That is the great thing about literature, opinions can vary dramatically. This book changed my life. It made other works of literature look timid and artificial. Miller’s expression was bold and alive and unlike anything the world has seen. I will be putting out another RU-vid review soon. Needless to say, my view of Tropic of Cancer will be different.
I bought Tropic of Cancer in 10th Grade after watching an episode of Seinfeld. My Teacher was like "are you sure you are prepared for this?" lol.. But she let me read it! And I spend many lunches reading excerpts out loud to my friends... Still one of my favs!
I'm about to read the book, and I'm in the same place you are. I'm fourteen going on fifteen but I read very mature and controversial books. I know this comment is from a year ago but I felt I should type this. In case you don't know there is a second book Miller wrote called "The Tropic Of Capricorn".
@@AshtrayBigMoney don't sleep on Quiet Days in Clichy when it comes to Miller's downright prurient novels. Black Spring and then Sexus, Plexus, and Nexus are also very highly recommended, at least by me, some random guy...
Henry Miller is my favorite writer. This book is like a conversation with an old friend. I like the flow of consciousness and philosophical reflections.
It's a shame you didn't enjoy it. It's a few years since I read it. What stays with me over the distance is not the scatology but the description, how it offer unedited (not really, of course, but still...) a time and a place, a bustle of desires and exhaustions. I'm reading Alfred Perles' "My Friend Henry Miller" at the moment, which is, as you can imagine, a memoir of their friendship (A. P. appears in [edit: "Tropic of Cancer", etc.] as "Carl"). The book recalls how to encounter Miller in real life was to be blasted with his personality. The book is pretty similar, isn't it. It's barely literature: it has, as you suggest, no form, really. Miller was aware of this. He "wrote the artist out of himself". In so doing he opened the door for a slew of formless, "personal", confessional literature which has never measured up to Miller to my knowledge. It only needed to be done once; and Miller was that once.
What a great comment, Fergus. I think your comment is hinting at something I've been thinking about lately. How Miller's book didn't seem to be written for the reader. It was more of an exercise, a statement. Which is great, I'm happy if he felt he expressed what he needed to, but as a reader it didn't feel like it was for me at all. Which is fine! There's room for everyone :)
The most American review of this book possible. Completely missing the point and being shocked by a healthy dose of sexuality. No wonder Henry decided to move to France haha.
They're generally not as tight-assed and unimaginative as this kid, who sounds like he never read anything that wasn't required reading, besides The Book of Mormon.
Yes Rick, this book has many stark and explicit sexual acts and graphic words that will certainly your aunt to blush. However, the 320 plus pages is not just about sex and sexual acts. Everybody knows the controversy surrounding this novel. However, there is so much more to this. It would have been helpful if you had mentioned that this was written as autobiographical fiction with surrealism mixed in with realism at times. This is often the difficulty one has reading this book. You also avoided mentioning his movement away from nihilism to a more romantic and optimistic view of the world. The book also describes the main characters sexual evolution from women as sexual objects to seeing the female body as being lush and fertile. Even likening the world to the female body, something to be celebrated. In this way, Henry has grown from a man who uses and disrespects women to being able to cast off that unfulfilling life and instead seeking a relationship. He also grows from an unemployed man who embraces his suffering for his art to someone who finally begins ti support himself rather than constantly sponging of his friends. There is so much more to this book that you could have mentioned. It’s a shame that you didn’t. Btw, what was Henry’s cancer?
Order this book a few moments ago. We need a book like this now and not in the past. Those that believe they are pushing boundaries aren’t, just the other day a school administrator resigned because a parent called statue of David pornographic. We live in a time when those that are so offended burn books along with banning someone for life. Pushing boundaries to win foolish hearts and an empty canvas mind has been happing far too often. The only thing provocative moment they present is that of which is clicked on. More books like this are needed.
