Tom > Recent Status Updates

Luis is much more involved. Jean and Evelyn much less.
Bateman also has a family - which, is something.

See, I understand that many lines are word for word “stolen” from the book - but the pacing and rearrangement of the context of each individual line is just superior.

I like reading about moments of coexistence between Christianity and Islam. It's interesting and hope-pilled.

Ever since Kingdom Come Deliverance and Pentiment, I’ve been obsessed with the (late) medieval era.

While Bateman does not care for his coworkers ramblings, we (the reader) likely do not care for his endless non-descriptions of everybody's clothes.

The violence progresses slowly, and yet - nothing particularly graphic (violence) has happened yet.

I see why certain scenes were changed for the film - even if the dialogue was kept. It's much more obvious in the book, that Bateman is probably bisexual (even if that would make him an outdated stereotype) and possibly autistic (an even worse stereotype - but what will you do).
As for the clothes and commodities, I only recognize Hugo Boss and Brooks Brothers - the rest, I don't particularly care for.

Bateman feels meek so fair in the beginning compared to the movie. Almost puppy-dog like.
The previous (2 or 3?) times I tried to read this I think I was too young, not because of the contents, but because I was under the impression this was a tough read in terms of style - it is not.

Technically this is my second time reading, but I enjoyed this so much when it was assigned that I got a physical copy and am now re-reading so I can write an A level essay.

I think the conclusion is going to end up being that we don't hate on the French enough.

I attended a lecture by the author in September. I really liked the core thesis on ‘civilization speak’ which evolves from philhellenism.

Him being in the cold is him digging up her body right? It has to be.
I will feel extremely illiterate if not.

I am struggling to understand the point of Brave New World.

Catherine cannot leave the protagonist like F. and Edith because she was never there in the first place.

I think I will focus my essay on intimacy as enacted through violence (against women, specifically indigenous women as opposed to white men). This protagonist is deeply disturbed and I suspect he project his own fantasies as being analagous to everybody else.
I wonder if the section that is from the POV of his friend, F., will confirm this theory. I already guessed on his(Protag) pedophile nature, and was correct.

This isn’t that difficult to read. I am *understanding* but I need to under enough to write a good paper. It’s a good novel.

Intimacy is solely about fulfilling self-desire and through constant sexualization of women in every possible scenario - even rape. It coincides with his saviour complex over indigenous women, wanting to "save him" for his own personal pleasure of being important and renowned.

We are finally getting to the inciting incident.

Have to read this for my English class. It’s not that hard of a read. I probably should have started earlier so I could re-read before the test. I still might. I want to get a lot farther a lot quicker. I want to be finished by Friday so I can re-read. I thought the homosexuality would be a “twist” but it’s already there hahahaha. It’s not that explicit mostly because the whole novel lacks description

This book feels extremely early science-fiction, which it literally is, I suppose. If it reminds me of anything, it’s probably Stand on Zanzibar.

I am interested still to see how it plays out. But I suppose, I didn’t know much except that BNW is about excess consumption, which I see. But with the genetic engineering component, I just don’t see it to be as relevant or horrifying as 1984.

I am curious as to why Huxley dislikes Ford so much.
The whole sleep memorization emphasis really is about the difference about how we teach history. Is is about facts? (Imagine those stereotypical WW2 guys) Or is it about analysis and making connections? (Basically, how I approach history) Huxley, through parody, promotes the latter to the utmost extent.

Here lay the consequences of not understanding biology.
: A tour to students, who embrace no critical thinking, at a fertility laboratory. A demonstration of the process - hundreds of processes of types of people. A question of infinite growth from one embryo. Of rapid growth. The question is engineering a type of person who can work but will not think.

I can't get over the central reoccurring act of Richard *always* being left behind, specifically by Henry.