Still recovering from Poland so no time to really think through a good post so this just some ideas about the latest book I’m trying. Confederacy of Dunces was recommended to me by a number of friends, called a modern classic on some sites, and received pretty only praise for it’s wit, writing, and humor on Good Reads. So an hour in(I’m doing it on audiobook, like everything I read now) I’m quite confused at what feels like a pointless boring and amateurish novel. Is is possible the readers poor handling of female voices and emotional intonation are detracting from the book? Yup of course, but good prose should still work through a poor voice. Is it possible the bumbling rudeness of Ignacious only becomes funny as it becomes more apparent how ridiculous it is? Sure, but it seems that every character introduced so far is equally foolish and for the most part quite unrealistic. Is it possible there is sharpness that’s too subtle for me to catch or could it be one needs a greater knowledge of the American South in the 60’s to really understand the comentary? Yup but when I’m 10% through I book I think it’s not to much to expect a humorist to have a line or two that transcend time and culture. Or at least the minor differences of 50 years and 1000 miles.
I’m going to keep reading for now, but I don’t expect much to improve and doubt I’ll end up finishing this modern classic. Guess I’m not cut out for literatutre