Tripp is nothing like Portia or Amory Blaine. He is reckless where they have been reserved. He lives outside the restrictions of everyday society instead of being smothered by them. He also presents a few contradictions to the way that we normally think about other people. Tripp is, surprisingly, a professor. This blew my mind when I first fully realized it. Professors are supposed to be these quiet, reserved people, who maybe have a family or maybe spend a good chunk of their time reading and doing research in their respective fields. They are not supposed to get stoned, get their students drunk, or have affairs with their boss's wife. That is simply not the kind of behavior that we expect from professors. The affair brings me to another point. What do all of these women see in Tripp? He is an aging and not very successful author and professor. He is stoned much of the time and admittedly breaks more promises than he keeps. Why do these women still want relationships with him? What is wrong with them?
Tripp seems to be a guy with some serious paradoxes of character. This seems to be reflected in the way that he describes things as well. He often uses paradoxical adjectives, or adjectives that don't seem to fit what he is describing. This happens a lot more when he is stoned than when he is not, which I guess could be a way to show us how his perception of things changes under the influence of weed.
The midnight disease seems to be a recurring theme in the book thus far, but what is it, exactly? It seems to be a blanket term that Tripp uses to refer to all of the terrible afflictions that writers seem to carry around. It reflects the depression, anxiety, and tendency for life to generally screw itself up when you most need everything to be OK. I wonder if the midnight disease is solely the affliction of writers, or even if writers become writers because of this ungainly burden. Hannah Green is a functional writer, and she does not seem to bear any marks of this depression, although her unexplainable attraction to Tripp can be seen as aversion of the disease I suppose. The stuff that Tripp carries around in his trunk, the dead dog, the tuba, the mangled body of the snake, are almost physical manifestations of the disease that he carries around all of the time. James Leer has this affliction in a pretty terrible way, especially indicated by his suicidal tendencies. He is a complex and layered character, and I don't think that we will ever really get to the bottom of his lies and stories and half truths. I started off the novel felling kind of sorry for him, but now I don't know enough about who he is to form a real opinion. Miss Sloviak is another character who tries to hide who she is, although her disguise is more physical and easier to see through.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
too many details
Wonder Boys is about a college professor and a novelist in Pittsburgh that throughout the course of the novel faces a series of crises during one weekend. His wife, Emily, leaves him and his lover of the past five years (who is also already married) is pregnant with his child. The novel that he has been working on for the past seven years remains unfinished and Crabtree, his editor, wants to read it, or at least the ending that is currently not written. And lastly the presence of a talented, but unstable, student, James Leer, completes the crazy weekend.
Even though I liked the novel overall, it was sometimes hard to follow. There were too many crises occurring at once to mention them all here. The work seemed also “too busy,” like when a pattern has too many details to keep track of and takes away from it. Although each separate event by itself is well written and is meaningful to the reader, taken as a whole the novel wandered all over the place.
First you have the pregnancy. Sarah potentially giving birth to Tripp’s baby just seems so out of place. They have been having an affair of over five years and she just happens to find out that she is going to have a baby during the same weekend that Emily decides to leave Tripp. I feel that if he had been single and this occurred it would have been more understandable, but for it just to occur so out of the blue just seems unrealistic. Also, the fact that Tripp just does not seem to care enough about the consequences of Sarah’s pregnancy just was not believable for me. I understand that this lack of emotion may have to do with him always being high so it may not have really hit him yet.
Then you have James Leer. What a crazy kid! He fabricates his life so much that it keeps the reader constantly questioning what is the truth. As readers, we do not know whether to feel sorry for him or to dismiss him as crazy and move on and make peace with that fact. He is just so over-the-top that it is hard to believe that people like him really exist in the world. He has extensive knowledge of movie stars’ suicides and even goes as far to curve “Frank Capra” into his hand. I did not understand the deal with his grandparents/parents. Were they as bad as he claimed or was he just so physiologically disturbed that he needed to make up all those horrid details concerning them, especially regarding the supposed rape of his mother by his grandfather?
Even Miss Sloviak seemed out of place. I wrote my previous blog about how I generally liked this character and I really liked the scene in which Miss Sloviak changes in Tripp’s car. It was a simple scene but I found it almost sensual. But after finishing the novel, I do not quite sees where it fits in when considering the general scheme of the novel.
I feel that for me to fully appreciate the novel, I would need a very in-depth discussion on the novel. I would need to pull apart all the details to get the full picture.
