hey–sorry–i forgot to put the “space” up for blood and guts. oops.
This entry was posted on May 27, 2008 at 3:16 pm and is filed under Uncategorized . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
I guess I will post my questions here verses on the home page. I can’t seem to stay interested in this book. I was wondering if someone could give me some insight or a perspective to look at it from. I have only read up to when janey goes to new york and I don’t get it! I usually can find something about a book that I at least admire, but this one is difficult for me. I want to understand it so can someone help me? I am having a hard time believing the characters and grasping their thought and intention.
Wow, looks like I was not the only one who is late in posting. The end of the term is truly approaching. sadness! Anyway, to the post!
I did really like this book. I did not get to finish it, (busy, busy) but I do really like it. I got about halfway through, to where Janey is being taught how to be a whore against her will. It seems somewhat odd, but she really seems to be growing in that dark room. It’s like, since all of the BS that has been continually assaulting her (save for the whore practices) she actually has time to grow. She does not have her pedophile father screwing with her head, she does not have drugs warping her, and she has only herself. Without the other influences, she seems to be able to grow mentally. I wonder what is going to happen next.
As for ways to stay interested, I’m not really sure how to help you. I did not need to try to get interested, so, sorry Charina. I’m not sure how to help you. I wish I could, though. It really is a good book. The only way that I can think to explain it, is that Janey’s life is in chaos, so then the book is in chaos. Does that make sense? I hope that that somehow helps, though I am not sure how it can.
Man, it must really be dead week. Sorry more of us have not posted Lidia!
Sorry for the late-ness. I am about to genuinely go nuts because it is just that time of year. (or part of the term? Yeah. It’s week 9. UGH.)
I would get the strangest looks from my family when they read the blurb on the back of this book, some person that as interested in what book I was constantly pouring over. Heh.
So, oddly enough, this was one of the thinner books that we read, but it took me the longest to read. A week solid in fact, granted a lot of that was taking breaks because unless I’m in a specific mindset, I find that reading something by Kathy Acker takes mass amounts of concentration. This is not the kind of book that I want to read mindlessly only to find that I can hardly remember what happened later.
For Invisible Monsters, I drew a weird little chart displaying how all of the characters were connected. For this one, I drew a timeline from the beginning to the end of the book. I tried pretty hard to make it as detailed as possible, marking the different phases of Janey’s life in this book. The book as a whole was awesome, and the kind of mind trip that I have a hard time finding in books that aren’t by this author, but admittedly the diagram did make it a bit simpler & coherent to look back on.
Janey has so many reflections on things that are profound, even just her take on the subject of roads is definitely enough to make one think.
Pg. 94. The roads are our civilization. They’re the order men have improvised on chaos so that men’s lives can be safer and more secure.
Pg. 94. The roads are getting so super-paved and big and light and loaded with BIG MACS AND HOWARD JOHNSONS that the only time people are forced into danger or reality is when they die.
That one smells a bit of quantum physics.
Pg. 94. The government, the big multinational business men, the scholars and teachers, and the cops are the people who maintain the roads. The scientists, philosophers, and artists are the people who build the roads. Everyone’s a slave.
Pg. 95. Everyone I know lives on roads.
I loved what she had to say about writing.
p. 100. Writers create what they do out of their own frightful agony and blood and mushed-up guts and horrible mixed up insides. The more they are in touch with their insides the better they create.
The conversation between Mr. Blowjob and Mr. Fuckface on page 136 made me laugh really, REALLY hard. Satire has that tendency. She is blatantly making fun of the general way that people tend to treat language, as something uniform, precise and sacred. This talk made me laught because I have learned in a previous class just what this author’s take on language is, and she is a ROCKSTAR in my mind because of it.
So today was a generally epic fail on the count of being academic about it. It was really a rant. With quotes, because I took kickass notes. BWAHAHHAHAHA.
