Patrick’s Reviews > The Making of Americans > Status Update

Patrick, now I’m dying to know what happened! 😃

Ah, not much D: just the question: “How has any one sensitiveness in living?” 🙂 and, out of the odd mobius strip-like sentences, the endless circular structure, the punctuation that is not based on rules but rather seemingly on whim, it was so surprising to see an actual question mark when there was never one before 🤓 I also almost wondered, given the book being how it is, whether the question mark was maybe an error actually lol. Because the edition I have is apparently a first edition facsimile, so any and all errors in printing that one exist in it, and sometimes they’re noticeable typos, but other times, they make you wonder if maybe that seemingly unexpected word was intentional; whether that question mark was specifically placed there to signify how the book in the part I’m in is seemingly merging: the narrator(is the narrator the author? I’m not sure) seemingly more and more voicing their own opinions, or whether it means something else? Or whether the correct punctuation of adding a question mark was ironically enough a typo(?). Much to ponder lol

It becomes almost an exercise in itself of having to occasionally make an arbitrary internal judgement to assume there was an error when in reality there may not have actually been an error. In the ? Mark case and in cases regarding actual correctly-spelled words that are in places where it could oddly be fitting for them to be there but at the same time they might actually be errors.

Haha, at that point I don’t think I’d even care anymore whether the question mark was intentional or not, Patrick. If a book I’d been spending that much time with had already made me suspicious of every strange word and bit of punctuation, even a genuine typo would start to feel like part of the reading experience. And honestly, I think I’d find that incredibly exciting! 😃

Hehe yeah for a while I was concerned that the publishers of this edition did an awful job editing or something, until I skimmed thru the intro and saw that facsimile intention and it all made sense to me and I wasn’t angry at them anymore 😆 it felt like a huge relief in a sense lol bc that mean I don’t have to/can’t fault Dalkey for it 🙂it’s interesting! Tho I’ve been really having to force myself to resist temptation to read any other books because I don’t want this book to be a multi-year read D::

Which is made more difficult because of how, sometimes I’ve spent like, 15 minutes or more on a page 😅 I haven’t read Ulysses in more than ten years but I feel like this book might be more challenging than it. Because of how it is and stuff

And idk whether I’m relieved to have not read anything else by her before or not, bc I wonder if it would’ve made me more weary to read this book or if it would’ve somehow “prepared me” for it. Can’t say.

Ugh, spending 15 minutes on a single page would completely mess with my sense of time, Patrick, and for some reason I think I’d start resenting the book! 😅

And saying it might be even harder than Ulysses isn’t exactly reassuring, because Ulysses is pretty much the ultimate level for me - every other book looks like an innocent little angel beside it, haha.

Though I do wonder if never having read Stein before might actually be a small advantage here. You don’t have another version of her in your head telling you how she’s supposed to sound, so in a way, you’re learning how to read her from this book itself.🙃

Heh yeah it takes time making sure to generally have an understanding of what is being discussed but the nice thing is, most of the time one can be certain what was discussed will be discussed again in a different way.

So, I would say in Ulysses there’s definitely more of a straight-up narrative, there’s much more linear progression. There’s plenty of allusions and all that too, which I think can make the reading experience a little easier because sometimes by knowing an allusion you can get a greater hint as to what the author is doing/relating to. There’s also much more diversity in writing style in Ulysses. With TMOA, TMOA is unapologetically itself. TMOA is almost obsessively trying to make the reader Understand. Attempting to provide clarity(as in TMOA) sometimes is just as complicated as attempting to confuse(as in, some other books) the reader, I would say.

Yeah I’m not sure 🙂 I feel I’d maybe moreso put the book off if I’ve already read something by her. Because the length of it and stuff o_O

Patrick wrote: "Heh yeah it takes time making sure to generally have an understanding of what is being discussed but the nice thing is, most of the time one can be certain what was discussed will be discussed agai..."

No matter what, I just can’t seem to kill my curiosity about Ulysses! 🤪

Heh I’m sure you’ll have a good time with Ulysses! I’d just finish up 2666 first and then decide if you’re 100% ready to start another big book : O

Of course! So Ulysses will have to wait for some other spring.😆

Heh yeah there’s no need to rush 😃

I’ve taken a little break from 2666 because The Part About the Crimes is honestly intimidating me a bit.🥲

Ohhhhhh yeahhh that part gets pretty relentless. I think it’s good to keep in mind that the murders are based on real murders(I can’t say if they’re 100% accurate tho), which, while painful to know, I think is a motivation to read it for the sake of those who have died I suppose one can say. I think it’s the biggest part of the book tho, so once you’re done with it you’ll probably be more than halfway thru the book!

