|
|
Post by rockkid on Feb 14, 2006 12:39:06 GMT -5
Received Stephen Kings Cell for V tines day. (t’was on the kitchen table w/a card when I awoke) bless his heart.
So that is what I’ll be starting after I finish Medak.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Feb 14, 2006 16:28:08 GMT -5
M, I read White Hotel a while back. I've had a special place in my heart for that one for a long time, so I am glad you liked it. I do doubly urge everyone to read it and read it without previous guidance. You'll be affected, as I most certainly was.
Haven't read any Adorno besides Minima Moralia (though my studies don't generally take me in that direction). Will be getting some free reading time soon, and will consider other works.
I will be Mr. Don Delillo by this weekend, given the great pains I've gone through to educate myself in all his works. Gotta love that guy. I recommend "Great Jones Street" to anyone who can find it. It will not disappoint.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Feb 17, 2006 11:08:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by poseidon on Feb 18, 2006 18:14:32 GMT -5
Finished Palmer's "Society" last night. Much, much better than the novel before "Society" called "Fatal." Definitely the best Palmer novel I've yet to read. Palmer's involvement with AA is very apparent in "Society."  Tonight will begin King's:  |
|
|
|
Post by poseidon on Feb 18, 2006 18:15:55 GMT -5
Received Stephen Kings Cell for V tines day. (t’was on the kitchen table w/a card when I awoke) bless his heart. So that is what I’ll be starting after I finish Medak. Wonder what a shrink would make of that...  |
|
|
|
Post by poseidon on Feb 18, 2006 18:16:24 GMT -5
Hope you find the answer to your quandary (from the movie board) Thorny. Let me know how Jack's death was played out in the book: If he was killed accidentally or murdered. |
|
|
|
Post by rockkid on Feb 20, 2006 15:59:55 GMT -5
A shrink would make that I had pointed it out in the store & hinted for it  |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Feb 21, 2006 14:15:33 GMT -5
Received Stephen Kings Cell for V tines day. (t’was on the kitchen table w/a card when I awoke) bless his heart. So that is what I’ll be starting after I finish Medak. Wonder what a shrink would make of that... I don't know about you but I call it true love . . .  |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Feb 21, 2006 14:35:04 GMT -5
I did find the answer to the quandary, pat. Although some might insist that it remains "ambiguous" in the story as well, a careful reading convinced me otherwise. Not to spoil it altogether too much for anyone, all I can say on the matter is that the author Annie Proulx has laid all the clues down with tact so as to allow the reader to put "2 and 2" together.
Now the fact that some may add it up and get "5" isn't my problem anymore than it is Annie Proulx's. She did her best to reflect the sensitivity of the issue circa 60s/70s rural Wyoming, all while refraining from delving into the labels we have come to use over a quarter century later (the "gay" lifestyle, etc). I think Annie Proulx has pulled off a small miracle in so doing. Because she has exposed the underlying importance of doing away with such limiting and potentially destructive labels. The labels in and of themselves already begin doing damage the moment they are implemented, because first and foremost they seperate the target (homosexuals) from the rest of humanity. When nothing could be further from the truth.
Anyone who happens to be homosexual just so happens to be every bit the same as any one else, and moreover, also happens to retain just as much uniqueness from everyone else. To label them as "gay" I now see has more potential in it for damage than good, when you consider that this label immediately removes them from a "normal" context and puts them over there, in the freakin' "gay corner".
Well this has got to end, in my little "hetero" opinion. And Annie Proulx's short story "Brokeback Mountain" makes a tremendous leap towards this, as does Ang Lee's excellent cinematic adaptation of it.
\begin spoiler
I didn't mean to wander away from answering your question patlogi, but essentially, yes, the story does provide the reader with the necessary variables with which to "add it all up" and conclude, without a doubt, that Jack was victim of a hate crime.
