What are you reading?

Megan: “This summer, I’ve been reading a lot of chick-lit — books about girls and their adventures with their careers and with men. I’d been reading more serious stuff for school, so it was just kind of nice brain mush. I just bought 4 Blondes, by Candace Bushnell, and I just finished The Washingtonienne, by Jessica Cutler. I didn’t like the main character as a person, but she was fun to read about — really fun, selfish, and self-indulgent — having affairs with married politicians so she could pay her rent. It’s based on a true story.”

Benjamin: “I just finished The Monkey Wrench Gang by Edward Abbey; I really loved it. It’s about eco-terrorists who go around trying to save the Southwest from development, blowing up bridges, sabotaging bulldozers. I’m from the Southwest, and you can tell that Abbey really cares about his subject. He’s a beautiful descriptive writer, and I really liked his imagery. Right now, I’m reading The Iliad because I never got to it in school, and I’ve got to fill in the gaps. I feel like I managed to take all the English classes that read all the silly books.”

What did you like or find memorable about the books?

Megan: “The memorable scenes in The Washingtonienne are, um, kind of sexual.”

Benajmin: “I like Achilles because I kind of like his arrogance — not that I identify with arrogance! I like how human and petty the gods are — really jealous and temperamental. I think it’s hilarious.”

Do you have a favorite author?

Megan: “No.”

Benjamin: “Richard Brautigan. I think he was popular in the ‘60s, but I don’t want to call him a beat writer. When I first read him, his was the most original writing I had ever encountered — very simple and to the point, with no extra fat. But very vivid — you don’t miss anything.”

What book has been most life-changing for you?

Megan: “Lolita by Nabokov wasn’t life-changing, but I really liked it. I liked his writing, how you could kind of feel sympathy for Humbert even though you felt it was wrong to feel for him.”

Benjamin: “The Abortion, by Brautigan. There’s a specific chapter where he writes about the love these two people have for each other. The way he speaks about this woman is just so tender and caring; it’s really moving. The story is about the woman getting an abortion and their journey before and after. They just endure it. It wasn’t this cheesy, ‘Oh, they had a revelation.’ He writes about it in terms of how difficult it was.”

Do you read magazines or newspapers?

Megan: “When I go to my parents’ house, I read the Wall Street Journal. But it’s expensive. I read the New York Times online.”

Benjamin: “At our school, they give the New York Times and USA Today away for free; when I go, I always pick them up. But I get most of my news from the radio.”

Do you talk to your friends about reading?

Megan: “We have a book club. We talk about what we liked and didn’t like, what spoke to us. A lot of times, after you read a book, you want to comment on it. If someone else has read it, it’s fun to bounce ideas off of each other.”

Benjamin: “I talk to my mom a lot. She’s a big reader, and I inherited my Brautigan books from her. I tend to automatically have respect for her opinion about a lot of things, though I’m sure there are some things we’ve disagreed on.”

Name: Megan Jones and Benjamin Inouye | Age: 22 and 24, respectively | Occupation: Graduate students
Neighborhood: Mission Valley and East Village | Where interviewed: 5th Avenue Books, Hillcrest

More from SDReader

More from the web

Comments

David Dodd Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:45 p.m.

"Why don't you teach lit, gringo? All ya needs is a masters degree."

Eh. It's been bantered around. I would be horrible, honestly. I mean, here I bash Nabokov, and admit that I have issues with Hemingway (I think I gave him one too many M's up there in a previous post). I think that students deserve a prof with a little less bias than I have.

That, and the little effing bastards should have to read the same effing crap I had to read! Like Fitzgerald, (ooh! what an effing genious HE was! He was a drunk who could only manage to write five novels in his whole miserable life!), or Faulkner (another effing drunk! He must have been passed the hell out when he wrote "As I Lay Dying", what a piece of crap THAT was!).

I wouldn't wish that one anyone, AG. I'd make a really bad teacher.

0

CuddleFish Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:46 p.m.

Anyway, Hemingway is so overdone. Anybody want to talk about Carver? If I could write like anybody, it would be Carver.

0

David Dodd Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:52 p.m.

I have read very little Carver Ms. Fish. I presume your talking about Raymond. I think I read a short one time from "Cathedral".

He wrote no novels that I know of...

0

Fred Williams Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:53 p.m.

