Who's afraid of those "difficult" novelists ?

[Lisnaholic]

There's a play called "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf?", but she is not the only novelist with a daunting reputation of being a worthy, but challenging read. I'd be very interested in people's opinions of Melville, Satre, Joseph Heller, Bret Easton Ellis - anyone who is considered good but difficult. Have you tried these guys, and are they worth it?

First up, I hope nobody minds if I airlift (from the Your Day thread) these posts about James Joyce: they are the spark that made me think people might like to share their reading experiences, their triumphs and defeats when facing down these literary giants.

I'm so honored. A dear friend of mine is a phenomenal artist who painted the framed portrait of Miles Davis I have displayed in my home which I've shared previously.

I was giving him a set of spare canvas frames for New Year's and he surprised me by using one to frame a canvas print of his portrait of the great James Joyce!

I have Joycean treasures all over my home. This new addition is now my favorite. Thanks, brother!

(Note: He accepts commission work!)

Great Portrait!

"Stately, plump Buck Mulligan came from the stairhead, bearing a bowl of lather on which a mirror and a razor lay crossed" is the first line of James Joyce's 1922 novel Ulysses.

^ That's a nice portrait of the artist as a not so young man, ISB ! - and that literary reference for your username went sailing right over my head, Buck Mulligan. 

[Lisnaholic]

That painting of James Joyce is really cool.. I haven't managed to finish one of his books yet 😅

The only book of his I managed to finish was Dubliners, which is a book of easy-to-read short stories. It's his debut album, before he got into the weird stuff. If you are challenged by Revolution No.9, this was his Love Me Do; if you don't like Tales of Topographic Oceans, this is just Yes from 1969. It's Can't Buy a Thrill, not Aja. Anyway, I'm sure you get where I'm going with these analogies.

[Guybrush]

You could probably add Cormac McCarthy to the list! I am technically reading Blood Meridian, but kinda fell off as I didn't have a grasp on what was going on.

I am attracted to weird, avantgarde things in other mediums (movie, music). But in litterature, I don't like it when it becomes too dense. I generally am not good at deciphering tricky symbolism. I don't necessarily enjoy meta writing, like writing the same story in different styles. I don't enjoy it when chronology is jumbled. I basically enjoy stories that I can understand and follow and prefer authors who write for readers rather than other writers.

I did enjoy Robert Chambers' trick with the unreliable narrator in the first of his short stories that make up The King in Yellow. In that story, there is a book (or play) called The King In Yellow that changes those who read it, making them insane. The book is written as narrated by our protagonist, so when he tells us he read The King in Yellow, we know him to be mad and unreliable.

It was of course a huge influence on Lovecraft who stole much of it and placed it in his own cosmos.

[Trollheart]

I must admit, I really wanted to read Moby Dick, but after about three or four chapters I had to throw it down in disgust. It's just sooooooo boring! I mean, if you weren't aware of what happens in the story later, you'd be like, "Dude! What the fuck?!" Talk about being slow to get started! I also very much enjoyed Les Miserables, but Hugo's determination to essentially catalogue the entire Napoleonic Wars in the middle had me skip, skip, skipping many chapters. I don't even see what the point of it was. Well, I do, sort of, but it didn't add anything to the novel, or, more importantly, skipping it did not take anything from the story.

[SGR]

I must admit, I really wanted to read Moby Dick, but after about three or four chapters I had to throw it down in disgust. It's just sooooooo boring! I mean, if you weren't aware of what happens in the story later, you'd be like, "Dude! What the fuck?!" Talk about being slow to get started! I also very much enjoyed Les Miserables, but Hugo's determination to essentially catalogue the entire Napoleonic Wars in the middle had me skip, skip, skipping many chapters. I don't even see what the point of it was. Well, I do, sort of, but it didn't add anything to the novel, or, more importantly, skipping it did not take anything from the story.

Did you at least get to the part where Ishmael and Queequeg shack up together for a night? 

Moby Dick is one of my favorite novels, though there are definitely slow/tedious parts.

For difficult authors I have yet to crack, I'd add James Joyce to my list too. I tried "Ulysses" to no avail - and then I found out that's not even his most difficult book! (Finnegans Wake)

I was able to read and love Malcolm Lowry with "Under the Volcano" though - the stream of consciousness style makes you feel almost as inebriated as the protagonist!

Is Brett Easton Ellis considered 'difficult'? To be honest, I only ever read "Less than Zero" from him, and I hated it (though I didn't find it a difficult read in any sense of the word). It's like a modern version of "The Sun Also Rises" for Gen-X'ers (hated that novel too).

[Guybrush]

I did also try Melville and did get to the part where they shack up, but not much further. Yes, it did seem tedious.

Tolstoy was easier, but War and Peace was just introducing more and more characters without outlining much of a plot. Why should I continue? Though someone did bring a bear on a drunken binge which seems fun and very Russian.

I tried Don Quixote. Snooze.

I can't remember if I tried Ulysses or Finnegan's Wake, but I actually enjoyed the start which seemed to be about a witty gay couple having breakfast?

[Marie Monday]

I wouldn't say Melville is difficult and Tolstoy and Cervantes certainly aren't. The fact that Tolstoy isn't difficult is the main reason why he's a genius

[Lisnaholic]

I was able to read and love Malcolm Lowry with "Under the Volcano" though - the stream of consciousness style makes you feel almost as inebriated as the protagonist!

I think I might have read that too, and I definitely read Dark As The Grave Wherein My Friend Is Laid on account of its irresistable title. What I "enjoyed" more, though, was a rather depressing biography of Malcolm Lowry, which gave a very sad picture of how ML's drinking caused misery to his wife and everyone around him.