This was fair to me. I am so torn on this book. On the one hand, there are moments where you slip into the surrealism and lose track of the literal meaning of the words and suddenly viscerally feel a certain way or place. But on the other hand, for countless pages you feel like you are mining for bits of gold in a free-style rant that I'm guessing fewer people than would like to admit actually understand or can find real meaning in. Then, something genius - he hits the nail on the head. Overall, he wears me down, though, like you said. They say he was a writer without hope and without despair and that his writing is joyous as a result, but I feel worse after reading it usually, exhausted, beat down. Sometimes blowing the doors off convention is really cool and sometimes it's the oldest trick in the book, yes even in his era. I'm not sure where Henry Miller will land on that spectrum overtime. The way he writes about sex is so celebrated, but it lacks all humanity. There's certainly something to be said for looking at the sex act is such a raw way, but it doesn't, for me, even reflect any type of real sex act, no matter how base. It's all surreal. Like how aliens trying to portray humans would have sex. I respect what he was trying to do overall, but not the kind of book you pick up to relax with after a long day.
It's such an important text because he was one of the *first* people to say the word cunt as many times as possible in 300 pages. It is undoubtedly demeaning to women, outright, but on a more underlying level it is demeaning to men as well, representing them all as sex-crazed, foul, conniving monsters. It's not the best book of all time, but it's an important book.
To fully understand something is to experience it. I don't know how many of us happened to have Henry's experiences in life. I, for one, am not upset one little bit that I can't understand his experience. With so many out there to have, I think I'll go another route.
Tried to get through Tropic of Cancer for over a year, picked it back up a month ago and finished just shy of a few chapters and honestly just couldn’t finish it. I would never say Miller is a bad writer because he is actually quite good at times, but the subject matter and his intentions are just morose and vulgar to me. This is comming from a guy that likes Bukowski so I’m not saying I’m offended by Miller at all but the way he views the world, at least in Tropic of Cancer just did not resonate with me. I don’t understand the hype behind Miller at all.
I'm reading a lot of short vague unhelpful comments about the book going over this reviewer's head. What I'm not reading much of is anything constructivelly positive about the book to reinforce that viewpoint.
The books holds forth an uncomfortable mirror to the viewer about conventional morals. It's subversive, real, genuine, uncompromising and it tackles a surprising amount of philosophy which you would never assume from this review. The social context is vital to consider firstly as with any piece of art but also to be frank the fact it still gets reactions like this today proves its necessity in and of itself. To act superior to this book is to deny your own sympathies tword sexual and social deviance, characteristics held and all too often ignored by all of us, while this book embraces them as though they were virtue. The book says "hey you think terrible irredeemable thoughts, that's an important part of being human". Not only that but it tells its story in a very stimulating poetic style that retains its same impact throughout the book. For me the most interesting part of the book is this protagonist who is an American living impoverished in France and constantly dispenses ideas about voluntary poverty and eastern philosophy. He reads to me as a true seeker. A man straining against and questioning everything in search of truth, meaning and revolutionary thought. That's my best case for what specifically I feel "went over his head".
The book is NOT pornographic and it's NOT all about sex. The 'sex' scenes are bombastic and actually surrealistic, like Anaïs Nin's erotic stories (Miller and Nine had a relationship and then they remained close friends for all the rest of their lives: they influenced each other). But then, apart from the sex and erotic parts, the novel is a poetic stream-of-consciousness about the very human condition. The novel describes the tragic lives of people living in the margins of society - the poor, the homeless, the street criminals, the prostitutes - with a rare sensitivity and compassion. Miller, in short, describes 'devils' who are just 'angels' fallen from the heaven of society. The 'gross parts' find their meaning in their contrast with the most poetic and reflexive parts. Miller wanted to describe EVERYTHING: from the subtleties and beauty of philosophical thinking and poetry, to the bestiality of flesh with all its brutal needs, desires and dirt. To focus only on the 'sex parts' is not only misleading but unjust towards an insightful and inspiring novel.
