Beckett does this too. What I do is stop in the same place each time...at the top of the left page. It kinda works.

I started Sons and Lovers by DH Lawrence, and its a pretty depressing book, but thankfully i spilled vegetable curry on it, meaning i could leave early.

The rising generation.

Criticizing Danielewski for being trite is like criticizing Joyce for being crude, or Chandler for being pulpy. You'll get unanimous agreement for years before he knocks Faulkner out of the Norton Anthology to much applause.

I think you are overrating Danielewski.

I love House of Leaves, but I don't care much for the Johnny Truant side of the story. All of the great stuff is in The Navidson Record.

The book dissolves into post modern gimmickry. I thought I would dig it but the charm wore off quickly.

I really tried to get into House of Leaves a couple years ago, but I just got tired of it, then I forgot about it. I have no desire to try to read it again. It really did just feel like wankery at the time.

I don't think I overrate him at all. The postmodern elements have nothing to do with his ability--that's just a medium that he enjoys, which he has elaborated on in interviews.

I hear "gimmick" used endlessly to describe both House of Leaves and Only Revolutions, which is a useless word without explanation. People assume that their striking appearance and pseudo-complexity are the depth of his innovation, but that has nothing to do with his writing. The Pelican Poems alone--an irrelevant and apparently useless addition to an already time-consuming work--are an excellent demonstration of his understanding of the art of writing. I think Danielewski as a writer, apart from whatever medium he uses, is genuinely one of the most capable voices out right now.

He does seem quite the prick, but if he can write, who cares? And anyway, Foer and Coupland have a much better hold on contemporary wankery.

I was hoping that his formatting would be more meaningful of a device in propelling the narrative but I didn't feel that was the case. The Three Attic Whalestoe Institute Letters did it well, the main story lost my interest. But I don't want to speculate over Danielewski as a writer any more than I already have. I haven't read any of his other work, nor have I finished this one.

Hah, no worries. I'm just hoping to set myself up for an I-told-you-so with a few of my friends. I think he's talented and have a feeling he's going to get recognized later, but I've lost bets before.

Not this translation, but the same book:


And then this:

a better "The Alchemist":
http://www.levity.com/alchemy/jn-alch0.html

Wow, you're managing to top yourself...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lamebrained

i am not surprised by some of those choices.

a) harry potter-- horrible horrible prose. unfuckingreadable.

b) ulysses -- too hard for most

c) corelli's mandolin --- i dont know but i saw the movie and it was HORRID

d) satanic verses -- im one of them. bought for the fame (over the mail for $1) not because i was realy interested

e) war and peace -- very fucking long! who has time these days? i wish i did...

f) coelho -- new age pap

I've read that translation of NFTU and loved it. Miller is the man, but I'm not familiar with that book. I'll have to check it out. Oh yeah, Danielewski is still wack. I'd rather my generation be crude or 'pulpy' than trite, which indeed describes Danielewski's poor attempts. there is much cooler contemporary literature out there. Junot Diaz's brief wondrous life of oscar wao is pretty dern good.

in response to a)...thank you...fuck harry potter

So I'm unfortunately adding Margret Atwood's Oryx and Crake to the list. Shit needs to take a back seat to FINAL ESSAYS!

Maybe people stop reading Harry Potter when they realize it's a fucking children's book, and that the movie wastes slightly less time.

And while we're at it, fuck Paolini, too.

I've been dipping in and out of Catch 22 for the last six months or so, and don't really know why I'm bothering. I mean, it's a totally pointless book, isn't it. I've realised that its very pointlessness is a metaphor, but, well, that doesn't make it any the less pointless.

Whether I'll ever bother to finish it is debatable.