Ben's Reviews > Tropic of Cancer

Tropic of Cancer by Henry Miller
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
Apr 06, 2009

liked it
Read in April, 2009

A marvelous pretention of a travel memoir from an American in Paris. More a song than a book: a love ballad to a city. In parts it reads like the surreal confessions of a sex addict. In other parts it is nothing less than a mock-serious philosophical treatis.

Tropic of Cancer is almost always as fun to read as it must have been to write. I say almost because at the outset, I kept wondering how much of his self-preening I'd let Miller get away with before I lost all interest; he can at times be highly idealistic and self-indulgent (I mean really really self-indulgent), but then I began to indulge myself in all his blarney... skimming in short to make the passages a jumble of images and impressions. Nevertheless several passages of this book I will continually return to inorder to mark the essential expressions of existential transformation, which are really the hallmark of Miller's style.
5 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Tropic of Cancer.
Sign In »

Comments (showing 1-25 of 25) (25 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

Trenton Judson Ben, wow! I must say I am impressed with this review. I think it is the best and most honest of the reviews of yours that I have read. I think I have put the book on a higher pedestal than you, but it was just one of those books that really reached me. I think you should have given it four stars... based on what you said, but hey that's me!!! Honestly, I sure appreciate you reading it on my suggestion and I hope that at least some of it was enjoyable/helpful. I know you are busy and I am honored that you took the time to read something that I loved. I am finishing up Tropic of Capricorn now and I would caution you NOT to read it. I think Tropic of Cancer may have been Miller's Magnum Opus, but I know he wrote a lot more... In Capricorn, he loses much of the magic of Cancer and is very tangential, in a bad way. ie: Now let me tell you about Mark's brothers sister in law cousin. It goes WAY too far. There are some amazing gems and if you are ever interested I would be happy to share those with you, but I don't like it much and doubt that you will either. You are a great friend and a good reader and you review is better than mine, I would say. I have a love for the book that blinds my review skills and will readily admit that. If friends of mine show interest in reading the book, I think I will direct them to your review. Best,

message 2: by Ben (new) - rated it 3 stars

Ben Trent, on the strength of your enjoyment of this book as well as the work of Celine. I recommend Cities of the Interior by Anias Nin; I'm sure you've heard something of her entanglement with Miller's wife in NY, which precipitated his move to Paris... she is an amazing writer and ironically became one of Miller's biggest fans.

Trenton Judson Ben, I must admit that I was a little drunk when I read and commented on your review and I looked through it again, and it is really good, but I do have one beef. Why do you say pretention of a travel memoir??? That means a charade of a travel memoir? Why is it a charade??? It's pretending to be a travel memoir??? I don't know, didn't sit right with me. Anyway, the rest of it was great. BTW, you HAVE to look at my Book of Mormon review, seems someone is taking an interest in my handy work. You HAVE to see how crazy these people get. Look at it and make a comment if you like.

message 4: by Ben (new) - rated it 3 stars

Ben Trent, I'm using pretension in the sense of an allegation of doubtful veracity or a pretext... further I'm referencing Miller's own claim of desiring to write not a novel but a "towering pretension." Further passages like the following struck me as both quaintly naive and obtuse in thier prentensiousness: "And he will never be a writer. Nor will Sylvester ever be a writer... The only writers about me for whom I have any respect, at present are Carl and Boris... They are suffers." It pained me even to retype this passage. What does the reader gain from Miller's prigish ellucidation on his own conceits? I only caught glimpses of something painfully inauthentic underpinning the narrative. Miller's need to make everything a sort of competition is perhaps the soaring pretension of the book... why do I care for instance who he places on a higher pedistal Turgenev or Dostoyevsky? I might chat about this over coffee (with an emphasis on might) but I would never deem it a worthwhile sentiment for a novel. It was passages like these that made me rethink the validity of Miller's desire to write a book from which nothing has been cut. Further, the fact that there is no unify plot or conflict to the narrative placed it more in a line with a travel memoir.