Brigid Brophy, a British writer who lived in England, reviewed "Tropic of Cancer" in "London Magazine" in June 1963. She thought Henry Miller had written a book that lacked literary value -- he even lacked the skill of a pornographer -- but she also thought no one should be prosecuted for publishing or selling the book. The fact is worth remembering: "Tropic of Cancer" was legally banned as obscene in several countries for approximately 30 years. It acquired the aura of the forbidden. "Tropic of Cancer" might be an important book for that reason alone, but it really isn't a well-written book. I don't understand how it got onto a list of the top 125 books of all time. If you are interested in reading Brigid Brophy's review (it's a real demolition job), you can still find it. The review appears in Brophy's "Don't Never Forget: Collected Views and Reviews," a book that appeared in the United States in 1967.
You missed the point. Get beyond your hang-ups with the naughty language and look at the poetry and sincerity being expressed. I disagree when you say the book's time is "long gone." This book wasn't for you.
I agree with you. I don’t think he truly enjoyed his writing or doesn’t know how to. Henry Miller “Tropic of Cancer” really explores his consciousness of as a man in his epoch and society all around. Tropic of Cancer can be viewed from all angles; as a memoir, it’s for philosophical concepts, humor, Criticism, history. Tropic of Cancer is for all kinds of readers, in my opinion. To say “it’s a book about nothing”, I don’t think he is open enough to enjoy a book of such magnitude. He strikes me more Nicholas Sparks or a Honey and Tea (or whatever that book is on Target shelves). I respect it.
Is it misogynistic though? IS IT REALLY? It seems like the incredibly obvious conclusion to make, but the fact is that what Miller said by virtue of the sheer fact that he SAID IT AT ALL, during the time which he said it ultimately turned out to be liberating for literally EVERYBODY. Yes, the manner in which he treats women can seem crass and disgusting but as his biographers who manage to tell a much more factual account of his life reveal, his relationship to June actually showed that Miller also put up with a lot of abuse from her and really tried within all his ability to love her quite unconditionally. I don't think time will be kind to Miller and I think that if women find his language disturbing and or dehumanizing - that's fair enough. But I think that, given that the man and the alter-ego in his novels are practically inseparable, that there are many layers to the man which cause him to defy simple categorization.
I just started reading this and as non-native english speaker, I don't know what the heck's going on most of the time lol. but I would probably continue reading it...
As a small time writer that hopes to get more work published. I have to say. This book was great to me. Everything is crude and gross but when you look closer. There’s no subject but I do feel as if it’s an “open book”. You get what you want out of it. Reading the book. I understand a man that’s so depressed that his best actions is to live with anger in every step he takes. I believe he has genuine hate towards people but has the wants and greed of every man and in a way. It angers him more cause he’ll never have the thing he truly wants. To be that successful author that lives but not happy cause everyone’s happiness is different. I read the book and this is what I got out of it and I believe people should read it but not cause it’s “good” but instead to read it to see the inner demons of man and how we all deal with it in our own way
I'll grant you that his imagery choices are... ugh. But this is similar to cringe-watching in modern day (think self-induced cringe moments on The Office with an exta veneer or two of filth), so it isn't entirely unenjoyable. I was divided on its worth until he openly questioned if the meaning of life could be boiled down to a monk's accidental twosie still steaming in a bidet. That was altogether much deeper than it appeared and I had to quit reading for a minute and really evaluate what he'd just said, after chapters of depravity, stream-of-consciousness ranting that seemed to be pointless, and scenes of intransigent life. From there out, I read the book as through the eyes of a directionless person engaging in all the nonsense with an eye to finding purpose. It felt like someone who kept revisiting the same wells of what comes easy, what satisfies the flesh, what temporarily increases comfort, but would ultimately result in no resolution. There was no romanticism in his Bohemianism. There was a tinge of sadness in it, to have a person who had no boundaries among people who had pushed their own vices to the extreme, and none of them satisfying or approaching a purpose. I rooted for difference and change in my heart, but knew it wouldn't happen. I read self-destruction or at least a life on pause. When the book was done, I realized what