Confessions of a Plot Junkie [Archive] - Literature Network Forums

osho

01-11-2014, 12:05 AM

I've read Joyce's Finnegan's Wake; also Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury. I've even read Wallace's Infinite Jest. From Aristotle to Zola I've read more highfalutin, hoity-toity, egghead books than you can shake a stick at. (Whatever that means) But when you get right down to it, what I truly enjoy is a good page-turner - the kind of a book I can't wait to get back to after I've had to lay it aside, the kind of a book I'll stay up all night to read, just to find out WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.

Anybody else here share my addiction?

I have read some of the books you mentioned but I did not like them and I read them just thinking that I must read them to be mature and well-read and they did not interest me and I ended up coldly and I do not like to touch those books though they are great classics. I have read the Brothers Karamazov by Dostoevsky and this book gave me all I expect of a book, the philosophy, the story, the intellect and the emotions I want in a book. A book must transport the reader to a newer world and transform him and entertain him apart from erudition.

JBI

01-11-2014, 04:38 AM

I'm allergic to narrative, for the most part. I am far more a lyricism junky, in the sense that I even take lyric poetry over narrative poetry (epic, Ballad, etc.). I think the problem with literature is the so called "plot" heavy nature of so many people's reading habits. To me, the emotional connection between text and reader is what matters, and the actual framing of a narrative is merely an amateur academic whitewashing for those who cannot actually appreciate artwork, the same way narrating the actual "painting's story" doesn't tell me exactly why it moves me, any more than knowing who actually painted it. I can eat the eggs without knowing the chicken.

I think that is generally one of the major challenges art faces, this sort of push toward plot over a sort of closer interaction with style. Generally, all plots are more or less the same half dozen stories, with very little in terms of thematic development. Themes generally change once every 100 years or so, so we are not actually reading new things, we are rereading the same thing with different names.

what changes more often, and for more reasons is the nature of style, the development of forms of representation and artifice. So painting styles like poetic styles are constantly reforming and rebuilding themselves in technical ways, the same way a metaphor can be developed over and over again. This is to me what is important. The actual idea of plot is really secondary. The same way when you listen to more of the same genre of music you start to appreciate new things you would have missed (especially things like Jazz which constantly borrow and share) so to is literature. The actual conclusion of a novel is more or less inconsequential, the art is in the expressive force of the medium.

SilvanDitties

01-11-2014, 07:08 AM

I think a good example of what you're saying is Madame Bovary, JBI. Flaubert takes a rather simple, almost boring plot and creates a masterpiece with his unique brand of realism, influencing countless future writers. I think it kind of shows that there's art in almost anything.

Sancho

01-11-2014, 09:26 AM

El Sancho walks past the alleyway on his way out of a highbrow bookstore:

- Psst. Yo, my man. I got what chew need.

- What you got?

- I got it all, man. Thriller, Romance, Crime. I got fiction for yo addiction.

- Naw, man, I can't. I'm fresh out of rehab. I'm trying to rebuild my personal relationship with lyricism.

- C'mere, man. Check it out. I got a stash of James Patterson, ain't never been read before.

- Oh man! Does he use metaphor?

- Hell yeah! Jim-Pat got a freakin metaphor that'll knock yo socks off, my man.

- Mmm, I don't know, man.

- First one's free. My gift to you.

- Gimme that book, man. Oh yeah, and gimme two of those, and three of those, and uhh, you got any Steven King?

- Does a crack ho put out? Hell yeah I got some, special reserve, you know. Go easy on this, man, King of plot will explode your head.

- Gimme four of 'em and make it snappy. I gotta be somewhere. C'mon - c'mon - c'mon, hurry up!

- Now yer talking, my man.

(And so it goes with a plot junkie)

YesNo

01-11-2014, 09:56 AM

I got through about two or three pages of Finnegan's Wake. Great stuff, I'm sure, but I finished all of Anita Loos' Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. I couldn't put it down, and I can usually put a book down without any problem. It was way better than that movie Marilyn Monroe starred in long ago. Skip the movie. Read the book. There's plot all over the place, but what really made the book great was that it was all from Lorelei Lee's blonde perspective.

Ecurb

01-11-2014, 11:43 AM

The classics relied on time-worn plots. Aeschylus, Euripides, Homer and Virgil didn't invent their plots -- they rewrote standard stories. This certainly suggests that something other than plot is essential to the artistry of their works. Shakespeare borrowed many of his plots, too.