Even though I liked the novel overall, it was sometimes hard to follow. There were too many crises occurring at once to mention them all here. The work seemed also “too busy,” like when a pattern has too many details to keep track of and takes away from it. Although each separate event by itself is well written and is meaningful to the reader, taken as a whole the novel wandered all over the place.
First you have the pregnancy. Sarah potentially giving birth to Tripp’s baby just seems so out of place. They have been having an affair of over five years and she just happens to find out that she is going to have a baby during the same weekend that Emily decides to leave Tripp. I feel that if he had been single and this occurred it would have been more understandable, but for it just to occur so out of the blue just seems unrealistic. Also, the fact that Tripp just does not seem to care enough about the consequences of Sarah’s pregnancy just was not believable for me. I understand that this lack of emotion may have to do with him always being high so it may not have really hit him yet.
Then you have James Leer. What a crazy kid! He fabricates his life so much that it keeps the reader constantly questioning what is the truth. As readers, we do not know whether to feel sorry for him or to dismiss him as crazy and move on and make peace with that fact. He is just so over-the-top that it is hard to believe that people like him really exist in the world. He has extensive knowledge of movie stars’ suicides and even goes as far to curve “Frank Capra” into his hand. I did not understand the deal with his grandparents/parents. Were they as bad as he claimed or was he just so physiologically disturbed that he needed to make up all those horrid details concerning them, especially regarding the supposed rape of his mother by his grandfather?
Even Miss Sloviak seemed out of place. I wrote my previous blog about how I generally liked this character and I really liked the scene in which Miss Sloviak changes in Tripp’s car. It was a simple scene but I found it almost sensual. But after finishing the novel, I do not quite sees where it fits in when considering the general scheme of the novel.
I feel that for me to fully appreciate the novel, I would need a very in-depth discussion on the novel. I would need to pull apart all the details to get the full picture.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Quirky and funny
Even though this novel deals with serious subjects such as divorce, children out of wed lock, and relationships with students, the author discusses with a humor that i find extremely appealing. Unlike the previous novel where Patricia dealt with the same issues, the author has the main character Professor Grady approach life in a different and more amusing way. Both characters were stuck in their jobs. Patricia was not able to get over giving up her child and leaving her job, and Professor Grady is having writers block and stuck in his awkward life where his wife left him, his mistress is having his child, and his student has a crush on him. Yet the way the authors describe the situations differently is what makes me enjoy this novel much more. Chabon writes it with a quirky touch and on a more light tone and it makes it more enjoyable to read and also understand what the characters are going through. Chabon writes with such youth that expresses just what the character Grady is going through. He is a man that is starting to age but is still trying to hold on to his youth, and this mirrors the style of writing as well. Also the chracters just have more depth to them. they are fun and different such as the transvestite and the writing prodigy who is obsessed with holly wood suicides. This read is definitely one of my favorites and I am enjoying extremely.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Cigarettes and Chocolate...milk
I’ve noticed throughout the book a kind of addiction or peddling in substances; sometimes far more overt than other times. Grady, for instance, is obviously always either smoking a joint or guzzling some Jack Daniels or popping prescription pills, but there are also less noticeable cases. Crabtree, for one, brings very few items of clothing on his trip, but is sure to pack quite a stash of substances with him (hence the prescription pills and Jack Daniels Grady gets into). James Leer initially refuses to take part in the consumption of these substances, because he does not want to let go of his emotions, but then indulges. A lot. Other examples are that many characters in the book smoke cigarettes. Sara “patted at the breast pocket of her jumpsuit, looking for cigarettes, then lowered her hand to her lap. She did not permit herself to smoke in the greenhouse” (155). There is some kind of unconscious need to do these things like smoke and drink…. I think it might have something to do with comfort. Or just habit, which provides a kind of comfort I think.
Another example, although kind of an odd one, that seems to adhere to the habit/comfort theory, is Irene (Emily’s mom). “With one automatic hand she reached into a pocket of her smock, brought out a chick wrapped in flashing yellow foil, peeled it, and neatly severed its chocolate head” (174). And again when…. “She reached into her pocked withdrew another chocolate chick, unwrapped it, and cruelly bit off its head, once again returning the remainder uneaten to her pocket. She must have had a whole pile of mangled little bodies in there” (177). This time, though, the substance is not a drug. Yet, chocolate is known to release endorphins which provide a rush similar, maybe, to a drag on joint or a puff of a cigarette or a swig of whiskey. So maybe it’s about looking to substances to artificially (and more easily) provide an improved mood/feeling?