A lot of Nabokov is tedious reading...except the book Pale Fire, which I found stunningly inventive and interesting, even though the format is totally strange. The long poem in the middle I especially admire: "I was the shadow of the waxwing slain, by the false azure of the window pane."

I'm reading Pynchon's Mason and Dixon now, and finding it mostly dull, convoluted, and self-indulgent, but (occasionally) brilliant.

I can't stand Jane Austin. Her stuff just gets on my nerves. A bunch of self-obsessed social climbers nattering on about their maneuverings...ugh.

The best author writing today, in my never humble opinion, is Neil Stephenson. When you see how many inventions were spurred by his sci-fi novel Snow Crash, (Google Earth, Second Life, et alia), or enjoy his history of the invention of modern finance and cryptography in System of the World, or take the time to understand the ideas in his latest book Anathema, (i.e. long-term versus short-term thinking), it's easy to be impressed with this guy.

0

David Dodd Sept. 28, 2009 @ 11:09 p.m.

Fred, I think you mean "Neal", right? Yes, he's an interesting dude. I keep reading about science fiction about to become a dead genre, but I don't think so. It's a great vehicle. I've never read him, but I'll look for something my next trip across the border. I'm out of books :(

0

CuddleFish Sept. 29, 2009 @ 12:55 a.m.

I can't stand Jane Austin. Her stuff just gets on my nerves. A bunch of self-obsessed social climbers nattering on about their maneuverings...ugh.

Don't know anything about a Jane Austin. But the Jane Austen I have read is brilliant.

That, and the little effing bastards should have to read the same effing crap I had to read!


LOL! And love Fitzgerald and Faulkner!

I have read very little Carver Ms. Fish. I presume your talking about Raymond. I think I read a short one time from "Cathedral".

He wrote no novels that I know of...

By refriedgringo 10:52 p.m., Sep 28, 2009

That's the fellow. Short stories and poems. Tried to write a novel once, was dreck. You probably read, or saw the movie, A Small Good Thing (Altman), formerly called The Bath.


SD puhleeeeze don't talk about Second Life here, I come here to get away from all of that! :)

0

David Dodd Sept. 28, 2009 @ 8:49 p.m.

I own no Nabokov. Nor do I own a library card. And I haven't read Lolita nor Gravity's Rainbow in well over twenty years. But I'll give it a shot, and I will, if necessary, check out both books from anyone foolish enough to issue me a card that allows me to transport borrowed books into a foreign country ;)

0

CuddleFish Sept. 29, 2009 @ 12:59 a.m.

To Austen for a minute, SD: I know a lot of people, probably most critics, think Mansfield Park is her best work. I've read all of them, many a time, and yes Mansfield Park is brilliant, but Pride and Prejudice is perfect.

0

CuddleFish Sept. 28, 2009 @ 8:57 p.m.

Golly, hard to believe refried really wrote this:

"I see [Nabakov] as that reporter who champions the rapist and casts humiliation on the victim."

By refriedgringo 11:27 p.m., Sep 27, 2009

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 11:25 p.m.

Fred, the poetry in Pale Fire is meant to be bad, and is :)

0

David Dodd Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:04 p.m.

The critics at the time were far less generous to Nabokov than I was, Ms. Fish.

0

antigeekess Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:11 p.m.

Fishy found something fishy:

"Golly, hard to believe refried really wrote this:

"I see [Nabakov] as that reporter who champions the rapist and casts humiliation on the victim.""

Really? Refried is a father of beautiful young daughters.

Mystery solved?

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:17 p.m.

To keep it fair, I will consult no criticism, refried. Just the texts in question--which are freshest in your mind?

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:18 p.m.

Oh, and just a debate on the merits of Nabokov--I prefer not to have to revisit Pynchon, though I have read Gravity's Rainbow and Vineland. Unless you insist :)

0

CuddleFish Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:22 p.m.

Really? Refried is a father of beautiful young daughters.

Mystery solved?


No, actually, since those aren't the terms even he would use as a basis to explain his statement.

Refriedgringo strikes me as a man of unusual intelligence. To reduce Lolita the way he pretends to do doesn't make sense, unless he's pulling our leg.

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 11:27 p.m.

I am going to save my best 'stuff' for the upcoming Nabokov debate, but will comb back through this thread now, to touch on some interesting points made by all.

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:27 p.m.

Fish, well said. And it will be like candy from a baby :)

0

CuddleFish Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:28 p.m.