Trenton Judson I must heartily disagree. lol. What is the difference between an allegation of "doubtful veracity" and a charade? Or pretending? They are synonyms with pretension, as I challenge you to look up. I have to tell you Ben, that in this instance, with erudite fucking words like priggish (spelled with two g's) elucidation (spelled with only one l) that I have to call hypocrisy!!! It seems rather that you are pretentious one!!! Who are you and what have you done with my friend Ben??? Lol. I think all of us, including you, I might add, are guilty of priggish elucidations of our own conceits as you put it. Miller has the balls to make a stand, to say something, which is completely "authentic" because no one at that time did that and unfortunatly no one of this time does either. The comment that Carl and Boris are sufferers, is a peaceful and deft observation about the inner turmoil of being a writer. For Christ's sake, you should understand that more than anyone!!! It fucking pains you to write it??? Are you serious??? Who are you Sylvia fucking Plath the way you speak to me??? lol. Ben, I'm your friend, not some undergrad student trying to challenge you. I "might" chat about this. lol. Ben, seriously, trying to beat me over the head with semantics and this illusory higher sense of self disproves your entire thesis, to put it in a scholarly sense, but really it boils down to I call bullshit. Also, when trying to make your friend look like a jackass, you might want to spell unifying and pedestal right??? Especially if you are using words like prigish and saying further every other sentence!!! Lol. Furthermore, lol. I was giving you shit. And what cracks me up is I completely laud your whole fucking review and you come back at me with this "cultivated" horseshit that I, knowing you, see right through. I didn't know it would offend you so goddamn much. And what is with this third person crap? What does the reader gain??? You are talking to me bro!!! And I DO care what reasons Miller has for liking Turgenev or Dostoyevsky because it gives me a perspective about what a certain creative mind is tapping into. This is literature brother, it's not some asexual science project, where we "deem" "worthwhile sentiments" for a novel, whatever the fuck that means. Who deems? lol. Opinions are what make great books like Catcher in the Rye, Lolita, and funny enough Dostoyevsky, who makes his opinions of the literary cannon very well known to his reader, as does Hemmingway, Faulkner, etc. I wonder, what these literary giants would think of you insulting the very things that they stand upon as a trite thing that you would or excuse me, "might" dicuss over coffee. Shit man, my novel Abraham is full of opinions on Hemmingway, Socrates, and others. Are you saying my book is trite as well? You know, when you say something about the validity of something being not cut??? It reminds me of a Jack Kerouac story I heard once. He was helping an up-and-coming writer and he told her that the best thought is the one that comes first. He took one of her revised poems and took her back to her original poem and was able to tell her how to make the poem better by going back to the original. Getting dirty and filthy, fuck man, that's writing. Like Naked Lunch or On the Road or Leaves of Grass. (All authors who did not edit extensively). I'm not saying that we should throw editing out, but that we should recognize and admire those who have the fucking balls to put something out there like that. We can't beat every book with a fucking editing hammer, then all of our goddamn books will become the same or worse, Jeff-like. It's like the quote in the beginning of the book Ben, the one that Emerson wrote about telling the truth and was it possible to write a story truthfully about yourself? Did you miss that man??? that was the whole point of the book and I thought he had a valiant effort. To omit any of those transient details that you say are "quaint" -who uses that fucking word anyway??? Quaint. Say it to yourself and see how you think it sounds. Anyway, to omit those things are to devalue the truth and his true story or the most true story I could ever write. Shit, I hope I can write that honestly one day. And how is the towering pretension obtuse??? That seems pretty direct to me. So does sufferers make good writers, what the hell is obtuse about that? Have you ever known a good writer that hadn't suffered??? Shit, I own my suffering and I know you have your own too, wear it brother, it makes us who we are. Ben, I loved your review, it was spot on, but this rant makes me think that I pricked some nerve by saying that I thought the use of the word pretension doesn't fit. I still don't think it does. When Miller refers to his work as a towering pretension, he is stating the obvious about writing a work of art based solely on the true nature of who you are!!! Fucking a!!! Of course it feels like a towering pretension to him, anyone putting themselves out there might put that caveat onto a work like that. Ben, I love you brother, you are my brother, the brother of the pen and of the heart, please don't take a transient comment I said about word choice and turn it into a federal case. The feds always screw things up bro, you should know that lol!!! Plus, how the fuck do you take a compliment, like "I think your review is better than mine and I will send people to it" to this??? Seriously man. It takes a lot for a man like me, a man of extreme pride, to say that about a book I love. I want to go to a fucking mountaintop and scream the fucking novel out for the whole fucking world to hear. And I bow my pride down and tell you that, because I believe it's true and in the nature of Miller, lol, I believe that truth outweighs my pitiful pride. (Although in the sense of anything else, my pride is far from pitiful). It was funny too, because I wrote this long e-mail that night about how I thought you took comments better than any of us in the group and that you have taught me how to better learn from comments and so my teacher in that regards brings this??? Man, I love you brother, but I am calling you out, this is not you man. Anyway, you know I always respect our differing opinions and I thought I made that crystal clear when I told you that you had written a better review??? I conceded, what else more could a man do??? God knows I fuck up man, I'll be the first to admit it, but I thought and still think that I was right about your review, that it was better than mine, and that pretension was misplaced. Oh well... Love you Ben.

