognition. Particularly if the piece, like this, is actually well written and thought provoking.

That said, I still don’t understand the title. I spent the entire book waiting for the postman to show up and ring the doorbell, but this never happened. I suppose the “postman ringing” could be a metaphor for death, and they had to kill the Greek twice. That would relate as well to the two deaths that occurred before Frank was actually accused of killing anyone. There were also two cats that played significant roles in the story. If I thought more, I bet I could think of a lot of instances of things happening twice.

Now I’m thinking like an English major.

Books Left: 99
Days Left: 700
Current Book: The Ginger Man by J. P. Donleavy

I’m almost finished with The Ginger Man, but I feel no real reason to write about it. So instead, I’m going to talk about why I don’t like the word poignant.

Dictionary.com defines the poignant as having four definitions. When you see the word in a quote on the back of a paperback in Borders, it probably refers to one of two:

1. Keenly distressing to the feelings.
2. Keen or strong in mental appeal.

It’s not the meaning of the word I dislike. In fact, it reminds me more of music than of literature, and the way that certain combination of notes can wreck havoc on your heartstrings. I don’t like way the word sounds. Say it outloud, right now: Poin-yant. Hear those diphthongs? Diphthongs are nasty little combinations of vowel sounds. Diphthongs are why everyone hates the word moist, but could care less about the word damp. Can you think of a name with the sound “oi” or the sound “ya” in it? I couldn’t think of one. This is because diphthongs sound ugly. Poignant has not one, but two diphthongs.

The other thing I don’t like about the word poignant is how overused it is. Poignant is to book critics what seriously is to the characters on Grey’s Anatomy. If you need a good word to use instead of poignant, remember, the Thesaurus is your friend.

Other words that should be used in book critiques more often:

lush
epicurean
picaresque
haunting
spirited
kaleidoscopic
pithy
tenacious
genuine