Ok I am not sure exactly what I want to say about the book so I’ll just start writing about it and see what comes out. I think this was by far the most difficult book to read out of the six we have read. I was constantly reminding myself to unclench my jaw as I was reading. I agree with Kelsie’s assertion that Janey’s life was in chaos so the book is too. I can also see what Charina is saying when she writes: “I am having a hard time believing the characters and grasping their thought and intention.” I thought Janey’s character in particular was very inconsistent, but when I pondered that thought for a while I came to the conclusion that the inconsistency, in my opinion, is fairly realistic. I know I am inconsistent. I know I have a hard time believing myself and grasping my thought and intention sometimes. I liked the part where Janey is working in the bakery in NY and all the holier-than-thou-hippies treat her like shit. I think anyone who has ever worked in customer service could relate to that bit. Reading the bits about “The Scarlett Letter” I decided I need to read that book. I thought that section had some great paragraphs. There are too many to list them all, but on I liked was: ” Hawthorne is a writer: Writers create what they do out of their own frightful agony and blood and mushed up guts and horrible mixed up insides. The more they are in touch with there insides the better they create. If you like a writer’s books read his books, the books aren’t pure suffering; if you want to publish/help the writer, do it business-like, but don’t get into the writer’s personal life thinking if you like the books you’ll like the writer. A writer’s personal life is horrible and lonely. Writers are queer so keep away from them.” I also liked the bit’s about society and the “roads” in that section. Anyway the politics o’ lit… I don’t know. I can see there are lots, but I don’t know how to tackle them. I thought this was interesting, “I’m to bruised and I’m scared. At this point in The Scarlett Letter and in my life the politics don’t disappear but take place inside my body.”
Before I post anything about Blood and Guts in High School: Since Alireza has no internet access, I’ve been commissioned to tell anyone who finished that packet he handed out to bring it to class tonight. Anyway, I’ll be back later to post about the book.
In response to Jodie, I feel exactly the same way, and also loved the quote about Hawthorne being a Writer, and the following lines. It was one of the few sections in the story I could actually relate to and understand.
I had picked up the book throughout the term, and tried to finish it over and over, and always felt like I must have forgotten something along the way. It is never a very good way to read a book, off and on, but this one seemed especially difficult. I wish I could put this more eloquently, but it is impossible…. This book simply made me feel weird. I wasn’t necessarily uncomfortable reading it, but I didn’t necessarily enjoy it either. It didn’t make me ‘think’ to much, but was confusing in other ways. I honestly feel that if I went back and read it again, which I plan on doing, I would not only understand it better, but also most likely gain an entirely different point of view. All in all, I don’t feel like it necessarily let me down, but instead left me hanging, and a bit more confused than when I began.
To be perfectly honest this book was the worst book i have ever read. I was not expecting to read or see the things i did. i got about half way through before i felt sick to my stomach and truthfully disgusted with the illustrations as well as story. Being only 18 and living a relatively sheltered life with limited sexual experience and have never been subjected to. this type of literature it made me feel extremely uncomfortable. i tried covering the images and trying to plug through the literature but found myself stopping and having to put the book down every 2 minutes. I remember lidia explaining the fact that
“several of you may experience the “alienated reader” effect. you know, when a book puts you as a reader in an uncomfortable, sometimes even antagonistic position while you are reading. when i first read this book i actually felt assaulted. so my question is, is there any value or point to that? are there any gains to be made by placing the reader there, as opposed to, say, placing the reader in the oprah sofa comfort zone?’
During the Jiri chronicles. and that. is more or less exactly how I felt while reading this book. It put me in an uncomfortable, antagonistic position and almost assaulted when i read it. I know many people can say she is an amazing writer but I dont understand why or what good writing in this style, using the overly sexual horrific nature of writing and on top of it all put illustrations that are unexpected and nasty. I guess I am not the intended audiance for this book, nor will I choose to read something like this again.
