Sot-Weed

[Ian Livingston]

I liked Barth when I was twenty-something. Don't think I could do him
again after reading some of his theory. Besides, I've long since worn
out the jokes in the re-telling during that phase of life. Of all, I
remember Chimera most fondly, pretty much for the reasons Mark already
mentioned.


On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 7:40 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm a latter reader of Giles. I was dumbfounded by my not being moved, or
> even mused much.
> This does not make me likely to go for the auible...
>
>
> On Saturday, February 4, 2012, Krafft, John M. <krafftjm at muohio.edu> wrote:
>> I should probably stay out of this: why dis other peple's idea of fun? But
>> ...
>>
>> Way back when I was just getting into Pynchon, the big guys claimed Barth
>> was the real thing, an intellectual('s) novelist, unlike Pynchon. I found
>> Barth intriguing, challenging, often funny, but often smug and tedious. (Can
>> anybody read Goat-Boy these days? Maybe: I admit I haven't since 1973 and
>> don't intend to.) When M&D came out, several reviewers complained that we
>> didn't need Pynchon's go at something Barth had done better a generation
>> earlier. So I reread (even taught!) Sot-Weed, and was ... disappointed. How
>> could I ever have found all those fart jokes and rape jokes amusing? I still
>> occasionally think about possibly doing something with Letters someday, but
>> maybe it won't reread well either.
>>
>> John
>>
>>



-- 
"Less than any man have I  excuse for prejudice; and I feel for all
creeds the warm sympathy of one who has come to learn that even the
trust in reason is a precarious faith, and that we are all fragments
of darkness groping for the sun. I know no more about the ultimates
than the simplest urchin in the streets." -- Will Durant