Yeah, if it were completely fictional, I could probably keep a little more distance from it, but knowing there are real women behind all of this will probably affect me much more. I just need to take it slowly and not try to rush through it like it’s an ordinary section.

Yeah true :/ tho you got this! You’ve managed to read 120 days! That one, while fictional, I feel was much more brutal o_O after that section tho, I feel it gets much less dark!

Did you mean The 120 Days of Sodom by Sade? 😊

Yeah! That was a dark one : o I remember for whatever reason the copy I had felt gigantic. And I was reading it on public transportation and it felt awkward so I read it with the book in my lap so that no one could see the name and think I’m reading some violent, grotesque pornographic book(which I guess in reality I actually was) 😅

Haha, for a second I thought you meant I’d been reading it for 120 days, which is why I had to check.🤭

Honestly, the main thing I remember about that book is the discomfort it left me with. Not the kind that disappears once you close the book either, but the kind that just sits there like a knot in your stomach. I’ve only had that feeling that strongly with two other books: The Painted Bird and Story of the Eye. Have you read either of those?

Ah! That’s ok 😃 heh yeah. And I often get reminded of how, surprising it is that the book even managed to survive given where it was found, and the many years prior to its actual publication. As for the other two, I did read story of the eye but I think I didn’t really know what exactly to feel about it. I think I partially felt disappointed bc I think it felt pretty flat to me overall. Like, it felt like it was trying to be a shocking/rebellious text, (but I read Justine and 120 days around that time so maybe it felt more tame),and it felt super brief and kind of not having much meaning to me overall. I understand the author was famous for philosophy and all that but sometimes I can be told something is supposed to be a symbol, and it can clearly seem to be something that you can point out and say, “yeah that’s supposed to be a symbol”, but in the context of the greater whole of the work it doesn’t really Say much as a symbol. That’s what I generally felt. Like, ok, there’s blatant symbolism in the book but do the said symbols really have much meaning? Or are they just arbitrarily supposed to be seen as symbols? To me they felt like forced symbols that didn’t really give as much meaning. Sure maybe if one re-reads it maybe one can think of ways something can be a symbol but I don’t feel like re reading the book and I think having to “find meaning” in that book would just feel like whatever the intended “symbolism” was ineffective.

Sorry for the rant lol

(End of rant): like, I think American Psycho did a much better job at providing meaning. With its surprisingly relentless, monotonous length reflecting the monotonous, unending, unsatisfying life of the main character, the sense of disorientation, the “did he really or did he not” aspect of the plot, the personality of the narrator, etc. Not a pleasant read but very effective at what it was trying to do. Story of the eye? I’m skeptical. Oh, and I have never read the painted bird 🤓 totally forgot about that one! Have you?

Patrick wrote: "Ah! That’s ok 😃 heh yeah. And I often get reminded of how, surprising it is that the book even managed to survive given where it was found, and the many years prior to its actual publication. As fo..."

I actually get what you mean about symbolism. Knowing that something is meant to stand for something else doesn’t automatically make it feel meaningful. Sometimes I can see exactly what an author is doing and still feel absolutely nothing from it. I think that’s probably more frustrating than not understanding the symbol at all, because then the intention is obvious but the effect just isn’t there.

I’ve read both. And I actually agree with you about Story of the Eye. To me it’s one of those books that seems to be saying something and somehow saying nothing at the same time. There are ideas and images everywhere, but I never felt they really came together into anything I could hold onto.

I’ve read The Painted Bird twice, though and that one changed completely for me the second time. The first time I read it, I mostly had the same kind of physical discomfort I had with Story of the Eye. But on the reread, all those details that had disturbed me the first time started feeling more like a mirror. Watching the boy slowly lose his innocence felt less like something happening only to him and more like a loss that belongs to all of us somehow. He’s trying to survive what he sees, while we’re left watching it with no idea what we’re supposed to do with any of it. That helplessness felt like the one thing we shared with him. And the painted bird itself hit me much harder the second time. Its dyed feathers started to feel like all the things we carry around with us, fear, trauma, whatever marks us. We can try to blend back into the flock, but something still gives us away.

Sounds like it was a book that really affected you!! I’ve pondered reading it but there’s been so many other books taking up the time : O I’m surprised you read it twice! Did you have to read it for school?

No, it wasn’t for school. Sometimes I just feel the need to reread certain books.😊