Like when Emily has to interact with Grady for the first time since she (in essence) said she was leaving him and she is sitting at the table next to him obviously very uncomfortable, Grady says she “looked like she was wishing for a cigarette” (211). In this case, it seems a little more like a desire for escape rather than comfort, but it could easily be a little of both.
At any rate, the book is full of people altering their states of mind (marijuana and alcohol) and indulging in more appropriate/acceptable substances (cigarettes and chocolate). Maybe another example of escape is how Tony sometimes dresses up as a transvestite while his brothers are very manly and have gun collections, etc. That might be stretching it, but I just can’t seem to decide what Chabon is saying about all this.
Another example, although kind of an odd one, that seems to adhere to the habit/comfort theory, is Irene (Emily’s mom). “With one automatic hand she reached into a pocket of her smock, brought out a chick wrapped in flashing yellow foil, peeled it, and neatly severed its chocolate head” (174). And again when…. “She reached into her pocked withdrew another chocolate chick, unwrapped it, and cruelly bit off its head, once again returning the remainder uneaten to her pocket. She must have had a whole pile of mangled little bodies in there” (177). This time, though, the substance is not a drug. Yet, chocolate is known to release endorphins which provide a rush similar, maybe, to a drag on joint or a puff of a cigarette or a swig of whiskey. So maybe it’s about looking to substances to artificially (and more easily) provide an improved mood/feeling?
Like when Emily has to interact with Grady for the first time since she (in essence) said she was leaving him and she is sitting at the table next to him obviously very uncomfortable, Grady says she “looked like she was wishing for a cigarette” (211). In this case, it seems a little more like a desire for escape rather than comfort, but it could easily be a little of both.
At any rate, the book is full of people altering their states of mind (marijuana and alcohol) and indulging in more appropriate/acceptable substances (cigarettes and chocolate). Maybe another example of escape is how Tony sometimes dresses up as a transvestite while his brothers are very manly and have gun collections, etc. That might be stretching it, but I just can’t seem to decide what Chabon is saying about all this.
Don't Leer
James Leer is a character.
No, literally, he’s a character. He has recreated himself in college. All of the other students and Grady think James is a poor, depressed kid whose mother died and whose father has cancer. He tells Hannah that he lives with his aunt in Mt.Lebanon. He writes these really disturbing stories that seem to be inspired by his own life, but I guess that’s just what he wants people to think.
He seems to be trying to turn himself into this tragic character—Grady catches him pondering killing himself.
He talks about this life, a life he says is his, and a life he wrote an autobiographical novel about.
But later we find out that James is a rich kid with country club parents who drive a Mercedes. Everything he told Grady and everybody else was fabricated.
I guess my question is why? Why did he want people to believe he lived in a dilapidated shack with a father dying from cancer? When most people fabricate a story about their lives they make their made up life better than their real one. But James took himself from the country club to the slums. Why?
I know he’s a writer, but I feel like his pathological lying has a deeper meaning than he just likes to make up stories. And he is a pathological liar. The part when he is lying to Grady about his parents after they come to get him is just pathetic. He lies about the gun being a fake, and he also lies about knowing how to roll a reefer. But these lies make no sense—what’s his motivation? Maybe he was truly unhappy in his actual life. Maybe he felt oppressed and unable to express himself.
I mean, apparently he’s an eccentric kid. He was able to give a list of actors who had killed themselves and their method of choice. He has a weird obsession with Hollywood. He stole a Marilyn Monroe jacket from the house of the chancellor of his college. He shot the chancellor’s dog with the gun he said was a fake. He wears a long stained trench coat that smells bad every day, and he carries his cloth knapsack with him everywhere.
Maybe he’s the classic case of the lost soul. He entered college and he’s just trying to find himself, but he’s confused and doesn’t know how to deal with the confusion. He seems to be really troubled, and he seems to be confused about his sexual orientation, which is made apparent by the things that go on between him and Crabtree. He also seems to be truly upset by the discouraging comments of his classmates about his stories. Plus there’s the whole he tried to kill himself thing (or at least thought about killing himself).
James Leer is a character all right; he’s the character in a book he wrote about the life he has been claiming as his own.
Who is James Leer?
