ah august, the month that brings high temperatures & higher humidity, how do i loathe thee?
let me count the ways...
with apologies to shakespeare, i do detest the month of august. growing up, i generally remember it's hot & invariably muggy, and the forecast for this weekend is validating that memory.
as a former lit major, i remember in senior year we read faulkner's light in august, and the instructor asked us a very simple question: what does the title mean to you?
back in those days, i was shy and not comfortable sharing my opinion (o, how times have changed!) but i remember thinking to myself, "i have no idea but august sucks". but he went on to explain how because august is hot, the light tends to be...heavy, for lack of a better word. i can't recall his wording any longer b/c it's been a bunch of years now, and as most of you guys know, my memory is "full of fail", as a friend is fond of saying.
but in essence, the professor was explaining that faulkner was observing how in august, the light has a peculiar quality, streaming through moisture-laden air.
this of course got me thinking about faulkner, but then to faulkner's descriptions, and hence inexorably to the subject of his run-on sentences. i always wondered if perhaps among fans of 20th century american lit if there's a divide between faulkner fans, who no doubt love his rambling, sometimes paragraph-long sentences, and hemingway fans, devotees of his clipped, journalistic form.
my familiarity with the works of either writer is embarrassingly scanty: i can barely recall anything from light in august; of hemingway, i'm familiar only with his short fiction, specifically his nick adams stories, primarily.
in literary criticism (often abbreviated as lit crit) circles, there's been this concept of "the canon", these works that most people who consider themselves well-read should have read by now. it's sorta "old skool lit", as it were: shakespeare & milton of course, but also tolstoy & dostoyevsky, hugo & maupassaint, faulkner & hemingway...i could go on for paragraphs, but you get the idea.
the thinking behind the canon is simple: writers are very often inspired by other writers, among other things, so to understand more contemporary writers, it's fruitful to understand their inspirations.
(and of course because we're talking about critics, there's a contrasting view: that the canon is exclusionary, consisting of what's known as DWMs (pronounced "dwims"): dead white males. so literary critics have looking for minority and/or female writers in english. but this is a tangent and not the thrust of this blog entry.)
irrespective of your particular feelings about the canon, i think that the concept, that writers are inspired by other writers, is reasonable and valid.
all of which leads to the poll question (at long last): what books do you feel you should have read by now, yet haven't? why do you feel you should have read them?
i know i don't know them all off the top of my head so i'll start, and then i'll have to start adding to this in comments:
moby dick. i haven't read any melville so i need to know for myself what the big deal is.
catch 22. i have, sadly, not read any joseph heller but i have friends who really dig his work so again, i need to see what the big deal is.
how about you?
ed
Hegemone
posted on Oct 27, 2009
| views: 53
|
Tags: thoughts, trash, Books
Sometimes, certain phrases just stick out I guess.... read entire post
Colorful
posted on Oct 23, 2009
| views: 26
|
Tags: reccomend, life, Books
Have any reccomendations?... read entire post