The most notable thing about this book is that I enjoyed it most when I wasn't reading it. I'd put it down and reflect happily on Toole's base, onanistic, and utterly absurd characters, dreaming of how I could incorporate more of their attributes into my own life in a vague attempt at self-improvement. That was my favorite part. Perhaps part of this is due to the fact that I read the first 200 pages in a darkened room lying in bed next to a very sick and hungover boyfriend. This book is extremely appropriate for such times.
In short, A Confederacy of Dunces is set in New Orleans in the early sixties. It's about the bizarre escapades of a certain questionably sane, morbidly obese, highly educated (Medieval studies major) Ignatius C Reilly, who had peacefully coexisted with his mother until she drunkenly drives into a building and suddenly owes a thousand dollars. They aren't financially well-off, so Ignatius finds himself faced with the challenge of getting a job. Hilarity ensues.
Lurking beneath the hilarity are some very well-drawn characters who embody various issues present in the sixties: the red scare, civil rights, various liberations, etc. Despite the setback of being a Pulitzer-prizewinner, the book doesn't preach, and it doesn't really say anything about the human condition. It was initially rejected by Simon and Schuster for "not being about anything." If you read the forward, you'll get a sense of how autobiographical the story probably was. At the very least, it's like viewing New Orleans forty-five years ago through a window that selectively magnifies absurdity.
Some people have protested the book on the basis that the characters are not likable, but if you ban books containing dislikable characters, you'd lose a lot of good stories. And, in a way, the characters are actually quite likable, once you decide to give them a chance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm not quite sure if you liked the book or not - are the likable characters enough to carry the novel or should I just pass?
I would give it a chance--the book is not annoying to read, the author isn't preachy or trying too hard to be funny or insightful. but it is character-driven, so if you don't find them engaging (which is a matter of taste) then you won't like the book.
I liked the characters :)
I absolutely loved this book-- read it in a matter of days and laughed insanely most of the time.
Ignatius is not terribly likable, but he's a GOOD character, and that trumps likable-but-bad characters any day. Moreover, he's basically the fullest realization of the impulse that everyone carries which tells them they are right about everything all the time. But while most people are willing to give other viewpoints a try, or at least admit that valid reasons exist for believing other things, Ignatius refuses anything but his self-imposed vision of the world. And, to quote the review, hilarity ensues.
I actually thought the book said quite a lot about the human condition, aside from being damn entertaining at the same time. Read it for the humor, for the characters, for the social commentary, or for the setting. But read it.
Post a Comment