Trenton Judson Oh and btw I hate being called Trent bro!!!! It makes me sound like a model for the fucking gap or something, in future could you please call me Trenton or at least buddy or pal or friend or amigo, anything but Trent, It might as well be Bret for christsakes.

Trenton Judson shit I spelled unfortunately wrong and I forgot a "the" in front of a prententious... oh well, at least I didn't use the word priggish, lol.

Trenton Judson On the piggy back of the statements I made about saying something true about yourself in writing and sometimes being able to love your first thoughts, here are some quotes I thought you might find interesting and that fit Miller's vision(s) and what I thought were similar visions between us???

Write down the thoughts of the moment. Those that come unsought for are commonly the most valuable. ~Francis Bacon

There's nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at a typewriter and open a vein. ~Walter Wellesley "Red" Smith

You must stay drunk on writing so reality cannot destroy you. ~Ray Bradbury

The role of a writer is not to say what we all can say, but what we are unable to say. ~Anaïs Nin (I thought I would add a quote for good measure on that book you told me to read!!!)

A word is not the same with one writer as with another. One tears it from his guts. The other pulls it out of his overcoat pocket. ~Charles Peguy

I try to leave out the parts that people skip. ~Elmore Leonard

The act of putting pen to paper encourages pause for thought, this in turn makes us think more deeply about life, which helps us regain our equilibrium. ~Norbet Platt

Substitute "damn" every time you're inclined to write "very;" your editor will delete it and the writing will be just as it should be. ~Mark Twain

Fill your paper with the breathings of your heart. ~William Wordsworth

A critic can only review the book he has read, not the one which the writer wrote. ~Mignon McLaughlin, The Neurotic's Notebook, 1960

To me, the greatest pleasure of writing is not what it's about, but the inner music the words make. ~Truman Capote, McCall's, November 1967

A writer and nothing else: a man alone in a room with the English language, trying to get human feelings right. ~John K. Hutchens, New York Herald Tribune, 10 September 1961

For me, a page of good prose is where one hears the rain [and:] the noise of battle. ~John Cheever

No one means all he says, and yet very few say all they mean, for words are slippery and thought is viscous. ~Henry Brooks Adams, The Education of Henry Adams, 1907

The expression "to write something down" suggests a descent of thought to the fingers whose movements immediately falsify it. ~William Gass, "Habitations of the Word," Kenyon Review, October 1984

Let me walk through the fields of paper
touching with my wand
dry stems and stunted
~Denise Levertov, "A Walk through the Notebooks"

Every word born of an inner necessity - writing must never be anything else. ~Etty Hillesum, quoted in Ten Fun Things to Do Before You Die by Karol Jackowski

The maker of a sentence launches out into the infinite and builds a road into Chaos and old Night, and is followed by those who hear him with something of wild, creative delight. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Most editors are failed writers - but so are most writers. ~T.S. Eliot

A good style should show no signs of effort. What is written should seem a happy accident. ~W. Somerset Maugham, Summing Up, 1938

The coroner will find ink in my veins and blood on my typewriter keys. ~C. Astrid Weber

It is impossible to discourage the real writers - they don't give a damn what you say, they're going to write. ~Sinclair Lewis

If I fall asleep with a pen in my hand, don't remove it - I might be writing in my dreams. ~Danzae Pace