he'd done was drop a giant sand bag on my shoulders and asked me to carry all my own bullshit after seeing it in naked relief; challenge me to enact human purpose over animal comfort. The scarier end of that conclusion is knowing that the book was a synopsis of my own purpose, though obviously not my daily life, if I failed to find direction. In this way, the book, to me, seemed to be offering an example of life in the extreme on the wrong end of the spectrum- an example of how now to be, and an exploration of life without engaging difficulties. Certainly, it satisfied all those gooey, little, devious thoughts lodged in my brain from the throes of growing up, every stifled wondering about the grosser aspects of existence, and put them to bed by exploring them openly. It was a catharsis that ended by challenging me to walk away from every ounce of what was written, knowing that all of it led to emptiness. The voice of this novel hollowed me out and left me feeling like a shell, too wrapped up in aspects (mind you, mere aspects) of this character's behavior and thoughts and their likeness to my own. I was cored out and left to feel as though I had to rage against it. It may not be a novel for everyone, but in the right conditions, this novel can assail you and leave you wondering if you were to wash away the thin layers of justification you've built, just how far into the dark you are. How alike all of the things you found depraved do you behave? And perhaps more importantly, where is the purpose beyond it?
To most appreciate this novel, one may cultivate a wider comprehension of the authors of whom Miller associates with, and of the general climate of the artist community of that time. Though, on it’s own, Tropic of Cancer is quite marvelous.
The dislikes are strange to me. Hard to imagine that those who really love this book do not in part appreciate it for its shock and for giving people precisely the sort of feelings it gave you.
Just finished this and your review is spot on...I feel as though Miller went all in with the pure crudeness in order to sensationalize his work. Perhaps he was worried that no one would talk about it if it wasn’t this damned insane? Thank you for posting this!
I think that was partially the point: over-crudeness to the point of sensationalism as a way of making a point about the boundaries (or lack thereof) of art. I just find it supremely uninteresting LOL. Thanks for watching, and for the nice comment!
That's so funny , I read Miller long before this but yeah. When Woke Meets Henry Miller ! If you thought that was bad try reading Opus Pistorum, trigger warning it's bad real bad, I read it out aloud in the Barracks when I was in the Army and even my mates thought it was disgusting and that's saying something. That said, Henry Miller is one of the best writers I have ever read and was a template for my life. I am glad I read him in my twenties.
The real meaning of life was precisely what Miller was trying to discover in his uniquely unfettered way which required him to explore forbidden regions that less courageous writers would be afraid to enter.
Stick to your guns. I know you're getting some hate in the comment section, but honestly, you keep it real. One minute I'm like "this is a masterpiece, stroke of genius,' the next minute I'm like "this is complete garbage, how many times can you say the C word? How do I give my brain a shower?'' The next minute I'm laughing really hard. His interviews on here are very interesting though, and the authors Miller likes I'm going to explore, but stick to your guns, I liked your review, I can relate. Subscribed!
he goes on several monologues that hint back to his point stated in the title, humanity is decaying and has been for some time, the story has no good characters because the world itself has lost its virtue, there aren’t any good men anymore and that’s why he embodies that in his writing in actions, it’s all irony because he writes as if the world is the issue when he himself embodies all of the same issues
Also sorry to double comment but another very revealing thing is that Tropic of Cancer is by far Miller's most famous work - and yet most serious Miller readers wouldn't agree that it's even close to his best. That's more revealing of people and what they react to than it is of Miller, in my ever so humble opinion.
agree not his best. I preferred Capricorn. Then again Miller is so dynamic that the pleasures are unforeseeable, a moving paragraph here a comical aside there, moments more than narrative
One correction. Miller was NOT a “young” writer when he wrote Cancer. It depicts a time in his life when he was nearly 40 and after decades of drudgery and frustration trying to live in some form of American “normalcy” scrounging out a living as an average New Yorker he finally “chucked” it all in the name of personal freedom and with his 2nd wife Mona’s encouragement…she was wilder than he was…took off to Paris to be a penniless but free artistic in “middle age” and beyond.