You go, girl!! xxxxx

Lovin' the refried, but he is so not gonna win this argument!

0

nan shartel Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:34 p.m.

this summer I've been writing a book to be read by CHICK LITS...but it spilled over into Autumn and now i have to figure out a new recipe for Pumpkin soup that doesn't duplicate Cinderella in a thong

don't tell anyone but i have read Anais Nin and drooled

bad nan..very bad nan..refried beautiful daughters hide your eyes!!

0

SDaniels Sept. 29, 2009 @ 5:32 p.m.

You'll have to wait a little longer, Fishikins. I've been kinda sick, and am trying to catch up on grading work. I also have to write my contribution to the love affair with a celeb theme. I'll try to get down to the public library tomorrow or the next day, as I cannot find my copy of Lolita on these disorganized shelves. For good measure, I'll pick up a few major Nabokovs. It'll be fun :)

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:44 p.m.

"and now i have to figure out a new recipe for Pumpkin soup that doesn't duplicate Cinderella in a thong"

hehehehhee!!

0

David Dodd Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:51 p.m.

No, you are all three correct. It isn't that I dislike Nabokov (heck, I never really knew him!), it is that I don't trust him. His prose is so eloquent, like how those high-class joints in the Gaslamp District put out the plastic food that makes your mouth water, but it isn't at all what they serve, is it? Perhaps it's our (obviously bound-to-be-different) definition of love, but mine has nothing to do with obligation, guilt, obsession, subservience, and on and on.

And, in good fashion, everyone of consequence dies in the end, so, you know, no loose ends to clean up there!

There are three elements to the perfect gringo novel. First, have a story. Second, have some characters I can root for. Third, write some bitchen prose. Nabokov completely failed in point number two, and barely gets a passing grade in point number one. Yeah, hell, he wrote circles around Hemmingway, but when I parted the buns of literary substance, there was no beef, no lettuce, no tomato, no cheese.

It was a story about two perverted men wanting to win the attention of the quintessential young virgin. No effing thanks :)

0

SDaniels Sept. 29, 2009 @ 12:05 a.m.

Fred:

So I am not the hugest fan of cyberpunk, but would like to read Stephenson's Cryptonomicon, for love of the crypt(ic) and the idea of code--these stemming from a love of these themes in Freud and Derrida. Isn't Stephenson grandfatherly to cyberpunk as Bradbury would be to sci-fi? Dunno, not my area.

As for Pynchon, enough said: "dull, convoluted, and self-indulgent, but (occasionally) brilliant." He tries way too hard, and this is coming from a fan of fiction of high artifice, like the Decadents.

0

CuddleFish Sept. 28, 2009 @ 9:59 p.m.

There's no comparison to be made between Hemingway and Nabokov, except that they were both immensely gifted writers. Why are we talking about Hemingway???

LOL First you say there is no story and then you tell us there is a story, it just isn't to your liking.

My dear gringo, there is a story, a love story. There are characters to root for, namely, Humbert and Lolita. And three, we agree, superb prose writing.

0

David Dodd Sept. 29, 2009 @ 12:10 a.m.

SD & Fred: Apparently, Stephenson has an amazing track record of accuracy in his futuristic predictions. It's interesting that I just received a message from a friend about him (no one we know). Small world? Now I HAVE to read him...

0

SDaniels Sept. 29, 2009 @ 12:14 a.m.

Gringo: It's hard to understand how you are such a fan of Bukowski, yet can't stand Burroughs. Explain yourself, sir.

I shall drub you thoroughly later in the week re: Nabokov. You have apparently missed the major metaphorical conceits of Lolita.

Fred: "Jane Austin... A bunch of self-obsessed social climbers nattering on about their maneuverings..."

Ah, but if you can look at the structure of her work... A lot of folk think Emily Dickinson is just about bees and butterflies--and even god--until they realize the razor sharp and dizzying scope of her philosophical wanderings. She figured out Kant before Kant. That is how I feel about Austin--she's like a steel trap, but you have to be willing to enter this structure for a bit, and look around at it. If you like the potential to exploit concepts related to computers and the info age, Jane Austin is to 19th-century social structure what these cyberpunks and postcybers are to Second Life and the vast metaphor of the network.

0

CuddleFish Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:04 p.m.