How vain it is to sit down to write when you have not stood up to live. ~Henry David Thoreau, Journal, 19 August 1851

“We die
That may be
The meaning of life.
But we do language
That may be
The measure of our lives.” -Toni Morrison

“This is the very perfection of a man, to find out his own imperfections.” -St. Augustine

And these are just a few!!!! Isn't this why we are in this??? It is the love of words, the instant gratification of putting them to paper and creating a sentence that makes us brilliant creators. Everything after that is an interpretation of that first moment-Trenton McKay Judson

message 9: by Ben (last edited Apr 09, 2009 08:30AM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Ben Trenton, I love this repartee... you've got to include your responses in something! Albeit with some editing ;). I'll accept that you're calling me out on any number of my own conceits, of which there are (no doubt) many. And, I can appreciate the depth of your feeling about The Tropic of Cancer. It is a marvelous and controversial book, and one worthy of this discussion.

I suppose the better way of saying what I meant is simply to state that several statements of Miller's (like the examples given above) ripped me right the hell out of the text. It is possible--as I think you're maintaining--that Miller was then holding the mirror too close for my own comfort, but I suspect it is simply bad writing... if only because I am doing my darnedest to erradicate such trivial competitions from my mind; especially as a reader. Further, I will maintain that there is a strong theme of competition that runs not only through Miller's work but the work of many American writers (Hemmingway, Mailer, Cheever, etc) and ultimately it is a dangerous stance. I believe this competitive worldview comes from the way we are raised... captilism's insistance that everything--including Art--must be asigned some value or marker of worth. I am philosophically opposed to this notion. I don't think that Art must proove its worth, and by extension I believe that competition or notions of hierarchy are ultimately corrosive to the brotherhood of letters.

I agree with a great deal of what you've written, and I know you understand my deep love of the written word. I also can honor concision and the kindly edit. I think what you've said about fiction as art based solely on who an individual believes themself to be is very interesting... I'm sure we will return to this at group.

Britta I've never been a big fan of Henry Miller. Maybe it's my feminine sense of propriety, but I just do not find his work erotic or compelling. It is very GOOD at demonstrating crass vulgarians in their natural habitat. I will say it is a decent read, but I doubt I would ever come back to it. I prefer Anais Nin's work when I want to experience artful sensuality.

message 11: by Ben (new) - rated it 3 stars

Ben Agreed Britta, Miller's incessant chauvinism is one of the elements of this book that could potentially religate it to the clearance bin of history. Being a guy, I found it "quaint," but I can imagine being more turned off as a girl. I, for one, find displays of both ultra-masculinism (if its not a word it should be) and ultra-feminism equally hormonally inbalanced, and in the end, both are distracting from what I believe is the real goal of literature: plumbing the depths of this fiction we call "The Self."

Nevertheless, we arguably couldn't have had the full sexual liberty of Anias Nin's prose in her short work and Cities of the Interior without Miller's groundwork in Crazy Cock and Tropic of Cancer, and I maintain this knowing that Miller borrowed this style from an earlier generation of French authors (Jenet, Huysman, Baudelaire, etc)... still Miller adapted the style to America's youthful frenzy and jazz-age industry and changed the entire aim to one more in line with Manifest Destiny. That being said, I would agree that Nin--standing on Miller's shoulders (or more to the point, on top of Miller's manhood)--wrote the more passionate body of work (on why we work that body).

message 12: by Adrian (new) - added it

Adrian Stumpp I'll just say Ditto.