I’m at page 141 it’s taken me almost a year to get here. I just can’t get into it you’re right after 100 pages it’s enough!! But I’m committed to finish it….
Here is how I approach reading classics. If I cant find anything worth while in the book I always asume its my fault and I need to look at it differently or try to understand better.
This feels like a book that was ment to draw the line for writers to know how far is too far. This book was not meant to be read by a normal person it is meant to be a middle finger to the censorship going on at the time...
My description of this book to a friend was “picture if Jack Kerouac wrote a penthouse forum letter that was 300 pages long…” there are moments of incredible prose and expert use of language amongst the filth here though. This is definitely a dirty book worth reading, but it’s a tough slog
"Tropic of Cancer" is a great book. Why? For starters, it is unconventional and written more in an unstructured, almost stream of consciousness style. In many ways, it is more of a journal of Miller's life in Paris in the 1930s than a novel per se. Yes it is raw, it is sexual and it is utterly real and unsparing of the writer who lived life in all of it's forms during this time. I read it more than thirty years ago, and I still remember it well. Is it relevant in the 21st century? Most definitely. Walk into a book shop these days and most of the novels are the same and formulaic - "Tropic of Cancer" is not is and is so different from anything that was ever written. It was ground breaking because of it's non-structural style, it's immersive and unrelenting sexuality and Miller's thoughts on a wide variety of subjects. You won't find another book like it. That said, you are probably best reading it alongside its companion piece, Anais Nin's "Henry and June" which gives context to the time in which Miller wrote the book. And it is even more impressive that he wrote such a book after walking away from a job in America, his wife and writing it often starving and living in poverty whilst in Paris. I'm sad that you can't appreciate the book, because it is so different and visceral compared to the fast food novels that are served up to us in the 21st century. "Tropic of Cancer" is a book which challenges the mind and the soul - if it has generated a response of some sort in you, then perhaps it has succeeded after all.
Please do not read anything by Michel Houellebecq if you find Henry Miller a disturbing author. Also please understand that although testosterone in the male population has been declining in recent decades, it was not always the case. If you have the ability to understand or maybe attempt to put yourself in the shoes of a quote unqoute viewpoint of a misogynist, you might end up reading one of the greatest books ever written.
All the kids not getting Henry Miller or who are easily offended and 'triggered' by his 'diminishing and disrespectful writings', should look at this interview to Professor Katy Masuga: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-jXPoEGZPugQ.html
This man starts to realize the value of this book at minute 6+, before that one can see a man struggling with the projection of his assumptions and his thinking of what people can think about him. After minute 6, the monologue becomes interesting, rational almost relevant to one question that is not completed. This man ask and answer (wrongly) if this book is or not relevant for the 21st century. Given that that The book was published in France 30 before than in the US , (i am skipping this man’s prejudices against french ppl) the answer is yes, it is relevant. The book recognizes the value, the function of man and women’s sexuality, the need to be satisfied in ways that are temporary- as historical records show ie romans, greeks, Sumerians, cultures from India, china, Africa, even Europe in the Neolithic times, middle ages to present- This man gets a strong point , today there are different ways to talk about this topic-granted! However, Tropic of Cancer reaches a universal level because… although in the US there’s progress on the way we talk about sexuality, that is not the case for the rest of the world, there’s still cultures, societies, beliefs, taboos, narratives that prevent the topic of sexuality to be addressed, the topic of free speech to be even discussed and that is why , this book is necessary. I see this man struggles so hard to see other angles of the literary work that is presented in Tropic of Cancer, maybe one day we can hear something less reactionary.
