A Confederacy of Dunces question

It was a great book, though the main character annoyed me so very much that I almost did not get through it. A master of dialogue and local accent however.

When I read this, I had two adult sons languishing at home...so it was especially poignant.:) The book was as you described...LOL funny and depressing at the same time. It was definitely one of those books that stays with you long after you've finished reading it. I'd recommend it!

I loved this book. Quirky, strange and honest. Most kids who stay home find themselves in a circle that they cannot get out of. They need a push out the door and he wrote it with humor and lots and lots of sad. The man killed himself, he was depressed. His mother got it published after he died. Yes, I found it LOL funny too. But Oh so sad. Thanks for the discussion on it Lisa.

I was pleasantly surprised by the humour of this tome especially the farce of the undercover cop in the background.

I read this book back in my twenties. Was gifted a copy, had high hopes for it, and was greatly disappointed.

I found the main character to be not just unlikeable, but unbelievable. I had similar problems with The Master and Margarita: the characters and events just seemed silly.

It could be that I have no patience for the picaresque. The Ginger Man is on my to-read list, but I keep putting it off because it may be too much like Confederacy.

I should slate this for a re-read, though. Perhaps it's better the second time 'round.

This was the most annoying book that I ever read. I did think that ignatious was a funny character, but Toole's writing style killled me. Reading it was some kind of torture. In addition, I tried to read it on 3 seperate occasions desperately trying to see why people love it so much.

This is by far one of my favorite books. I have to keep buying the book because I can't help loaning them out for friends to read.

I loved Ignatious, but Officer Mancuso in his ridiculous disguses was my favorite character.

I believe it is once again time for a re-read.

It was funny and unique -- the two things to me that make a great novel.

A great book! I know someone like Ignatius who has tremendous potential but can't get off the ground due to family issues and early tragedies. That, and being from the South, gave me an instant connection with this book. It has become a favorite. Funny, sad, thoughtful and, perhaps, autobiographical in places. Toole captures the language and ambiance of New Orleans, especially the scenes in the Quarter. Very good read!

The characters in a novel don't have to be likeable in order to make it a work of genius. I gave this book five stars because of the quality of the writing and the insights into human nature, which is often deplorable. It also made me laugh out loud many times.

I loved this book for a myriad of reasons but principally because of the humor, quality of writing, and the completely detestable character of Ignatius J. Reilly. I was surprised (horrified may be a better term here) upon reading comments in which readers expressed *liking* Ignatius. As though the glory of his character (or his POV) were what made the novel. Does the majority agree with this? Does every author I've heard express his love for this book do so from some kind of identification with Ignatius? I certainly hope not.

The character development is amazing. Jones was great. Easily the funniest book I've ever read.

I had a hard time separating what may have been a bit autobiographical- there was a great deal of tragedy both in Ignatius, as well as the author. The questionable "escape/salvation" at the end was interesting- who knows or wants what is best? And "best" for whom?

I agree that a story doesn't need likable characters, but it does need interesting ones. An example of these characters would be those in Gene Wolfe's FREE LIVE FREE--a book I would recommmend to those who liked CONFEDERACY if they are open to something with a fantastic element (not talking swords and dragons).

I had a tough time getting through this one. The characters just seem cranky and frustrated. I much prefer the books of Walker Percy, who helped this get published, or Peter DeVries, who makes me laugh and who was just as sharp on depicting human nature without making such a big deal about it. A big disappointment after all the endless praise I'd heard for this over the years.

This book was recommended to me by someone in my book club. When I started to read it, I began to question the taste of this person. I found Ignatious to be the most annoying person I ever read about (except maybe the character in Running with Scissors). It takes alot for me to give up on a book, so I continued on. I started to get interested in many of the other characters. Then near the end I actually started to feel empathy for Ignatious. And at the end, I felt sorry for him.

Overall, I can not say I loved the book, but I did feel some appreciation for it and I did not dislike it completely.

I agree with Beth although I didn't hate it. I tried I really tried, but just couldn't stomach another page. I think I made it to 149 or something. I just didn't care. Nothing in it was funny to me. If anything just thinking about the author and suicide made me feel sad.

Lisa wrote: "I thought this story was amazing, funny, and depressing all at the same time. What are your thoughts on this book and on the humor?"

I loved this book when I first picked it up. It's just outrageously funny. I've read and reread passages over and over. It might seem surreal or annoying to some, but many people actually think and behave in this manner. And if we take a look at our so-called pristine lives, we will find some form of absurdity. A real good read. Somebody give Miss Trixie her Easter Ham.

This book made me want to visit New Orleans.

Cracked me up. Seems like I know a few people like this. I also couldn't decide if I loved or hated Ignatius.

I confess that the novel, Confederacy of Dunces, was in my mind always eclipsed by the tragic story of its author and the circuitous circumstances of the book's publication.

Especially as a young writer starting out, I saw John Kennedy Toole's story as a cautionary tale of what could and probably would happen to even the most promising writers in our society. Rather than redeem his suffering and hard work and talent, all of the acclaim that came to the writer and his book posthumously seemed to be a very bad joke--an ironic mockery of the futility of writing for recognition.

The book itself has that kind of underlying darkness: the Rabelaisian gluttony of Ignatius, the impersonal turning of the wheel of fate, and the pessimism of Boethius, a philosopher who was fated to think at the terrible death throes of the Roman empire.

I suppose that a reader should only consider the book on its merits, new school style, and excise the context in which it is written. Unfortunately, in our era, with its 24/7 news cycle, lurid love of gossip and morbid attraction to tragedy, such a narrow view is quixotic if not impossible. Confederacy of Dunces will always have an asterisk next to it, signifying it as a terrible fact as well as a funny fiction.

Walker Percy was responsible for the publication of this fantastic book. Toole's Mom sent him the manuscript and he said that he read it expecting to, as usual, lose total interest after 10 pages, but the book pulled him in. And it kept pulling until he approached his publisher with the manuscript and an argument for the book's publication and ... voila!

Oh! And if you haven't read "The Moviegoer" and or "Love in the Ruins," I highly recommend them. And any other Percy fiction.

DG

especially sad that Toole killed himself before the book was published. His mother found the manuscript in his belongings and sent it to a publisher.

I read this last fall on the recommendation of a co-worker who later told me she recommended it because of a student I had a few years prior. She was right! Spot on Ignatius!

Which is really sad for that student.

But -- "Hot dogs, ladies?" is now an inside joke at the office.

I enjoyed the story because of the annoying characters. This is a world populated by those who are not altruistic, in some regard, like the real world. I wonder if Larry David and Jerry Seinfeld read this book? I kept thinking about Seinfeld the tv show while reading.

I really loved this book. The beginning was slow and I wasn't laughing( and I thought I ought to be having the time of my life). I felt a little bad because I thought I didn't "get the joke". In the end I think I got it and I loved all the detailed characters and scene depictions. Over all it was amazing for me.

I loved this book. But I'll admit it's not for everyone. I was born in New Orleans and now live in Shreveport. I have been to New Orleans many many times and this book brought back many happy memories for me.

Funniest book I have ever read. It is the only book I have ever read that literally made me laugh out loud. I would love to see it made into a movie but doubt it could ever be done justice.

I hated this book. I don't like spending my time with annoying people. They aren't funny.