I can say with complete truth, that i could have gone my whole life without reading this book.
oooooo contoversy. I want to mediate the arm wrestling just kidding. Shayna: I think we must have posted at the same time because I didn’t see your post when i was posting. You quoted a bunch of the stuff I was thinking about quoting, but was too lazy to do so
The odd relations between Janey and her dad are extreme in their allegorical take on issues between the archetypal father and daughter. It is fascinating (and gutsy) that Janey (really symbolic of girls in a semi allegorical way) tries desperately to win her father’s love by appealing to him sexually. Is Acker suggesting that this is how most women try to appeal to men they want to love them? Clearly (sorry I can almost hear the class groaning at my apparent arrogance:P) in our society women are taught that being sexually appealing is the (only? maybe exaggerated but oh well) way to make men love you. The fact that she takes the (arguably most significant male/female relationship in culture) and not only sexualizes it but uses it to play out the (somewhat exaggerated) psycho-sexual development of women is fascinating. Satirizing the socialized (another never ending argument, but I believe nurture trumps nature) cultural response to feminine sexuality is spot on in this book.
As eluded to in previous posts this satirical look at the western psycho-sexual experience uses shocking imagery and alienation. It deals with sexual issues that no one wants to deal with but that do exist in reality. I would still argue that putting people off is not the best way to make them think, but that does not mean that I did not like this book. They are separate issues, I am allowed to like things that shock me as well as dislike things that shock me. I would also argue that in many ways this is similar to “The Ballad of Jack and Rose.” An (subjectively) great film that also deals with psycho-sexual daddy/daughter issues, but in a much less overtly shocking way that is therefore more accessible. Entirely accessible? hell no! Anytime an artist deals with female sexuality it is shocking.
Sex=consumerism is prevalent in the book as well as in the real world. Female sexuality is something that is often traded as a commodity and prized throughout the world. I would say the book deals to some extent with the power structure for women in regard to their sexuality within society. The essential reality that dudes will pay for sex with women gives women some sort of power, but that power is constantly undermined, primarily by the whore/virgin paradigm of femininity. Clearly (omg, will he stop saying clearly? no!) the patriarchy is scared shitless of female sexual power, the reasons which are enough to write a frickin sociological dissertation.
This book was a super hard read for me. I was instantly put off by its vuglarness. But I tried really hard and just kept plugging along hoping to reach a point where I felt justified in spending all this time. I was disappointed because as the average reader, I want a happy ending or at least something that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. WELL- this is NOT the book for you if that is what you expect or want.
As someone who has some weird daddy/daughter issues ( Although- just to clarify, I DON’T have sex with my dad or anything like that, he is just super controlling emotionally) I can relate a little to those aspects of the book. Although, thinking upon it, most women who have had fathers in their lives or maybe even not involved in their lives can relate to that.
Other things I could relate to where being a younger girl and just trying to find your self. and then finding your self and seeing that everything is just a sham, and so you try again. and get the same results, so you just keep changing your self based on your surroundings and then hopefully one day, all that pays off and all of it combines and comes together and poof! you are a person. But some people never get there and they just keep letting people control their lives and they keep changing based on what other people expect and want. I don’t know, maybe I am way off base, but thats what I feel about the book. ” I don’t even adore my emotions anymore. Whatever the fuck they are. Living locked-up in a slave traders room is easy. I mean you have the same emotions over and over again, the same thoughts, the same body, and after a while you see its all in your mind: you’re stuck to your mind. SLAVESLAVESSLAVE.”
This hamster like mentality is a very valid point! We are slaves to the society we live in, whether it be the t.v.’s we are chained too or the fashions, or the jobs or the family, or the $$ or a million other things that we are slaves too. Only we have locked ourselves up.
this was very rambling, but I think that is rather fitting to the style of this book!
May 27, 2008 at 4:51 pm
I guess I will post my questions here verses on the home page. I can’t seem to stay interested in this book. I was wondering if someone could give me some insight or a perspective to look at it from. I have only read up to when janey goes to new york and I don’t get it! I usually can find something about a book that I at least admire, but this one is difficult for me. I want to understand it so can someone help me? I am having a hard time believing the characters and grasping their thought and intention.
