J.G. Ballard discussion

I'm going to start reading Millennium People.

The premise seems pretty interesting and I'm looking forward to see how his late work was (despite the average rating this gets in this site).

I'm going to write some of my thoughts about it while I get through it.

I'm also looking forward to hear what you guys/gals though of it. :)

It's not one of his best but I enjoyed it. It digresses away from what the blurb says though. The actual mystery about his wife is lost in Ballard's world of psychopathy

Ballard's world of psychopathy is what I'm here for! :)

I think he's best at describing weird events and behaviour than he's at talking about the feelings of someone grieving over someone's death.

And the first chapters of this seem to prove just that. Also, the metaphors here have been kind of hit or miss so far in my opinion.

Yeah I agree with you on both counts. His strengths lie in his description of events rather than emotions. Personally, I think that Super Cannes and Kingdom Come are much better (Especially Super Cannes, which I feel is Ballard's most entertaining work).

For me the point of Ballard is that the external world in his work is always an externalisation of his characters' inner lives and feelings. Each desolate landscape described, each empty swimming pool is a psychological portrait; on that score whatever he describes is the description of emotion. It may be the description of psychic desolation and privation but these are also real and legitimate feelings, and feelings that Ballard gives full voice to.

I'm already 2/3 through and I have to say I'm enjoying it more as I read more.

There's less pontificating dialogues and so Ballard's prose really shows its quality.

Also, I'm enjoying the ambiguousness of the characters. It's hard to define them, even the main character.

I agree that a lot of the emotions come through in Ballard's writing by unusual means. Indeed a swimming pool can say more about the protagonist than the protagonist himself. I remember reading "Millennium People" when it first appeared and comparing it too much to "Cocaine Nights" and "Super-Cannes", perhaps that is what happens when one gets accustomed to this high quality output. Reading your comment makes me want to read it again.

Finished it yesterday.

I think the prose improved in the second half of the book, there were tons of memorable lines in it for me (despite the fact that I read a translation).

I think much of what of the book was about was the search of meaning in a meaningless world. Whether it was Sally’s accident, the priest that lost his faith, the protests or the terrorism, the theme was pretty much everywhere. It was more than simple rebellion. But, I'm not sure of what to make of it in the end, any other opinions?

I thought the ending was too unambiguous. That it wrapped everything to neatly, but I haven’t read that many Ballard novels so maybe I’m assuming something that’s not true about his books.

What I found most odd about the book was how clueless the protagonist, David, was despite him being very intelligent. I think it was so exaggerated (he even assumed that a sniper rifle was a fishing pole despite it being inside a police bag!) that it must have been intentional but I didn’t get what the meaning was. Any theories?

A surrealist connection (as I’m tempted to do with any Ballard book) that I made in this book was the talk about meaningless acts of violence being, in a way, more meaningful than anything else. It reminded of André Breton’s quote (founder of the surrealist group) saying: “The simplest surrealist act consists in going into the street with revolvers in your fist and shooting blindly into the crowd as much as possible.”

I haven't read Millenium People but sounds like I should. :)

I'm curious, Sérgio, about why you read a translation: I'm not a native English reader myself and I always debate whether I should read the original and avoid "lost in translations" problems, or instead rely on a translator, who could provide insights from knowing the English language better than me. I guess it really depends on the translator, but I was wondering if you have thoughts on the matter, particularly related to Ballard's works.

Hi Ettore.

Well, translations can have real problems, and some can be really bad. But even in the bad ones I can feel the voice of the writer behind it when they have really personal styles (whether it's PK Dick or Ballard for example).

I would say I would prefer originals when I can read them, but I can get cheap used translated books sometimes or books from the library, so, I end up reading tons of translated stuff. And even if I can't get 100% of the experience of reading the original text I think I get most of what the writer was transmiting through his prose.