I first met Henry Miller at a dinner party in Benedict Canyon in 1960 - an absolutely marvelous man. I’ve traveled in literary circles all my life. Henry Miller is universally revered. I’m afraid the young man conducting this youtube review is simply naive.
You are so lucky. Most of my favorite writers were dead by my birth. Bukowski died a year before I was born. Reading books like this that weren't afraid to show the writer's truth inspired me in a big way. Maybe even saved me
I totally agree with every word you said about this book 😂 P.s. I don't why but I felt it almost as a marketing strategy, at that time in 1930s it was obviusly shocking to write all that details, and for sure Henry Miller knew that, and he did purposely, so that he could earn some money on it, I just got this feeling..
You read some of the passages out loud ... yet, possibly, you overlooked the construction of metaphors and comparisons (which, in my opinion, are the stronghold of Miller's writing style). But hey, that is not the most important thing I have to question you on. I mean, look at our present times (6 years after you made the video): there are almost no publishers willing to publish manuscripts that have not passed through so-called "sensitivity readers". In that respect we are worse now then we were in the 1930s! So YES, I think there is a need not only to reproduce what Miller has done, but to go beyond, and I want to say WAAAAY beyond. Somewhat like French author Louis Aragon did in "Irene's Cunt" (1928).
I am SO glad I found this review. I struggled with this when I was young and couldn't get to the end. Or the sequel. Having a cabal 'literature' clear out. (Bukowski was easier) At least my charity shop or bonfire will benefit this weekend.
Hello thank you for your vidéo. I totally disagree with your POV. Yes it s a testomony of someone, 80 years ago, who had a non moral life from our 2022's point of vue (or even at that time maybe) and then ? Does art need to be moral ? Is the the best way to approach art ? Ask Picasso, Bukowski, or S. De Beauvoire if they were moral. Asking if if a novel is "necessary" or not might even have a very pernicious effect on art in general. Btw you didn t talk about many of the mains aspects of the book so maybe this book was aimed to you to tickle your morale 😉 Just jocking Best Alfredo
I haven’t read any Miller but I did read some letters between himself and Anais Nin documenting their love affair which, you could probably imagine, was pretty intimate/sexual. I think based on this I’ll stray from Miller, at least this work. I haven’t read any Nin either but I find their relationship boggling & I’m sure it inspired their work to some degree. Excited to see your project with these books progress!
Oh I can only imagine what his private letters were like. I mean, good for him for being open and honest and true to himself and not caring about what other people thought of him, and I'm happy he found a kindred spirit in Nin, but yeah, they're not for me, hahaha.
Wow... how interesting the conversations around this book must have been! Your insights and thoughts were great.. I actually own the book, but haven’t read it. I now WANT to read it and DON’T want to read it! I love this project and hope to add some of this list to my read pile. I counted 25 that I have already read.. Happy New Year! 🥳
In rating this book it is said that it made the top list by the Guardian by Times Magazine & by the modern library, it was first published in France. When it came to the states it was described as an open sewer, a pit of putrefaction, a slimy gathering of all that is rotten in the debris of human depravity. A reading: A Tottenham court Road with her dress pulled up and fingered herself....Its not fancy but if you have the guts this book is for you....
The book is more necessary than ever with our dystopian wasteland of dumbed-down illiterate oafs. People live in an insulated pod world with brainwashed plastic oozing out of every poor. Henry had the balls to transcend cultural deformities and like a supernova lit up the night sky exposing a zombie class of arrogant puritans and capitalist vultures. I am sorry you got stuck on the sex bits as most self-righteous concrete thinkers do. Henry's humor, genius, and courage leave most of us stuck on the guard rails of dull-witted freaks.