May 27, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Wow, looks like I was not the only one who is late in posting. The end of the term is truly approaching.
sadness! Anyway, to the post!
I did really like this book. I did not get to finish it, (busy, busy) but I do really like it. I got about halfway through, to where Janey is being taught how to be a whore against her will. It seems somewhat odd, but she really seems to be growing in that dark room. It’s like, since all of the BS that has been continually assaulting her (save for the whore practices) she actually has time to grow. She does not have her pedophile father screwing with her head, she does not have drugs warping her, and she has only herself. Without the other influences, she seems to be able to grow mentally. I wonder what is going to happen next.
As for ways to stay interested, I’m not really sure how to help you. I did not need to try to get interested, so, sorry Charina. I’m not sure how to help you. I wish I could, though. It really is a good book. The only way that I can think to explain it, is that Janey’s life is in chaos, so then the book is in chaos. Does that make sense? I hope that that somehow helps, though I am not sure how it can.
Man, it must really be dead week. Sorry more of us have not posted Lidia!
May 27, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Sorry for the late-ness. I am about to genuinely go nuts because it is just that time of year. (or part of the term? Yeah. It’s week 9. UGH.)
I would get the strangest looks from my family when they read the blurb on the back of this book, some person that as interested in what book I was constantly pouring over. Heh.
So, oddly enough, this was one of the thinner books that we read, but it took me the longest to read. A week solid in fact, granted a lot of that was taking breaks because unless I’m in a specific mindset, I find that reading something by Kathy Acker takes mass amounts of concentration. This is not the kind of book that I want to read mindlessly only to find that I can hardly remember what happened later.
For Invisible Monsters, I drew a weird little chart displaying how all of the characters were connected. For this one, I drew a timeline from the beginning to the end of the book. I tried pretty hard to make it as detailed as possible, marking the different phases of Janey’s life in this book. The book as a whole was awesome, and the kind of mind trip that I have a hard time finding in books that aren’t by this author, but admittedly the diagram did make it a bit simpler & coherent to look back on.
Janey has so many reflections on things that are profound, even just her take on the subject of roads is definitely enough to make one think.
Pg. 94. The roads are our civilization. They’re the order men have improvised on chaos so that men’s lives can be safer and more secure.
Pg. 94. The roads are getting so super-paved and big and light and loaded with BIG MACS AND HOWARD JOHNSONS that the only time people are forced into danger or reality is when they die.
That one smells a bit of quantum physics.
Pg. 94. The government, the big multinational business men, the scholars and teachers, and the cops are the people who maintain the roads. The scientists, philosophers, and artists are the people who build the roads. Everyone’s a slave.
Pg. 95. Everyone I know lives on roads.
I loved what she had to say about writing.
p. 100. Writers create what they do out of their own frightful agony and blood and mushed-up guts and horrible mixed up insides. The more they are in touch with their insides the better they create.
The conversation between Mr. Blowjob and Mr. Fuckface on page 136 made me laugh really, REALLY hard. Satire has that tendency. She is blatantly making fun of the general way that people tend to treat language, as something uniform, precise and sacred. This talk made me laught because I have learned in a previous class just what this author’s take on language is, and she is a ROCKSTAR in my mind because of it.
So today was a generally epic fail on the count of being academic about it. It was really a rant. With quotes, because I took kickass notes. BWAHAHHAHAHA.