And by the way, Lolita was not a virgin. She goes out of her way to make that clear to Humbert. He states that SHE seduced HIM. He also discloses in the book, as I recall, that she has an I.Q. of 153. I realize that as a narrator he is unreliable, and highly compromised. But it is hard to believe Humbert would not have prefered her to be a virgin, so I tend to believe his version.

0

SDaniels Sept. 29, 2009 @ 12:18 a.m.

nan: You met Tom Robbins? Had sex with him? I think we know what your next blog is going to concern--or should, lady! For the record, I do like Robbins. Still Life With Woodpecker springs to mind--great fun. I just don't think he stands out as better than really good mass consumption stuff--like David Lodge.

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 3:52 p.m.

Ennio Morricone spaghetti Western soundtracks, tiki! Rocks!

re: #17: Where's my closeup, Mr. DeMille? :)

0

SDaniels Sept. 29, 2009 @ 12:20 a.m.

refried: It makes no sense that you would not read Carver. I am still scratching my head over that one. Your inclinations would seem to naturally lead you to him. Of course, we mentioned the whole issue with Lish a few months ago--which may be the reason you don't want to read 'him?'

0

SDaniels Sept. 27, 2009 @ 8:50 p.m.

We don't need any more like this guy, SurfP. Bo-ring. Funnier are probably the key phrases on Amazon for this book:

Key Phrases: old redneck, random girl, Married Girl, Baby Dolls...

Hey Fishy, probably P&P.

I would also disagree with "Benjamin" above, who thinks Edward Abbey's Monkey Wrench Gang is a great read. That book is pretty bad. Desert Solitaire, on the other hand, has beautiful imagery and style.

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 3:54 p.m.

Whoa, nellie. I'd best not be the rattlesnake in this scenario, AG. [bassoon on soundtrack rises: Whahh whahhh whahhhhnnn].

0

David Dodd Sept. 27, 2009 @ 9:18 p.m.

I really wanted to like Brautigan, but I couldn't. There was some genius there, but it's almost like he denied it, kept pushing it down. My ex-wife loved him. She's a psycho. 1 + 1 = 2? Apparently. He blew his brains out in some old shack in California and they didn't discover the body for over a month.

I wasn't surprised when I read his obituary.

Nabokov was another one. Brilliance upended by the author himself. You can read Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow" and get enough high dosages of Vladimir to last a lifetime. Plenty of sympathy for the antagonist(s). Plenty of heros to hate.

On the positive side, I am always encouraged and happy to see that people still read. Even if I don't agree with their literary tastes, it gives me a warm fuzzy :)

0

Joe Poutous Sept. 28, 2009 @ 4:18 p.m.

SD if you dig that - try and find a copy of "For A Few Guitars More"

Surf guitar band covers of spaghetti western themes... way rad.

  • Joe
0

SDaniels Sept. 29, 2009 @ 1:59 a.m.

Thanks for the typo correction, Fishikins. Several of us should be shot on sight for it. Luckily, no one can see us :) I have not read Mansfield Park, but like P&P for its dead-sharp construction. Speaking of baths, reminds me: Did you know she had an unfinished novel set at an English spa (as in taking the waters, mineral)? Wasn't very good, and have forgotten the name.

refried, I like the pilot analogy. Burroughs was quite a cut-up, wasn't he? [Ah, nooooo, she didn't!] I know little about him, and nothing about the Mexico link. Tell?

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 4:30 p.m.

I will order it forthwith, Joe! Believe it or not, a good friend used to build flotation (sensory deprivation) tanks, and when not listening to language tapes on the underwater speakers, I'd pop in Morricone's greatest hits :)

0

David Dodd Sept. 29, 2009 @ 12:36 a.m.

Well, SD, in aviation terms, you can call Bukowski an aviator and Burroughs a test pilot. Bukowski wanted to write, and he wrote what he knew, and some of it was ugly. Burroughs knew better (his family actually had some money). Burroughs wrote ugly because he wanted to write ugly. He wanted to drive that jet into the ground!

You are aware that Burroughs has a quite precarious Mexico link?

I love Bukowski because I think he is honest. I have a probelm with Burroughs because I think it's an excuse.

My opinion. Anyone who loves "Naked Lunch", good for you. I didn't. I agree with those who thought it as an attempt at doing nothing more than to test censorship.

0

SDaniels Sept. 27, 2009 @ 10:52 p.m.

