admin of books

Meh.

In the foreword, Williams' describes his book as an "escape into reality". His portrayal of one mans ordinary life features no heroes and no villains and is simply the chronicle of a mundane life. The sparse and melancholic prose tells the story of John Stoner from age 19 through to his death. We see his humble beginnings in desperate poverty with his parents who toil on their farm and only ever know hardship and hunger and endurance and pain. Stoner is sent to university to study new agricultural techniques, and he subsequently falls in love with the English language and decides to become a scholar. He settles in at the university, gets married, has a child, and deals with adversity. In the mundane flow of his existence, there are moments of true love, a fulfilling career, and a quiet legacy left in his writings.

Stoners decision to become a scholar is perhaps the only decisive moment in his entire life. He drifts through life with a stoic passivity that's almost painful to witness. At every confrontation with life’s pivotal moments, Stoner capitulates to inaction. This might sound frustrating to witness, but his story is so lovingly and tenderly written that it is easy to enjoy the ride, and almost impossible to not relate.

The final few chapters examine the questions of what it means to live a successful life. Stoner is by all regards very very average. His stoicism borders on self-sabotage, especially evident as he watches his wife undermine his relationship with his daughter, offering no resistance. Stoner is not an innocent victim though, the repeated sexual assaults on his wife and neglect of his daughter, even as she descends into alcoholism and hopelessness paint a complicated picture of a man deeply flawed and complicit in the suffering of those around him.

Perhaps this is a novel about the inherent beauty and tragedy in just living, just being. Or perhaps it is a warning about passivity and the dangers of just 'going with the flow'. Stoner's life story leaves us pondering the fine line between resignation and acceptance, and the quiet yet profound impact of the choices we make or fail to make.

Ignatius J. Reilly - bumbling buffoon or revolutionary thinker? Almost certainly the former, though I suspect inside his head lurks a fantasy world revolving around the latter. At times I thought A Confederacy of Dunces resembled a treatise on mental illness - narcissism, delusions of grandeur, paranoia - possible schizophrenia - then I remembered the book is supposed to be a comedy. The tragedy of Ignatius J. Reilly is that, much like his valve, the tragic comedy that is his life is portrayed as (or by?) an increasingly ambiguous and wavering mirage that may or may not exist.

Toole's representation of New Orleans mirrors the turbulence in Reilly's mind as much as it does the events which unfold around the wily antagonist. Everywhere Reilly goes, calamity seems to follow. However, as the noose slowly tightens, our anti-hero refuses to acquiesce, instead opting to double-down again and again.

My only issue with the book is the ending. I felt frustrated that Reilly managed to escape what he sorely deserved, however I was left with the impression that he was not going to get far - satisfaction denied but not forever.

Wasn't a fan of his writing style at first but I came around after a few chapters. It's actually quite unsettling at times and has the effect of drawing you into the malaise of the blind characters. A great and unexpected dystopian nightmare. Would have been five stars were it not for the atrocious ending.