(And if you are interested in an insider's view of drunkeness, I can recommend the powerful The Lost Weekend by Charles Jackson. The genius of the book is there in the title: it's only one weekend, but it's packed with that alcohol-infused intensity, and includes euphoria, the slump of remorse, and mortifying lapses of judgement, all laid out in meticulous, as-they-are-happening, detail.)   

Is Brett Easton Ellis considered 'difficult'? To be honest, I only ever read "Less than Zero" from him, and I hated it (though I didn't find it a difficult read in any sense of the word). It's like a modern version of "The Sun Also Rises" for Gen-X'ers (hated that novel too).

^ I don't know, tbh: I read a review, though, (probably of American Psycho) that said his book was a struggle because it goes inside the mind of a dispassionate materialist and is thus full of long descriptions of possessions without any emotional depth to get you involved in the protagonist.
 

I must admit, I really wanted to read Moby Dick, but after about three or four chapters I had to throw it down in disgust. It's just sooooooo boring! I mean, if you weren't aware of what happens in the story later, you'd be like, "Dude! What the fuck?!" Talk about being slow to get started! I also very much enjoyed Les Miserables, but Hugo's determination to essentially catalogue the entire Napoleonic Wars in the middle had me skip, skip, skipping many chapters. I don't even see what the point of it was. Well, I do, sort of, but it didn't add anything to the novel, or, more importantly, skipping it did not take anything from the story.

^ I remember you telling us about reading Dickens to your sister, Trollheart, so you are very well aware of this: back in the old days, books were often written precisely to be long time-fillers, so that they could be the evening's main entertainment through the long winter months. Today, with our attention spans dictated by Tiktok, that style of writing can get kind of annoying, imo, unless you are in the mood for it, or it has some other special merit going on.
I think I lasted about 10 pages with Moby Dick; on the other hand, I avidly read In The Heart Of The Sea, which is a modern, non-fiction account of a whaling ship called The Essex. It's the story of the original shipwreck that inspired Melville, which he came across when he himself was based in Nantucket. If you want to immerse yourself in the startling world of 19th century whaling, then that book is a painless way to do it. Lots of eye-opening detail that will stick in your mind for ages.
 

I did enjoy Robert Chambers' trick with the unreliable narrator in the first of his short stories that make up The King in Yellow. In that story, there is a book (or play) called The King In Yellow that changes those who read it, making them insane. The book is written as narrated by our protagonist, so when he tells us he read The King in Yellow, we know him to be mad and unreliable.

It was of course a huge influence on Lovecraft who stole much of it and placed it in his own cosmos.

^ Wow! that itself is very Lovecraftian: that there is an obscure tome that predates the stories of Cthulhu. I've never heard of The King In Yellow, but it sounds intriguing right from the get-go.

[Lucem Ferre]

Anything written by an economic theorist is tedious because they write obnoxiously.

But the only book that's really given me trouble is The Divine Comedy. Almost like a completely different language.

[Lucem Ferre]

You could probably add Cormac McCarthy to the list! I am technically reading Blood Meridian, but kinda fell off as I didn't have a grasp on what was going on.

I am attracted to weird, avantgarde things in other mediums (movie, music). But in litterature, I don't like it when it becomes too dense. I generally am not good at deciphering tricky symbolism. I don't necessarily enjoy meta writing, like writing the same story in different styles. I don't enjoy it when chronology is jumbled. I basically enjoy stories that I can understand and follow and prefer authors who write for readers rather than other writers.

I did enjoy Robert Chambers' trick with the unreliable narrator in the first of his short stories that make up The King in Yellow. In that story, there is a book (or play) called The King In Yellow that changes those who read it, making them insane. The book is written as narrated by our protagonist, so when he tells us he read The King in Yellow, we know him to be mad and unreliable.

It was of course a huge influence on Lovecraft who stole much of it and placed it in his own cosmos.

Blood Meridian took some getting used to but it was great. Frown recommended that one to me.

When it comes to unconventional writing that makes you think "What the fuck is going on, here?" Naked Lunch fits right in. Im surprised that Lynch actually pulled a plot from that acid trip enduced word salad of a book.

[Guybrush]

Blood Meridian took some getting used to but it was great. Frown recommended that one to me.

When it comes to unconventional writing that makes you think "What the fuck is going on, here?" Naked Lunch fits right in. Im surprised that Lynch actually pulled a plot from that acid trip enduced word salad of a book.

Yes.. I am technically also reading Naked Lunch

I'm not sure I will finish Naked Lunch, but I will give Blood Meridian a fair attempt.

[Lisnaholic]

^ "technically"   Yes, Naked Lunch is a wild ride !!

Not only did I read it, but I went on to read a couple of other William Burroughs novels. I quite liked the unique use of language and the strange images that WB's writing style generated. Mind you, that was when I was 18, and I was more open/patient with authors. I don't think I'd like his stuff if it had been recommended to me recently. That said, I still carry in my mind a WB phrase: "Narborhood In Aqualung" Sounds great, but what does it mean?!

[Lucem Ferre]

I feel like I need more hallucinogens to truly understand it.

[Lisnaholic]

I feel like I need more hallucinogens to truly understand it.

Maybe you should try that approach with The Divine Comedy, Lucem !! That's not a book I've ever attempted. In fact, having struggled to "do" Shakespeare at school, I have a kind of cut off point for old books and have given up exploring much-praised classics from the past, like Danté, Cervantés, Plato, etc.
I feel like anything written before 1800, more-or-less, is just not going to overlap with my idea of reading: that my purpose or expectations in reading aren't going to match the writing intentions of those old guys, however worthy their words may be.

[Guybrush]

I quite enjoy my copy of The Divine Comedy, but I will admit it's because of the wonderful art of Gustave Dore. One day, I want to try to actually read the words and not just look at the pictures. Can't go wrong with Italian poetry from the renaissance.. probably? 👌