Wednesday, January 31, 2007

One thing DFW certainly does is write without sympathy. I feel like none of the characters whom we've spent a lot of time with at this point are what we could consider "normal" people; they're all quirky and (for the most part) unhappy. There are not yet any healthy relationships in IJ; all we have is people who are wallowing in their loneliness, who focus all of their attention inward. DFW puts people in these ludicrous, pathetically sad/ sardonically humorous situations and we kind of observe them from afar, like little specimens, as opposed to in other books (how often can that be said for IJ?) where we are there with the characters.

I love DFW's choice of words; since I began reading IJ I've been reminded of this short EB White passage called The Hen (An Appreciation)...here is the first paragraph:

Chickens do not always enjoy an honorable position among city-bred people, although the egg, I notice, goes on and on. Right now the hen is in favor. The war has deified her and she is the darling of the home front, feted at conference tables, praised in every smoking car, her girlish ways and curious habits the topic of many an excited husbandryman to whom yesterday she was a stranger without honor or allure.

Although obviously it is entirely unrelated, both EB White and DFW write about normal/usual things in an entirely unexpected manner, by adding specific words or details, that just makes them all the more delightful.

In particular I enjoyed the passage p. 145ish concerning the takeover of videophony and then the transition back to the normal telephone; when videophony was first described, my first thought was (embarrassing…) “you’d always have to look good when you answered the phone!” Really the whole thing was just described in a rather amusing fashion..

p.s....What was the deal with that section (127-135) with the misspellings etc? It was very bizarre, back to the Wardine/ Clenette section almost.

1 Comments:

Blogger Cory said...

Good points, Rose. I totally agree with the writing without sympathy. Not that he's so much callous as simply... objective.

1/31/2007 11:16 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home