Robert’s review of Perfection > Likes and Comments
6 likes · Like
I hear this relates to Perec's novella, Things: A Story of the 60s. Had you read that and if so, drawn any conclusions about the references? More than a refresher?
Yes, I read that about the Perec novella connection, but I haven't read it. The idea of fiction relating to fiction intrigues me (and I'm currently writing some fiction that does just that), but focusing on one work to relate to is something different, especially in that one can actually read that other work, before or after, if one wants.
I just looked at "Things" and realized that it is closer than I expected, also about a couple, but more focused on things than experiences; today it is experiences that characterize more than things? That would explain the redo. Is it, then, more redo than reference or refresher? Definitely makes me want to read "Things." Too bad there are probably too many unknown nouns for me to get a good reading of it in the original.
Nick wrote: "I hear this relates to Perec's novella, Things: A Story of the 60s. Had you read that and if so, drawn any conclusions about the references? More than a refresher?"
I wanted to make sure you saw that I had read and reviewed "Things." Wishing you a great new year, Rob
Thanks Rob, didn’t see this - usual GR enshittification not getting notifications
I half expected this one to be a flaky unimaginative work reliant on another work to propel itself but it sets up a kind of dialogue. The youthfulness in the Perec book is still real, the lifestyle longing is still real, but this one lacked the optimism of just being young and desirous. Wanting didn’t feel like it gets you anywhere unless it’s through inheritance- which defines the difference - no compromise tinged with hope as in Perecs work.
So riffing banjos maybe ?
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Nick
(new)
Dec 04, 2025 04:09PM
I hear this relates to Perec's novella, Things: A Story of the 60s. Had you read that and if so, drawn any conclusions about the references? More than a refresher?
reply
|
flag
Yes, I read that about the Perec novella connection, but I haven't read it. The idea of fiction relating to fiction intrigues me (and I'm currently writing some fiction that does just that), but focusing on one work to relate to is something different, especially in that one can actually read that other work, before or after, if one wants. I just looked at "Things" and realized that it is closer than I expected, also about a couple, but more focused on things than experiences; today it is experiences that characterize more than things? That would explain the redo. Is it, then, more redo than reference or refresher? Definitely makes me want to read "Things." Too bad there are probably too many unknown nouns for me to get a good reading of it in the original.
Nick wrote: "I hear this relates to Perec's novella, Things: A Story of the 60s. Had you read that and if so, drawn any conclusions about the references? More than a refresher?"I wanted to make sure you saw that I had read and reviewed "Things." Wishing you a great new year, Rob
Thanks Rob, didn’t see this - usual GR enshittification not getting notifications I half expected this one to be a flaky unimaginative work reliant on another work to propel itself but it sets up a kind of dialogue. The youthfulness in the Perec book is still real, the lifestyle longing is still real, but this one lacked the optimism of just being young and desirous. Wanting didn’t feel like it gets you anywhere unless it’s through inheritance- which defines the difference - no compromise tinged with hope as in Perecs work.
So riffing banjos maybe ?