Trenton Judson Oh Christ!! I wish I hadn't read your last comment Ben. Again with the quaint, jesus. And relegating things. Plumbing??? Are you using this to describe the thing I love most in the world? Shit? That's what most plumbing consists of. The depths of fiction? What the fuck is that? Apparently we call the depths of fiction "The Self". It's a dirty little self. I don't see why or when an artist has to edit their work to be PC??? Who is Henry Miller a chauvinist about? Prostitutes? His wife who had multiple affairs on him? I consider myself a feminist having had a mother that raised me by herself, but this term is thrown around WAY too much. Never once does Miller pigeonhole women as inferior or make comments that directly insult women or their intelligence. He was around shitty women, so what? Does he have to say every five seconds that this prostitute who is fucking me and my friend really has the potential to be a learned member of society, right after she wipes the cum from her pussy, she should go read at the library and express her the true nature of her mind. C'mon! THere are dirtbag guys and dirtbag girls. I don't hate on sylvia plath because she believes that males are the cause of all strain in her existence. She just knew some shitty men. That's life. And Ben, I love you bro, but everyone has borrowed their style from everyone. That's not a valid criticism. And Adrien, your a chicken shit. Ditto??? Ditto to what? You'd agree with Ben if he told you the sky was purple. If I want to hear your comments then, I just ask Ben or what?? You told me you really liked the book... And now you are ditto? IS your opinion so easily swayed? I have never heard you disagree with Ben on anything. Show some backbone man?? Not that you have ever agreed with me on one, not even one book that I have ever liked. Jesus. Am I going to have to call Ben for your opinion when he leaves the group? Miller never pretends to be sensual??? I thought the the fucking and the cunts and all that made that abundantly clear. He is showing a different side of life, the dirty fucking cunt side that nobody wants to see and nobody wants to talk about because its too hard. And Ben, what are you doing? First you told me you liked the book, then that you weren't sure about it and now you are picking shit out of the fucking sky to try and make the book looking horrible. Is it your pride that's at stake??? or what is it? Again, with the "one of the elements of the book". We are talking sophmoric shit here man. Again!!! After we already had that talk?? And I must call hypocrisy AGAIN!~!! You say that "I don't think that Art must proove its worth, and by extension I believe that competition or notions of hierarchy are ultimately corrosive to the brotherhood of letters" Haven't you entered multiple competitions??? Why did you then? If you were true to this philosophy about the brotherhood of letters (apparently not a chauvinistic term although completely exculding females) then you wouldn't enter those contests because they are "corrisive to art" Also, didn't you just sign up for an MFA that bases their admissions on a "competition" ie asssesing what they believe is good art??? You should quit that too, if that is what you truly believe. Or else you become the worst of us all, a hypocrite, living what he believes to be corrisive to our art. I, of course, know that there is no way you can truly believe that and follow through with what you are following through. Shouldn't you have sent back any monies/perks that you have recieved for winning the competitions you have with a note that says your true beliefs??? C'mon brotha!!! Seriously. Also, once again my very studious friend relegate is spelled with two e's not with an i??

Trenton Judson Lol, you know this whole wretched argument began with me praising Ben's review work!!!! -Added an extra exclamation for you buddy. I just had to add one thing. It was funny, the last group session you were all telling me. Well, Ben and Adrien, how I should read Lolita and what a great book it is. I am nearly half way through and although the style is witty and clever, I have never been so sick about the subject matter. You talk about objectifying women? He marries a lady just so that he can fuck her 12 year old daughter, then pretty much kidnapped her and raped her all over the country. It's shock literature. Miller was writing a true account of his experiences. He was being who he was. If it's shocking or vulgar, that's because that's who he was and I have had indepth conversations with all of you where you would make Miller blush. We are all just as fucked up and sick. we just don't have the balls to say it. On the other hand, my cousins were raped by an older couple who cut up cats in front of them when they were younger, babysitters of theirs and my mother was molested by my grandfather. Both around the age od Dolores. It's sick shit man and I dont' know if morally I can finish it. Empathizing with a child molester, who tries at every turn to justify his actions is vile. And just for the record, he doesn't even deserve to be mentioned as a Russian write with the big D, Tolstoy, Gogol, and Onegin. He writes a lot more like a britt.

message 15: by Britta (last edited Apr 12, 2009 12:30PM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Britta Just so you know Trent, the Ditto comment came from me, not Adrian. I logged in to read Ben's reply to my comment and then added my own reply before I realized our computer was still logged in under Adrian. So that was me. If you want to say I'd agree with Ben if he said the sky was purple, well...okay. I really don't think you know me well enough to assert that kind judgement but, whatevah. Adrian is not a spineless follower as you seem to be trying to imply.

