Matthew Ted’s Comments (group member since Sep 02, 2020)

Matthew Ted’s comments from the The Obscure Reading Group group.

I'm still baffled by the number of characters. And their similar names too, no less. Jackson isn't a bad writer but a lot of time has been spent so far on wildly disorientating dialogue sequences with too many involved at once. Intrigued to see where the whole story goes though.

I'm reading my way through "Don Quixote" and "Gravity's Rainbow" still. Two big books on the go is exhausting and exciting at once.

Ken wrote: "Kathleen wrote: "Speaking of toppling TBR's, MacFarlane's The Old Ways: A Journey on Foot is on mine, and I'm assuming is the one you read Ken. Sounds fantastic.

I'm finishing up [..."

Not at all, but they stick in my memory from the module. The latter started my obsessive Hemingway binge which lasted the subsequent years there.

Stoner is one of my favourites. I studied MacFarlane's The Wild Places in a module called "Writing Place". We also studied Hemingway's Moveable Feast.

Thanks all, looking forward to the next one already. And another bravo for Ken for all his organising.

Carol wrote: "I am not finished yet. I read everyone’s comments. Interesting the various opinions people have. It appears to me Calvino mish mashed a few mystery styles into this book. I thought it odd , but I d..."

I remember reading once that Calvino adored the English word "feedback" and his English translator said how often Calvino would attempt to put it in his fiction, randomly, most of the time without context, because he loved it so much. His job at times was just removing the word "feedback" from the middle of a sentence. He was playful alright.

It's a fabulous collection of essays. I highly recommend them. I'm yet to read Our Mutual Friend though.

Ginny wrote: "Matthew wrote: " I certainly wouldn't be reading today if novels were only being written as they were in 19thC. ..."

Most of my reading time these days is with novels written in the 19th Century, ..."

I do like Dickens (though I haven't read LD). I'm actually very fond of 19thC novels, my comment was said (mostly) facetiously. The point was really that novels have evolved and I am very glad of it. I could read those old Russian tomes forever though, probably. I think Ken mentioned War and Peace at some point. I second whatever positive sentiment he expressed towards it/Tolstoy.

I'm seeing it more and more on this read as just a wonderful exercise of style, quite like Raymond Queneau's novel. Each opening is in a different style, perhaps even a different genre, in a way, though all similar too, at once. It reminds me of the questions I get from my parents: "Why do you want to read that! Reading should be fun, not hard!" I always irritate them by saying, "The hard reading makes for fun reading." They don't believe it.

I've had many debates about style v plot v character, I think everyone is completely different in their preferences (which allows for brilliant debate!). You're right though, I probably would still be reading too, even if we only had those big baggy 19thC tomes.

Sara wrote: "This may all have been fun for them, but does it have any lasting value to us as literature?"

I believe so. The novel has gone through numerous changes throughout its lifespan, and I believe it will only continue to survive (and thrive) as people push the boundaries and see how far it can go. After all, that's the most exciting thing about the novel: that there are no rules, that there are no limitations. I certainly wouldn't be reading today if novels were only being written as they were in 19thC. For me, personally, the most exciting thing about the novel is its, seemingly, boundless scope.

On your note Jan, it's worth noting that Calvino was a member of the Oulipo gang of crazy writers doing crazy things. By putting constraints on literature, could one make literature more creative? That's the general idea. Or, as founding member Queneau put it, "rats who construct the labyrinth from which they plan to escape."

Queneau himself wrote a "novel" comprised of the same scene (an argument on a bus) 99 times, rewritten each time in a different style. Or Perec, who wrote "A Void", a whole novel without the letter "e" used once. Originally written in French and someone was mad enough to translate it into English!

These Oulipians were having fun, maybe at our expense.

I know where the novel is going having read it before, so I can't comment on my theories there but it's interesting reading it again. I'm finding snippets of the fiction bits return to me in fragments, the bridge, the spies, etc., and less so of the chapters in-between (despite the fact I find them more entertaining, and did so the first time too). It's only confirmed how different this is from Calvino's other novels.

Laura wrote: "Nick wrote: "I am on board for Calvino, as I have never read him before. He sounds a bit Borgesian, from my briefest of reading. On another front, I am a librarian in real life, and am hearing your..."

Agreed. I like Borges but find him difficult sometimes. Calvino is far more readable and overtly playful to me.

I think the best way to go about it is to think about how playful Calvino is. Don't think of it as hard-work, think of it as playing along in his game of words!

If you liked Borges, Kathleen, then this'll be a walk in the park for you.

A Confederacy of Dunces is one of the few books I almost hate. It's a real tragedy about Toole and I don't like to badmouth the novel too much for that reason. I will say this Calvino is the hardest of the ones I've read by him, but one of his most popular, which is why I was surprised it bagged the obscureness! Though, one's common book is another's obscure book.

I'm looking forward to reading it again and seeing what I make of it now I'm older (and hopefully wiser?), and seeing what everyone else makes of it. It's certainly a book like no other!

Welcome, friend. Nice to see you here. It's a great bunch.

Huge Calvino fan too. Baron in the Trees, Ken, yes! A beautiful book. I've read this one too but am looking forward to the discussions all the same. Enjoy!

I've read a few of them but excited to see what comes up in the end! Bring on Thurs.