Gringo erred:

"Nabokov was another one. Brilliance upended by the author himself. You can read Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow" and get enough high dosages of Vladimir to last a lifetime."

What!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

0

SDaniels Sept. 27, 2009 @ 10:55 p.m.

Pynchon can never ever ever touch Nabokov. I've never heard the most rabid of Pynchon fans dare make such a claim! I will dissert forth upon this topic, given enough time later in the week.

0

David Dodd Sept. 27, 2009 @ 11:04 p.m.

We're on, dearest. Nabokov, like Pynchon (I dislike both), gambled story-telling away in order to promote some sort of clever prosaic pointless lesson about our complete misunderstanding of humanity's mission. Pynchon was heavily influenced by Nabokov, that much is obvious. Less obvious was their disdain of the true hero. Writers have to give people someone to root for. Otherwise, what's the point?

0

CuddleFish Sept. 27, 2009 @ 11:07 p.m.

Are you kidding??? Nabokov wrote the definitive love story. Sheesh.

0

David Dodd Sept. 29, 2009 @ 12:44 a.m.

SD, I'll read Carver, he simply isn't very prodigious, literary-wise. I think he's written more poetry than fiction.

0

David Dodd Sept. 27, 2009 @ 11:27 p.m.

Shakespeare wrote the ultimate love story, Mz. Fish. "Lolita" is a book about obsession. It is a book that revolves around what we become when desire outflanks wisdom. I'm certainly happy (and quite respectful) that you and SD and many others saw Nabokov as a brilliant writer, but I see him as that reporter who champions the rapist and casts humiliation on the victim.

I didn't like W. S. Burroughs either, for the same reasons.

0

antigeekess Sept. 27, 2009 @ 11:30 p.m.

"Oh, shoot, did you meant AustIn, Texas, or AustEn, Jane? :P"

I definitely prefer Austin, Texas. :D

But don't say "shoot" there, Fishy! It could happen!

0

antigeekess Sept. 27, 2009 @ 11:37 p.m.

Gringo put forth:

"Shakespeare wrote the ultimate love story, Mz. Fish. "Lolita" is a book about obsession. It is a book that revolves around what we become when desire outflanks wisdom. I'm certainly happy (and quite respectful) that you and SD and many others saw Nabokov as a brilliant writer, but I see him as that reporter who champions the rapist and casts humiliation on the victim."

You know I don't read much fiction. But I did see Kubrick's Lolita:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056193/

Pretty pervy.

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 12:08 a.m.

Gringo smirked:

"We're on, dearest."

and missed:

"that reporter who champions the rapist and casts humiliation on the victim."

Oh, yes, we're on buddy boy. Just lemme get to the library and pick up what I don't have here, see :)

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 12:09 a.m.

and this from a Bukowski fan....ahhahgggggggggggg

0

antigeekess Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:11 p.m.

You people are going to make me read this, aren't you?

(It certainly has a lovely beginning, I must say...)

http://www.randomhouse.com/features/nabokov/lo_excerpt.html

0

David Dodd Sept. 28, 2009 @ 1:31 a.m.

Ah, but Bukowski was certainly an original Aqualung. Nabokov was not. Library-up ma'am. I'll stand pat with my failing memory ;) If that fails (at it has recently been prone to do), then I'll beg for either more time, or for bonus points on account of senility...

0

David Dodd Sept. 29, 2009 @ 2:15 a.m.

Okay, I'm about to go to bed, but Burroughs got arrested in Mexico City for MURDER! The story is long and, well, complicated, but he skipped (a la some-famous-film-director-we-all-know?). They wanted to incarcerate him for two years. He blames his writing genius on the murder.

Weird.

But true:)

0

antigeekess Sept. 28, 2009 @ 6:25 a.m.

SHOT #1: Blistering desert sun at midday.

SHOT #2: Extreme closeup of the Gringo's squinting eyes. Slow zoom out just far enough to reveal the cigarette dangling from his snarling lips...

SHOT #3: Rattlesnake, coiled to strike.

0

David Dodd Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:17 p.m.

I brought Hemmingway into this as an example of a great storyteller without the gift of prose. I think they were opposites. Nabokov went on and on, nothing succinct, everything drawn out, wonderfully, while Hemmingway... wrote...

Short. Sentences. I saw the Bull. The bull saw me. We Danced. Men drink and kill. Bulls are food. Blah.