Sounds like a ,big waste of time, I'm way too old , for sophomoric, moronic toilet bowl humor, I Like black humor, like Evelyn Waugh, Muriel Spark, William Faulkner, Patricia Highsmith, Fyodor Dostoevsky, this sounds like a literary edgy teenager trying to shock their parents. I don't mind sharp, unlikable, characters. You're right it's a product of its time and no need for this book in the 21 first century.
I don’t know man, every time you read a passage you’re laughing and having a great time. Maybe he meant those passages to be funny? Either way, you’re obviously amused and you seem to be actively trying to not to admit that.
Agree with much of your opinions about this one. The book's ok. Valueable it is, and probably transcendental for its time, but not a surprise for our time. I like the book, I understood the book, but I don't think is the masterpiece many people think it is. 👍
I'm not going to get in here with everyone else and slam the review or but he definitely is not ready for something like this. Maybe a little bit triggered. Maybe a little too much indoctrinated into a liberal mindset. don't worry about it kid come back and read it again in 30 years and you'll love it I promise. I was ready for this kind of stuff at a younger age then you will be ready for it apparently but everyone matures at their own rate. Then again you may never be ready for it but that's fine it's just a matter of evolution, and not everyone evolves.
ToC was timely. But it is far, far, far from being timeless literature. It is very much of its time and I will leave it there where I found it, never to be perused again.
Uh, do you think the door knob thing in Here I Am was a reference to that line you read... LOL Interesting how some controversial books stay relevant and are still debated (thinking Lolita) but you don't hear much about this one anymore. I still kind of want to read this :)
Laura Frey Wow, I never even made he Here I Am connection. Maybe it is, haha. Wouldn’t put it past Foer. I would imagine books like Lolita live on because there’s some nuance or some mystery to them, some reason for the conversation to continue. There’s debate. With something like Tropic of Cancer, there’s not much to discuss other than “is it too disgusting?”
In this era people are afraid to like Miller. Young readers don’t even “read” anymore, they scan for confirmation of their contemporary world view, rather than enter the flow of the words
Who are you, young man, to judge so ferociouly this book ? you deliberately chose excerpts serving your puritan repugnance whereas there are many pages full of pure poetry... how can you dare reducing it with such a light mood ? Get deeper and you might become more indulgent, and (who knows ?) more intelligent !
You have to understand the context of this book. At a time where everything was private, especially sexual matters, Henry Miller came along and blew the lid of the damn social pot. If youve never read anything along these lines (Burroughs, Ginsberg, Bukowski) you might not understand the point of the literature. Its meant, in a sense, to cause chaos, to get you out of your comfort zone and think a bit. It might not be your cup of tea and thats cool, but if you are just seeing what is written on the pages, youve missed the point, which undermines literature like this. But at the very least you read it!
You’re missing his point! ... nah, just kidding. It’s one I haven’t read. It doesn’t seem to be taught anymore these days. Looking forward to your thoughts on The Golden Notebook. I didn’t get along with it well.
Barter Hordes I’m really hoping The Golden Notebook goes a little better for me. The last 700 pages of this project have been a tad difficult to get through. Do you remember why you didn’t enjoy it?
I can’t remember if it was stylistic or structural. But here’s the review I did. I don’t want to prejudice you against it, though. Lots of people love it. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--2kkflxrvYI.html
Barter Hordes I think I'll read it myself first, and then check out your video. I want to go in as fresh as possible. But thanks for the link! I'm excited to see if we differ at all.
Excellent review. I still have it on my tbr pile. My eyebrows were always raised about this text but I think I may have to still take it on to get my own take.
This book never appealed to me and your review really confirmed my suspicions. But I look forward to hearing your thoughts on The Golden Notebook because it's been on my shelves for a decade.
I'm actually finding that The Golden Notebook is a difficult book to come across. Seemingly every bookstore in my city doesn't have it. Kinda strange. But yeah, if Tropic of Cancer didn't appeal to you before, I would suggest skipping it.