May 27, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Ok I am not sure exactly what I want to say about the book so I’ll just start writing about it and see what comes out. I think this was by far the most difficult book to read out of the six we have read. I was constantly reminding myself to unclench my jaw as I was reading. I agree with Kelsie’s assertion that Janey’s life was in chaos so the book is too. I can also see what Charina is saying when she writes: “I am having a hard time believing the characters and grasping their thought and intention.” I thought Janey’s character in particular was very inconsistent, but when I pondered that thought for a while I came to the conclusion that the inconsistency, in my opinion, is fairly realistic. I know I am inconsistent. I know I have a hard time believing myself and grasping my thought and intention sometimes. I liked the part where Janey is working in the bakery in NY and all the holier-than-thou-hippies treat her like shit. I think anyone who has ever worked in customer service could relate to that bit. Reading the bits about “The Scarlett Letter” I decided I need to read that book. I thought that section had some great paragraphs. There are too many to list them all, but on I liked was: ” Hawthorne is a writer: Writers create what they do out of their own frightful agony and blood and mushed up guts and horrible mixed up insides. The more they are in touch with there insides the better they create. If you like a writer’s books read his books, the books aren’t pure suffering; if you want to publish/help the writer, do it business-like, but don’t get into the writer’s personal life thinking if you like the books you’ll like the writer. A writer’s personal life is horrible and lonely. Writers are queer so keep away from them.” I also liked the bit’s about society and the “roads” in that section. Anyway the politics o’ lit… I don’t know. I can see there are lots, but I don’t know how to tackle them. I thought this was interesting, “I’m to bruised and I’m scared. At this point in The Scarlett Letter and in my life the politics don’t disappear but take place inside my body.”
May 27, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Before I post anything about Blood and Guts in High School: Since Alireza has no internet access, I’ve been commissioned to tell anyone who finished that packet he handed out to bring it to class tonight. Anyway, I’ll be back later to post about the book.
May 27, 2008 at 11:09 pm
In response to Jodie, I feel exactly the same way, and also loved the quote about Hawthorne being a Writer, and the following lines. It was one of the few sections in the story I could actually relate to and understand.
I had picked up the book throughout the term, and tried to finish it over and over, and always felt like I must have forgotten something along the way. It is never a very good way to read a book, off and on, but this one seemed especially difficult. I wish I could put this more eloquently, but it is impossible…. This book simply made me feel weird. I wasn’t necessarily uncomfortable reading it, but I didn’t necessarily enjoy it either. It didn’t make me ‘think’ to much, but was confusing in other ways. I honestly feel that if I went back and read it again, which I plan on doing, I would not only understand it better, but also most likely gain an entirely different point of view. All in all, I don’t feel like it necessarily let me down, but instead left me hanging, and a bit more confused than when I began.
May 28, 2008 at 12:21 am
To be perfectly honest this book was the worst book i have ever read. I was not expecting to read or see the things i did. i got about half way through before i felt sick to my stomach and truthfully disgusted with the illustrations as well as story. Being only 18 and living a relatively sheltered life with limited sexual experience and have never been subjected to. this type of literature it made me feel extremely uncomfortable. i tried covering the images and trying to plug through the literature but found myself stopping and having to put the book down every 2 minutes. I remember lidia explaining the fact that
“several of you may experience the “alienated reader” effect. you know, when a book puts you as a reader in an uncomfortable, sometimes even antagonistic position while you are reading. when i first read this book i actually felt assaulted. so my question is, is there any value or point to that? are there any gains to be made by placing the reader there, as opposed to, say, placing the reader in the oprah sofa comfort zone?’
During the Jiri chronicles. and that. is more or less exactly how I felt while reading this book. It put me in an uncomfortable, antagonistic position and almost assaulted when i read it. I know many people can say she is an amazing writer but I dont understand why or what good writing in this style, using the overly sexual horrific nature of writing and on top of it all put illustrations that are unexpected and nasty. I guess I am not the intended audiance for this book, nor will I choose to read something like this again.
I can say with complete truth, that i could have gone my whole life without reading this book.
May 28, 2008 at 12:32 am
ARM WRESTLING IS IN STORE!