If I taught literature, I would use neither as an example for what is good. Both are celebrated, but both were flawed. I totally appreciate anyone who enjoys either (I've read much more Hemmingway than Vlad), but I prefer the storyteller to the linguist. I want Mark Twain. I want Vonnegut. I want Saroyan and Bukowski and Steinbeck. I want Kingsolver and Matthiesson and Buckley and Robbins.

0

antigeekess Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:22 p.m.

Vlad the inhaler writes?

Oh, Nabokov. :)

Why don't you teach lit, gringo? All ya needs is a masters degree.

And, Robbins?

0

nan shartel Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:28 p.m.

ohhhhhhhhhhh my head hurts...i need to start over


You people are going to make me read this, aren't you?

(It certainly has a lovely beginning, I must say...)

http://www.randomhouse.com/features/nabo...

By antigeekess 10:11 p.m., Sep 28, 2009 > Report it


when you've gotten down to my minds simplicity level antigeekees explain it to me will ya hun

0

David Dodd Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:29 p.m.

Tom. Even Cowgirls Get The Blues. Still Life With Woodpecker. And so on.

I think he's brilliant. SD questions my taste ;)

0

nan shartel Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:37 p.m.

REfried...TOM ROBBINS...Holy Mother of God...now ya got my attention...and Another Roadside Attraction was the definative itinery for my hippie hearts pilgrimage thru the redwoods to ecstasy

i knew him when he lived in Laguna Beach...a lovely lad who didn't take himself too seriously and like sex after lunch as a writing break

0

CuddleFish Sept. 23, 2009 @ 3:42 p.m.

Which is your favorite Austin, SD? I can never decide ...

0

CuddleFish Sept. 23, 2009 @ 3:43 p.m.

Oh, shoot, did you meant AustIn, Texas, or AustEn, Jane? :P

0

nan shartel Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:41 p.m.

and Hemingway..the only really good book he wrote was "The Old Man and the Sea"

0

CuddleFish Sept. 28, 2009 @ 10:43 p.m.

Nan! Don't make me come over there and hurt you! :) xxx

0

CuddleFish Sept. 29, 2009 @ 9:57 a.m.

Well, I'm just now rising and shining, and to answer SD's question, I knew of the JA book, but haven't read it, I think it's part of a collection of stuff of hers they put out a few years ago, isn't it? I don't generally get into reading that deeply or extensively into people's unpublished work, lazy that way. Althought sometimes that stuff is fascinating. I have a book on Kurt Cobain's notebooks, it was really interesting.

0

antigeekess Sept. 28, 2009 @ 8:16 p.m.

"I'd best not be the rattlesnake in this scenario, AG."

Of course not, SuzAnnie. You're right here:

Now we finally know where your Francophilia had its origins.

:)

0

CuddleFish Sept. 29, 2009 @ 10:13 a.m.

I'm waiting for this, SD:

I shall drub you thoroughly later in the week re: Nabokov. You have apparently missed the major metaphorical conceits of Lolita.

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 8:27 p.m.

Darn! Not allowed to listen to the link right now, as someone is watching the Ken Burns special.

Francophile? Not totally, somewhat. One of the reasons? Some French family, bien sur. That is why it is funny when some jackoff tries to show you up as a hoity toit for speaking/being interested in another language. I'm sure that for total jackoffs, that reason is humble enough, and makes it "ok."

0

SDaniels Sept. 28, 2009 @ 8:30 p.m.

Rant over :) I expect we'll need "A Few Guitars More" playing as the showdown unfolds.

Uh, refried? Where are ya? We need ground rules for this type of thing, too. Such as: You HAVE to library-up too, pardner. You cannot have all your Nabokov in your head--unless you prefer to just be 'schooled' :)

0

antigeekess Sept. 28, 2009 @ 8:40 p.m.

"That is why it is funny when some jackoff tries to show you up as a hoity toit for speaking/being interested in another language. I'm sure that for total jackoffs, that reason is humble enough, and makes it "ok.""

I'm sure it's plenty reason enough for both partial and total jackoffs, as well as part-time, full-time, temporary and permanent ones.

:)

0

ReaderRabbit Dec. 9, 2009 @ 2:38 p.m.

I'm looking forward to Lorrie Moore's new book. She never disappoints.

Isn't Claire Messud supposed to have a new book out, too?

0

Sign in to comment