Hey TL, I just want to write a quick blog on reading Proust's Remembrance of Things Past and how my plan for my summer reading has changed slightly.
I can't actually read Proust it seems. I started off Volume one of the three volume series that is the entirety of one book, and I got lost. It didn't take long at all for me to get lost either. I started out the first 30 pages or so and I was bored to tears. I decided to continue reading in the hopes that the book would get better, It did. Unfortunately, even though the book became more interesting, it never became any easier to read. I now see why Proust was second on the French list, his book is a slow read, a contemplative one; it rewards the slow reader who can pick up and understand all the nuances of the billion plus two adjectives he uses to describe everything young Proust sees.
The beginning of the book was the start of my troubles, I'd already wasted four days on just attempting to understand the first one tenth of the book, but the first day was the worst by far. I read about 31 pages, and none of it was fun. I'm used to a boring beginning at this point, but Proust took it to a new level. He spent 30 pages describing to me how much he longed to have his mother give him a goodnight kiss, and the intrigue and deception he had to construct to get his way. He describes his grandparents, his parents, and of course M. Swann (whom the title is about for Swann's Way) in no short detail. He goes on for ages, hours, almost years, intricately describing the subtleties of their characters, honestly to the point of my boredom, with no true lack for commas, and with what seemed like no real sentence structure outside of his love for commas, except for his use of conjunctions and then not ending the sentences with them. /Rant.
I actually do appreciate the work though. Proust seems to be one of the pre-Modernists, his book, though it has its uptight text moments like any author from the late 1800's, looks like a proto-type of the french modernism that would come around the turn of the century. His text, even though it can be boring at times, is gorgeous. The man can write, and his descriptions and analyses of the people around him make the characters seem more human than almost any other book I've ever read. He's exhaustive, but really he is sculpting the character in the reader's mind, and that isn't just a skill, that's a master's work. I'm going to come back to this book, when I have the time to read slowly, and the reading skills to understand what Proust is saying. I can read this book as fast as I read any other, but I can't read it and understand as fast as I read any other. I need to read the books slowly, and this summer is not the time for that, after I move into college, when reading/writing become my second or third priorities, then I'm going to take the book on. Until then, I'm going to build myself up. I'm defeated, but only for now.
Thanks for reading guys. If you guys have ever read Swann's Way or the rest of the books in Remembrance of Things Past, please tell me how you got through it.
On June 10 2013 03:17 AiurZ wrote: i dont think people actually read proust
it seems insane to me to want to read proust.
i think i read an article on the internet about not being about to read proust.
I can't fucking do it man, like. I don't understand how someone has the reading level to actually read this book and not be so extraordinarily confused to the point they don't understand 3/4 of the page.
i googled something like "how to read proust" and i read an article that said you should just read it as fast as you can, and that eventually all of the digressions etc. become your own and you don't even have to read it, or something
I haven't read Proust, but wait until you get to Ulysses. I could read Finnegan's Wake, but Ulysses felt like a brick wall. At least it's the opposite with regards to commas!
On June 10 2013 05:48 TheTenthDoc wrote: I haven't read Proust, but wait until you get to Ulysses. I could read Finnegan's Wake, but Ulysses felt like a brick wall. At least it's the opposite with regards to commas!
I'm literally putting all of In Remembrance of Things Past and Ulysses on the list of, "Shit I want to read, but not until the end of this summer/beginning of college" because I want to get a lot of reading done and I'm not going to hold myself up dealing with a never ending stream of commas. Also, I really enjoyed One Hundred Years of Solitude and the magical surrealism style of the book, so I'm looking to learn how to write fiction similar to that with a newer style, rather than deal with antiquated, but beloved, styles I can't use as a writer.
On June 10 2013 05:22 AiurZ wrote: i googled something like "how to read proust" and i read an article that said you should just read it as fast as you can, and that eventually all of the digressions etc. become your own and you don't even have to read it, or something
I heard that if you read Proust fast enough, it's almost like you're not reading Proust at all.
On June 10 2013 03:17 AiurZ wrote: i dont think people actually read proust
it seems insane to me to want to read proust.
i think i read an article on the internet about not being about to read proust.
I can't fucking do it man, like. I don't understand how someone has the reading level to actually read this book and not be so extraordinarily confused to the point they don't understand 3/4 of the page.
On June 10 2013 01:44 docvoc wrote: He describes his grandparents, his parents, and of course M. Swann (whom the title is about for Swann's Way) in no short detail. He goes on for ages, hours, almost years, intricately describing the subtleties of their characters, honestly to the point of my boredom, with no true lack for commas, and with what seemed like no real sentence structure outside of his love for commas, except for his use of conjunctions and then not ending the sentences with them. /Rant.
On June 10 2013 03:17 AiurZ wrote: i dont think people actually read proust
it seems insane to me to want to read proust.
i think i read an article on the internet about not being about to read proust.
I can't fucking do it man, like. I don't understand how someone has the reading level to actually read this book and not be so extraordinarily confused to the point they don't understand 3/4 of the page.
On June 10 2013 01:44 docvoc wrote: He describes his grandparents, his parents, and of course M. Swann (whom the title is about for Swann's Way) in no short detail. He goes on for ages, hours, almost years, intricately describing the subtleties of their characters, honestly to the point of my boredom, with no true lack for commas, and with what seemed like no real sentence structure outside of his love for commas, except for his use of conjunctions and then not ending the sentences with them. /Rant.
To answer you in two parts, one yes, Pax is hilarious. Two, he is critically acclaimed as one of the best french authors ever (at least that is what every french person tells me). Throughout the book, from the beginning he uses a lot of stream of consciousness, and, even more than that, he utilizes strings of adjectives to give his character a hurried air. When I wrote that sentence, I was parodying the part of the book that I found so obviously well written, but so annoying to read for me. Honestly I loved what I read of the book and I found it intriguing, but it was like miring around in words attempting to make headway that I couldn't make heads or tails of.
I don't understand what reading such books gives you. Its like you're going through a very complex maze of words, hidden meanings, historical references (as in the case of Ulysses); but where does it lead? In your case its an unendingly detailed character description for no good reason except because he's some pre-modernist figure, but it doesn't seem like a worthwhile justification unless you're hoping it gets better.
I hope you find something useful in such books. I can't help but feel anything useful has probably been described in more concise, clear language by other authors. Otherwise one should only read those books if you enjoy the writing style, which it seems you have a love hate relationship with
On June 10 2013 09:12 radscorpion9 wrote: I don't understand what reading such books gives you. Its like you're going through a very complex maze of words, hidden meanings, historical references (as in the case of Ulysses); but where does it lead? In your case its an unendingly detailed character description for no good reason except because he's some pre-modernist figure, but it doesn't seem like a worthwhile justification unless you're hoping it gets better.
I hope you find something useful in such books. I can't help but feel anything useful has probably been described in more concise, clear language by other authors. Otherwise one should only read those books if you enjoy the writing style, which it seems you have a love hate relationship with
I'm learning how to write better and learning various styles of writing. I'm focusing on modernist and post-modernist styles (even if post-modernism is "dead" to some) so that I can write my own books. I want to become a better writer for that and so that I can have an easier time in my selected majors.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uyI6EHB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kmKOXPM.jpg)