May 28, 2008 at 12:40 am
oooooo contoversy. I want to mediate the arm wrestling
just kidding. Shayna: I think we must have posted at the same time because I didn’t see your post when i was posting. You quoted a bunch of the stuff I was thinking about quoting, but was too lazy to do so 
May 28, 2008 at 1:04 am
The odd relations between Janey and her dad are extreme in their allegorical take on issues between the archetypal father and daughter. It is fascinating (and gutsy) that Janey (really symbolic of girls in a semi allegorical way) tries desperately to win her father’s love by appealing to him sexually. Is Acker suggesting that this is how most women try to appeal to men they want to love them? Clearly (sorry I can almost hear the class groaning at my apparent arrogance:P) in our society women are taught that being sexually appealing is the (only? maybe exaggerated but oh well) way to make men love you. The fact that she takes the (arguably most significant male/female relationship in culture) and not only sexualizes it but uses it to play out the (somewhat exaggerated) psycho-sexual development of women is fascinating. Satirizing the socialized (another never ending argument, but I believe nurture trumps nature) cultural response to feminine sexuality is spot on in this book.
As eluded to in previous posts this satirical look at the western psycho-sexual experience uses shocking imagery and alienation. It deals with sexual issues that no one wants to deal with but that do exist in reality. I would still argue that putting people off is not the best way to make them think, but that does not mean that I did not like this book. They are separate issues, I am allowed to like things that shock me as well as dislike things that shock me. I would also argue that in many ways this is similar to “The Ballad of Jack and Rose.” An (subjectively) great film that also deals with psycho-sexual daddy/daughter issues, but in a much less overtly shocking way that is therefore more accessible. Entirely accessible? hell no! Anytime an artist deals with female sexuality it is shocking.
Sex=consumerism is prevalent in the book as well as in the real world. Female sexuality is something that is often traded as a commodity and prized throughout the world. I would say the book deals to some extent with the power structure for women in regard to their sexuality within society. The essential reality that dudes will pay for sex with women gives women some sort of power, but that power is constantly undermined, primarily by the whore/virgin paradigm of femininity. Clearly (omg, will he stop saying clearly? no!) the patriarchy is scared shitless of female sexual power, the reasons which are enough to write a frickin sociological dissertation.
May 28, 2008 at 1:06 am
yes, jodie, proofreading blog entries is a good idea, as I learned with this one.
May 28, 2008 at 4:29 am
jesse morris, I haven’t even finished reading your blog yet but you are such a bad-ass lit snob, I am seriously misty eyed.
May 29, 2008 at 6:56 pm
This book was a super hard read for me. I was instantly put off by its vuglarness. But I tried really hard and just kept plugging along hoping to reach a point where I felt justified in spending all this time. I was disappointed because as the average reader, I want a happy ending or at least something that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. WELL- this is NOT the book for you if that is what you expect or want.
As someone who has some weird daddy/daughter issues ( Although- just to clarify, I DON’T have sex with my dad or anything like that, he is just super controlling emotionally) I can relate a little to those aspects of the book. Although, thinking upon it, most women who have had fathers in their lives or maybe even not involved in their lives can relate to that.
Other things I could relate to where being a younger girl and just trying to find your self. and then finding your self and seeing that everything is just a sham, and so you try again. and get the same results, so you just keep changing your self based on your surroundings and then hopefully one day, all that pays off and all of it combines and comes together and poof! you are a person. But some people never get there and they just keep letting people control their lives and they keep changing based on what other people expect and want. I don’t know, maybe I am way off base, but thats what I feel about the book. ” I don’t even adore my emotions anymore. Whatever the fuck they are. Living locked-up in a slave traders room is easy. I mean you have the same emotions over and over again, the same thoughts, the same body, and after a while you see its all in your mind: you’re stuck to your mind. SLAVESLAVESSLAVE.”
This hamster like mentality is a very valid point! We are slaves to the society we live in, whether it be the t.v.’s we are chained too or the fashions, or the jobs or the family, or the $$ or a million other things that we are slaves too. Only we have locked ourselves up.
this was very rambling, but I think that is rather fitting to the style of this book!