So I'm getting into this book and I don't understand what in the fuck is going on in this first portion.
Is the narrator literally retarded or something, like what the fuck? The keep repeating words over and over like a fucking retard, I fucking can't read this. Is Faulkner retarded?
Yeah, the narrator of the first chapter is LITERALLY retarded, but you're worse than him for not being able to figure that out
you wanna fuck your sister if you wanna fuck your sister
you wanna fuck your sister if you dun wanna fuck your sister
is faulkner retarded?
This is bait right?
It is honestly a bit corncobby it's true. I would at least read the 2nd section, it has some nice passages
>is the narrator literally retarded
You chose, if by the power of bait or just sheer luck, the ONE book for which this is actually true
If I can get a serious answer besides the bait thread that OP has created.
I'm currently doing a read through this book, and I am trying to get a better grasp on how Part 2 with Quentin reads and how I can understand it more without having outside assistance.
I have established Quentin is mentally unstable (which is why he rambles on about the same phrases over and over) due to Caddy and Herbert and such, and that he (similar to Benjy) has thoughts of the past in sudden and abrupt ways.
But I still am having such a hard time grasping most moments. Faulkner sometimes refuses to use any indication that Quentin is thinking of a memory, or sometimes Faulkner refuses to use quotations or periods and conversation are just big flows and it feels hard to figure out who even is speaking or who is even in the conversation in moments.
Any suggestions?
it's like some sort of consciousness stream...
And Faulkner expects people to BE Quentin and know everything he does?
It's because the book is retarded. That's why it's hard to read, it's because Faulkner wrote a fucking retarded book
It's easy to distinguish the different timelines interweaving, pay attention
Any suggestions on interpreting stream of consciousnesses?
I can't differentiate it from a first person narrative, is there really a difference?
There is a big difference. Usual first person is still the character telling their story, stream is just they thinking. Stream of consciousness done well, in my opinion will always have things that you'll find irrational or irrelevant. I've written stream and I think those things are essential, because that's how the mind works.
I'd recommend not to stop too much on interpreting, but rather go with the stream, let it flow.
Also, you need to notice that cursives indicate a change in timeline in this book.
Pay attention to how you think and you'll see why stream is like this. The character might be retarded, but we all repeat words non-sensically in our minds and shit like that.
Thanks for the advice...
I just felt a little confused due to me mixing up an earlier quote from Dalton Ames about how women are bitches, I thought that was Jason saying that.
Suppose I should pay a bit more attention.
I don't know if your edition is the same that mine, but once you realize the cursives indicate a timeline change it gets extremely easy. The first part, in my opinion, doesn't try to leave you with a detailed account of events, but rather with a feeling about those events. It's not necessary that you recall all that happened correctly, it's more important to notice how the characters are affected.
>hear good things about James Joyce
>pick up his most acclaimed work
>LITERALLY writing like a 2 year old
>moocow, wetting le bed xD, singing songs
>put down book and never read Joyce again
what the FUCK, Veeky Forums? Do you retards actually enjoy this shit?
Here's a helpful review I found on amazon
>The first chapter is what puts people off this classic. Here is a simple way to understand that chapter. By followong who is caring for Benji you will know when things are taking place. It becomes a very easy chapter to read once you get used to this.
>Versh - 1900-ish when Benji is 3-5
>T.P. 1905-1912 when Benji is 15-ish
>Luster - Present when Benji is 33.
>Each time italics are incorporated Benji is changing his train of thought.
>I find this book moving and very rewarding.
Also just have to deal with the fact that when it comes to "difficult" books, you're just not going to understand everything on a first reading.
Joyce?
>hrrrm
>I reckon I'll have them french-fried pertaters hrm
I didn't enjoy Faulkner much, but I found it useful because of the technique. Just like I don't enjoy some stories by Vargas Llosa, but the technique is so good I find it useful for my own writing.
my mother is a fish
If your book has an introduction I'd suggest reading it. Once you know what's going on it's way easier to understand.