No, literally, he’s a character. He has recreated himself in college. All of the other students and Grady think James is a poor, depressed kid whose mother died and whose father has cancer. He tells Hannah that he lives with his aunt in Mt.Lebanon. He writes these really disturbing stories that seem to be inspired by his own life, but I guess that’s just what he wants people to think.
He seems to be trying to turn himself into this tragic character—Grady catches him pondering killing himself.
He talks about this life, a life he says is his, and a life he wrote an autobiographical novel about.
But later we find out that James is a rich kid with country club parents who drive a Mercedes. Everything he told Grady and everybody else was fabricated.
I guess my question is why? Why did he want people to believe he lived in a dilapidated shack with a father dying from cancer? When most people fabricate a story about their lives they make their made up life better than their real one. But James took himself from the country club to the slums. Why?
I know he’s a writer, but I feel like his pathological lying has a deeper meaning than he just likes to make up stories. And he is a pathological liar. The part when he is lying to Grady about his parents after they come to get him is just pathetic. He lies about the gun being a fake, and he also lies about knowing how to roll a reefer. But these lies make no sense—what’s his motivation? Maybe he was truly unhappy in his actual life. Maybe he felt oppressed and unable to express himself.
I mean, apparently he’s an eccentric kid. He was able to give a list of actors who had killed themselves and their method of choice. He has a weird obsession with Hollywood. He stole a Marilyn Monroe jacket from the house of the chancellor of his college. He shot the chancellor’s dog with the gun he said was a fake. He wears a long stained trench coat that smells bad every day, and he carries his cloth knapsack with him everywhere.
Maybe he’s the classic case of the lost soul. He entered college and he’s just trying to find himself, but he’s confused and doesn’t know how to deal with the confusion. He seems to be really troubled, and he seems to be confused about his sexual orientation, which is made apparent by the things that go on between him and Crabtree. He also seems to be truly upset by the discouraging comments of his classmates about his stories. Plus there’s the whole he tried to kill himself thing (or at least thought about killing himself).
James Leer is a character all right; he’s the character in a book he wrote about the life he has been claiming as his own.
Who is James Leer?
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Chabon and me. Best friends.
I actually really like this book so far, although I’m not entirely sure why yet. I think the style is a lot more appealing because there is just an overall lack of convention, which fits very well with the subject matter of the novel as well. When I started reading the section about the man from Naples who was arrested for illegally planting a vegetable garden on the Pitt baseball field, I had actually just picked up the book again after a few hours of not reading it, and I suddenly realized (about a page into the section) that I had no idea who this vegetable-growing man was and what on earth he had to do with any of the book or where Tripp could possibly be going with that story… but it also seemed completely natural for Tripp to be so completely off-the-wall random that I was content to just keep reading and see where it would lead, instead of trying to guess or expecting what would happen.
I also happen to love the way Chabon writes sometimes; he can describe something in such an obscure way that you know exactly, vividly what he is talking about, but at the same time could not actually picture what he described or you’re not quite sure how to take it. His descriptions of Crabtree were my first hint at this. “I knew the expression in Crabtree’s eye all too well. He was looking at me as though I were a monster he’d created with his own brain and hands, and he were about to throw the switch that would send me reeling spasmodically across the countryside, laying waste to rude farmsteads and despoiling the rural maidenry” (8). Of course you can picture Frankenstein going totally nuts while romping destructively around the countryside, but how could a person ever convey that in a facial expression?? It’s all just so bizarre. I think Tripp has a rather wild imagination that he sometimes, or maybe more often than not, mistakes for reality. But I really think that’s what adds so much to the style and I just really like it so far.
I also happen to love the way Chabon writes sometimes; he can describe something in such an obscure way that you know exactly, vividly what he is talking about, but at the same time could not actually picture what he described or you’re not quite sure how to take it. His descriptions of Crabtree were my first hint at this. “I knew the expression in Crabtree’s eye all too well. He was looking at me as though I were a monster he’d created with his own brain and hands, and he were about to throw the switch that would send me reeling spasmodically across the countryside, laying waste to rude farmsteads and despoiling the rural maidenry” (8). Of course you can picture Frankenstein going totally nuts while romping destructively around the countryside, but how could a person ever convey that in a facial expression?? It’s all just so bizarre. I think Tripp has a rather wild imagination that he sometimes, or maybe more often than not, mistakes for reality. But I really think that’s what adds so much to the style and I just really like it so far.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)