And, literature, like every other form of art is a matter of taste. Miller is NOT my cup of tea, but that does not mean he is a terrible writer. I just think his topics are tawdry and banal. There seems to be tons of substance there but very little art. The word art itself comes from artifice which is not 'real life'. If I wanted to read all the lurid details of Miller's exploits, I can find similar stories in Playboy, which btw I find more entertaining. I never said anything about objectifying women. In fact, I sometimes find those stories intersting in a purely masochistic sort of way. One of my favorite books of all time is The Story of O. I just want some craft, some beauty spliced into repugnant situations.

Back to Lolita, the fact that Nabokov can make someone as horrible as Humbert an empathetic character despite everything he's doing to Dolores, is what makes his writing intersting. If it was a play by play of what was going on, a more 'real life' scenario if you will, no one would read Lolita and everyone would agree Humbert is a monster. It's the crafting of the point of view which I find so incredible.

In short, I'm not calling you out in anyway because your taste is different from mine. That's what makes the world go round. We can't all fawn over the same writers all the time or life would be boring. I'm simply saying it IS different, that's all. And, I do believe Miller deserves his place among the ranks of the great 20th Century authors, but there are several in that category too which I do not personally enjoy reading.

P.S. Is this why you wanted me to sign up for goodReads? So we can argue over who is right and who is wrong about the kind of books we like to read? Since when do we all have to agree on literature?

message 16: by Ben (last edited Apr 14, 2009 08:44AM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Ben Trenton, it is no longer clear if you're attacking me personally or attacking my thoughts on The Tropic of Cancer. Assuming it's the latter, I will continue to maintain that chauvinism is an "element of this book" regardless of your distaste for this phrase if only because of the sheer volume of offensive language Miller heaps upon women and further because there does not appear to be a single well-spoken or even interesting female character in the entire narrative.

In terms of Miller's competitiveness--as I earlier expressed--I believe it is a product of the times: less remarkable than it is obvious. I'll admit I am competitive... what American writer isn't? But don't shoot me until I start gratuitously writing into my novels which writers I personally work with are legitimate and which are doomed to failure... as Miller is evidently doing in the initial passage I quoted. Additionally, what I've said about natural selection taking care of competition doesn't stop competition, but rather places any notion of hierarchy where it rightly belongs ie in the hands of fate and evolution.

In terms of sophistry, arguing with a misunderstood quotation is the height of this notion. I wrote that the real goal of fiction is not to get caught up in the pettiness of gender roles but rather to weigh-in on the very notion of "the self," which both transcends the facts of gender and yet is still a form of fiction.

Cries of hypocrisy fall on deaf ears, my friend. In my lexicon, the word "hypocrite" is synonymous with "human." Everyday, I ask myself the question I learned from Whitman: "Did I contradict myself?"--and I answer it myself without much help from anyone else. In brief Trenton, take the example of the O'Neill antagonist who jokes about the iceman until he goes mad with guilt and attempts to force others to face thier demons. Further, do you realize that by insisting on correcting my spelling you do so in the face of Miller's notion that we must write without revision?--yet another quaint idea in our day of spell checking and txtng... u c?

Britta, yes I love these kinds of arguements because they force us to articulate and defend any number of notions about literature and self, which we might otherwise be content to merely toy with from the grandstand.

message 17: by Britta (last edited Apr 13, 2009 09:59AM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Britta Okay, and that's fine.

I think I just got my hackles raised when it seemed the lines of defending an author and morally assaulting one's character were blurring.

I maintain my position and have no problem with others defending their own, so long as it is the opinion we're talking about here. If I posted a review of a book I read and you responded with something like, "That was the worst book ever! I wouldn't wipe my ass with those pages..." I would simply assume, "Well, I guess he didn't like that book. Next."

Anyway. Enough said. Next?

Britta Adrian wrote: "I'll just say Ditto. "
Actually I wrote this on our home computer. Adrian was still signed in when I received notice that Ben had responded to my comment. Just clearing that up so no further cases of mistaken identity take place here.

Trenton Judson Ben wrote: "Trenton, it is no longer clear if you're attacking me personally or attacking my thoughts on The Tropic of Cancer. Assuming it's the latter, I will continue to maintain that chauvinism is an "elem..."

