Super Sad True Love Story
discussion
Was I Wrong?
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Phillip
(new)
-
rated it 2 stars
Sep 23, 2011 01:16PM
I wanted a better ending. The ending just seemed to be another meaningful moment melting into the futility of the entire backdrop of the book. I wanted just a little bit of happiness. Not the seemingly inevitable blah that I got. Is that so wrong?
reply
|
flag
Yes. What you wanted is called a fairytale. The writer was trying to make a point which a happy ending would have ruined. And remember, he is a Russian writer.
Didn't want a fairy tale or a happy ending. Just a glimmer of hope at the end. Even Dostoevsky offered an epilogue (not a very good one) at the end of Crime and Punishment. This story was dystopian. So I could look at Never Let Me Go and still feel the dignity of the characters and the pride each held inliving out their lives. This just faded into blah. Love literary work, but there was a real sense of nihilism here.
I was unhappy with Dostoevsky for retreating from his courageous ending in his epilogue. At least this writer stuck to the very sad ending. But it just didn't work for me. Then again you may have a point about being Russian. If the ending reminds me of how any other book made me feel it would be The Idiot.
Irene wrote: "Yes. What you wanted is called a fairytale. The writer was trying to make a point which a happy ending would have ruined. And remember, he is a Russian writer.": ). Good point, Irene.
This type of fiction is called absurdism, which is based on the philosophical theory that man struggles to find meaning in an essentially meaningless universe. The premise is therefore always pessimistic. But it wasn't the ending: it was the whole book that, frankly, was a huge disappointment. And what love story? Was there one? People using each other for money, sex, and security? So what? What's new about that?
I seldom feel satisfied with a book unless I feel absolutely crushed at the end. Searching for meaning in an empty frame, finding it, and then losing it all only to discover that it wasn't anything to begin with? Perfect.
Joe wrote: "I seldom feel satisfied with a book unless I feel absolutely crushed at the end. Searching for meaning in an empty frame, finding it, and then losing it all only to discover that it wasn't anything..."Good one, Joe. You would also enjoy Next, by James Hines. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/66...
I really liked that one!
Laura wrote: "This type of fiction is called absurdism, which is based on the philosophical theory that man struggles to find meaning in an essentially meaningless universe. The premise is therefore always pess..."Absurdism is hard to take in large doses. The Onion articles, sure. Three hundred pages, not so much, for me. I couldn't finish this book.
Irene wrote: "Joe wrote: "I seldom feel satisfied with a book unless I feel absolutely crushed at the end. Searching for meaning in an empty frame, finding it, and then losing it all only to discover that it was..."Agree. Next was one of the few books with a sad sack middle aged make narrator (is this a new trend?) that didn't make me want to kick him repeatedly. I didn't love it, but it was hard to put down.
This represents a major shift in our culture. Just to give you an example, look at any major crime show from the 1980's or 1990's, and compare it with one from today. Back then, there was a moral associated with the story, and not only was the criminal put away, there was an ending that finished on a high note and taught a moral. Nowadays, the Law & Order/CSI/Criminal Minds genre might end with capturing the villain, but it will also end with a comment about the grim nature of the human condition. I must admit that sometimes I miss the morals. As a culture, though, we seem to enjoy navel-gazing at our own shortcomings as a culture and species more than we enjoy a lesson.
I agree that the ending was surprisingly blah after a book that I found fascinating. I thought it would be more sad.. but it felt like a sad story on antidepressants.All that said, I really loved this book.
Danielle wrote: "I agree that the ending was surprisingly blah after a book that I found fascinating. I thought it would be more sad.. but it felt like a sad story on antidepressants.All that said, I really loved..."
I love the way you put that!
Irene wrote: "Yes. What you wanted is called a fairytale. The writer was trying to make a point which a happy ending would have ruined. And remember, he is a Russian writer."I too was disappointed in the ending. I think it would have been more fitting if he had left the epilogue out altogether. That kind of ending would have been more "Russian."
Laura wrote: "This type of fiction is called absurdism, which is based on the philosophical theory that man struggles to find meaning in an essentially meaningless universe. The premise is therefore always pess..."Wasn't that the point? The fact that there is no true "love story" and that Lenny and Eunice are both "super sad?" Though people using each other certainly isn't new, and the book wasn't uplifting, I wasn't at all disappointed in the book. I was impressed with the vision of the author and his ability to portray our society in extremes-like verballing and onion skin jeans...it is super sad and it's the direction in which our society is heading. His insightfulness portraying love and the human condition in that setting is part of what makes it a super sad true love story.
sound like you really enjoyed it. I admit I was taken in with how well he used the many fragments of conversations through social media and various technologies to weave the narrative together. You're right on about his vision. I found myself talking to someone about the idea of transparency in social media and what people will divulge. Before I knew it I was talking about this book and the credit ratings and attractiveness ratings made available to everyone you passed. I think you're right in that "that setting" in many ways will be our setting. Yet when I look at Rabbit Angstrom, despite the wretched brokenness of the life, there was always a glimmer of something. Bigger found a voice, with Pandora hope remained, and Candide had his sense of an existential task shouldered by the self. Babbitt, Siddhartha, and Pirsig's Phaedrus re-discovered meaningful connections to others. Rubashov's reflected on the eternal and Plath's Ester walked into the final review hopeful.
Maybe I missed something here. Maybe there was a sliver of something. But if there wasn't then I think the work is missing an element of the human condition.
Anyways love your comment. I do look forward to reading Shteyngart, again. I thought the craftsmanship was very good.
No because the entire book has horrible or a lest it was for me I hated everyone in it but to each their own I guess
Was this really such an "absurdist" book? Even at dinner people are looking not at their food or friends, but at their Facebook accounts on their smartphones. Nation-states like Greece and Italy have been teetering on the edge of bankruptcy for several years now, and the GOP assures us that the USA will be there soon. We are right on track to fulfilling the destiny SSTLS promises. As for me, I couldn't put the book down.Regarding the ending,I would have liked a happy ending too. But the one provided seemed a pretty believable conclusion to everything that went before. The only other possible ending might have been that Lenny never achieved "literary fame" due to text being entirely superseded by live celebrity porn. Actually, looking at TV and the internet, that seems a lot more likely.
John wrote: "Was this really such an "absurdist" book? Even at dinner people are looking not at their food or friends, but at their Facebook accounts on their smartphones...We are right on track to fulfilling the destiny..."John, I agree with you completely.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