On a greater scale - - that of boiling down the themes of Brokeback Mountain to the catchphrase "Love Is A Force Of Nature" -- I can definitely see how, in the long run, it may not actually matter how Jack met his demise, one way or t'other. But for the purposes of maintaining with the theme of how homosexuality has been dealt with in our society - - it is crucial for the reader to properly add up the variables and get the one real answer -- which is Jack did not perish from changin' no tire on the side of the road.
/end spoiler
It is a great short story. Find yourself a copy and read it, asap. Annie Proulx is a gifted writer. I will seek out more of her stuff (in particular, the collection of stories which Brokeback Mountain comes from).
|
|
|
|
Post by poseidon on Feb 21, 2006 19:06:10 GMT -5
Thanks for answering that question. Does the book go into more detail regarding what Ennis's father made him witness as a youngster (the murder of that gay guy which occured as a result of being tied to the horse by the genitalia and dragged to death?) I shivered on that one. Aweful way to have a dick-ectomy...hardy-har-har.
Seriously though, thats what went through my mind when I watched Jack's death scene, what Ennis's father forced him to view.
A quandary no more.
Thanks for reading the book and posting your thoughts. I found them (your thoughts) interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Feb 22, 2006 9:59:22 GMT -5
Well thanks pat. Actually almost every scene in the movie is touched upon in the story, but in the most basic way. There's really not much more to the story than the movie. It is, after all, a pretty short story: you can read the entire thing in about an hour, taking your time. So the story doesn't really go into more detail regarding what Ennis's father made him witness - it is briefly touched upon, as in the movie. After reading the story, I can see what a close adaptation Ang Lee managed with his film. Quite an accomplishment, actually, to tie all those various narrative details into one seamless, epic movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by poseidon on Feb 22, 2006 20:36:13 GMT -5
Will pick up the book sometime. I doubt the public library has it available to be checked out. One to add to the mountain of someday books to read...my favorite gay themed novel remains Patricia Neil Warren's "The Front Runner." Wonderful gay novel of triumph and tragedy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Feb 23, 2006 12:21:07 GMT -5
Will pick up the book sometime. I doubt the public library has it available to be checked out. One to add to the mountain of someday books to read...my favorite gay themed novel remains Patricia Neil Warren's "The Front Runner." Wonderful gay novel of triumph and tragedy. Oh I'm sure the library would have it; and if not the exclusive edition w/just Brokeback Mountain, the chances they have the Annie Proulx short-story collection which features it, are veritably guaranteed. Unless. . . . you live in Vilonia, Arkansas of course. |
|
|
|
Post by luke on Feb 23, 2006 13:01:35 GMT -5
So I've been reading all sorts of different assortments of short stories by different authors, and one of the books I recently nabbed was Asimov's 9 Tales of the Near Future (think that's it.)
Man, the guy is fucking brilliant, and his writing enthralling, but- maybe it's just the modern kid in me that doesn't really "get it"- I get so fucking annoyed when science fiction authors in the 50s, particularly the "brilliant" ones, can predict interstellar drives rooms that calculate interplanetary gravity down the decimal, but can't even begin to fathom digital cameras, cell phones, and Microsoft fucking Word.
Like, in one story, he imagines this fantastic "scanner" device that holds a tiny roll of film and scans paper documents, taking photo copies of them to be reproduced at will. He talks about how miserable it would have been before the time of these "scanners", when paper documents had to be reproduced by hand or bulky photo copy. It NEVER occurs to Mr. Asimov that, 1) Why in the hell would a device that advanced in every other way need FILM, and 2) Why can't these scientists just make back-up works on their "micro computers?"
It also perturbs me in these books and stuff like Star Trek when someone puts on a pair of glasses. Come the fuck on! Was it THAT hard to "predict" some of the shit we have today, when you're capable of damn near laying out the wiring for a flying saucer in your head?
That said, I still love Asimov, and the guy is still the king of science fiction.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockkid on Feb 23, 2006 13:16:04 GMT -5
Its has always been off on one end or the other luke.
The highest example being those old Popular Mechanics/ Pop Science covers.
|
|