Oh, Ben. Poor Ben. I wan't attacking you personally, although I guess I was attacking Adrien personally, who never did respond. But I was attacking wild labels that are placed on authors because of what now??? Bad labels against women? Why because he refers to the prostitutes as cunts? I've heard you personally refer to women in no less denigrating terms. Brit, all I can say is that I am sorry about the Adrien comment, I thought he was going back on his opinion of something he had said about the book and I, as a friend, would call out anyone that I thought was spineless. lol. And like I have reiterated numerous times, my original comment was praising Ben's review of the book as better than mine. And Ben, my entire problem with you is that you come off with these aesthetic high grounds, not that we disagree. I'm sure Ben is more aware of that then Brit. I have come to the conclusion that I just think that you are trying to "sound" smart because other people here read these reviews. It was funny because after we had talked at group you had laughed at how you wrote and then came back with a far more pretentious response. My pedantic sense in correcting your spelling was because if you are going to talk like a fucking want-to-be scholar than you should certainly spell those bs words right and also you should spell the more nominal words right like relegate and pedestal. I'm trying to help you, to be your friend. I like your Backpedaling on the brotherhood of literature comment, lol. Brother, you are one funny man. I guess my entire point, to close my comments on this is: that you are talking to a friend and we were having an argument between friends. I believe you to be a highly intelligent individual, and I believe that I have probably given you and Adrien-for Brit, more comments and compliments than anyone in the entire group, and more often. I have never heard any of you fall in love with each other's stories the way I fall in love with Adrien's and Ben's. A way that they have never fallen in love with mine or each others, and a way that I don't expect them to do. I defended your review??? Jesus Christ!!! You didn't even say thank you, you just started in with your fake scholar bullshit. Jesus man. I have been one of your biggest supporters!!! Just because I call you out on a few things all the sudden I am attacking your character??? I quit good reads. Number one I don't like the sound of my own voice enough for this horseshit, number two, it turns my friends into crazy people, and number three, what is it exactly accomplishing that I can't do in person??? I would much rather talk to either of you/debate with either of you in person. And for all I care you can wipe your asses with the pages of Miller, it would actually fit. My biggest problem is labeling authors with NO evidence and talking to your friends like they are a computer program/trying to impress others. Ya'll have fun on this, much love, I'm done on here. If you want to talk I'll see you when I see you.

Trenton Judson wasn't lol

Britta Trent, you are definitely a man of passion and I admire that, but I just think you're taking this whole Miller thing way too personally. Is it because you see something of yourself in him? I could see how you might make that association, but in the very limited amount of time I have spent with you, I think you have more talent and more INTEGRITY than Miller ever possessed in his pinky finger. You can take that as a compliment or no, but it is meant as a compliment.

And if I came across as huffy, that's because I was for five seconds because I thought you were being mean to my husband, and no one is allowed to be mean to my husband accept me. JK.

Anyway, let's move on to a new book shall we. I think we've stretched the limits of where we can go with this one

message 22: by Ryan (last edited Apr 18, 2009 09:05AM) (new)

Ryan i thought the thursday flavor was delicately distinct, whatever that means --- my fined tuned sensitivity for you.

But what i really wanted to point out was that RELLY HERNI is an anagram of Henry Miller, with only a leftover M! REALLY HORNY is obviously what i was going for --- didn't really pull it off though. Well, we all have our dreams.

Anyway, email me anyone who can figure out what to do with the straggler. There might be a prize involved.

message 23: by Ryan (last edited Apr 18, 2009 09:14AM) (new)

Ryan ERR IN MY HELL. Sweet. I guess I'll be keeping my prize, thank-you.

message 24: by Ben (new) - rated it 3 stars

Ben I got HYMEN IRE (with a spare two Ls and an R), which I imagine is synonymous with penis envy.

message 25: by Ryan (last edited Apr 20, 2009 09:47PM) (new)

Ryan Three spare letters!? Although, i must admit Hymen Ire is a pretty cool anagram, and will most likely become the name of the hero in my next tragi-comedy redneck adventure story, going from one spare letter to three is bad form. Bad form indeed, Ben. No prizes. In fact, you get a negative prize, which will be awaiting you next Thursday. (You would be wise to bring a aloa-vera salve, or some similarly mollify balm or lotion, for the friction burns you will no doubt endure compliments of my leather handcuffs.)

back to top