Let's look at (famous) modern adventure stories (which, it would appear at first glance, depend on the thrills of their plots for their artistic impact). "Treasure Island" cerainly has its thrills. Jim Hawkins is threatened by Blind Pew, Israel Hands, and any number of other pirates, and barely escapes over and over again. But (I'd suggest) the excitement of the book is only minimally in these hair-raising adventures. Instead, the mood of the novel is suffused with "piracy",with strange, lawless men, missing legs and eyes, who live by their own strange and terrifying codes. Stevenson's demonstrates his genius with "Blind Pew". Being chased by a blind pirate would surely be less adventurous than being chased by one who could see. But Stevenson recognized that the "otherness" of deformity and blindness added to the mood of lawless piracy, where the normal rules governing life are changed. As a chld, I had nightmares about Blind Pew. The desert island, the marooned pirates, the quiet stillness of the apple barrel, and cries of the parrot add to the mood, and it is the mood that makes "Treasure Island" so readable and enduring. The mood is captured in the last sentence:

"Oxen and wainropes would not bring me back again to that accursed island; and the worst dreams that I ever have are when I hear the surf booming about the coasts or start upright in bedwith the sharp voice of Captain Flint still ringing in my ears: 'Pieces of eight! Pieces of eight!'."

Let's look at another children's classic: "The Jungle Books". Mowgli certainly has adventures. We readers worry about him when he is captured by the bander-log, we fret over his battles with Shere Khan, and we root for his team in its battle with the red dogs. Nonetheless, the "incidents" of the book are not what makes it so good. Instead, it is the mood of the jungle -- the "jungliness" of the setting. My brothers and I greeted strangers with, "We be of one blood, you and I", and departed saying "Good hunting." The poignant sadness of the last chapter ("Spring Running"), in which the adolescent Mowgli leaves the jungle to return to Man is devastating, not because there are no dangers or adventures among men, but because he is leaving this "jungliness' behind him.

Now, in some senses, this mood is created by "plot". When Odysseus lands on Circe's island, and sees all his men turned into pigs, with warnings from Gods and mysterious smoke curling up through the mysterious woods, no ordinary risk to life and limb will do. The "plot", the "peril" of changing from man to brute, is essential to the mood -- although the mood is also influenced by other factors.

The novelist needs a story to tell. We all read to find out what happens next. But the excellence of the novel generally depends on other factors.

qimissung

01-11-2014, 12:14 PM

The classics relied on time-worn plots. Aeschylus, Euripides, Homer and Virgil didn't invent their plots -- they rewrote standard stories. This certainly suggests that something other than plot is essential to the artistry of their works. Shakespeare borrowed many of his plots, too.

Let's look at (famous) modern adventure stories (which, it would appear at first glance, depend on the thrills of their plots for their artistic impact). "Treasure Island" cerainly has its thrills. Jim Hawkins is threatened by Blind Pew, Israel Hands, and any number of other pirates, and barely escapes over and over again. But (I'd suggest) the excitement of the book is only minimally in these hair-raising adventures. Instead, the mood of the novel is suffused with "piracy",with strange, lawless men, missing legs and eyes, who live by their own strange and terrifying codes. Stevenson's demonstrates his genius with "Blind Pew". Being chased by a blind pirate would surely be less adventurous than being chased by one who could see. But Stevenson recognized that the "otherness" of deformity and blindness added to the mood of lawless piracy, where the normal rules governing life are changed. As a chld, I had nightmares about Blind Pew. The desert island, the marooned pirates, the quiet stillness of the apple barrel, and cries of the parrot add to the mood, and it is the mood that makes "Treasure Island" so readable and enduring. The mood is captured in the last sentence:

Let's look at another children's classic: "The Jungle Books". Mowgli certainly has adventures. We readers worry about him when he is captured by the bander-log, we fret over his battles with Shere Khan, and we root for his team in its battle with the red dogs. Nonetheless, the "incidents" of the book are not what makes it so good. Instead, it is the mood of the jungle -- the "jungliness" of the setting. My brothers and I greeted strangers with, "We be of one blood, you and I", and departed saying "Good hunting." The poignant sadness of the last chapter ("Spring Running"), in which the adolescent Mowgli leaves the jungle to return to Man is devastating, not because there are no dangers or adventures among men, but because he is leaving this "jungliness' behind him.

Now, in some senses, this mood is created by "plot". When Odysseus lands on Circe's island, and sees all his men turned into pigs, with warnings from Gods and mysterious smoke curling up through the mysterious woods, no ordinary risk to life and limb will do. The "plot", the "peril" of changing from man to brute, is essential to the mood -- although the mood is also influenced by other factors.

The novelist needs a story to tell. We all read to find out what happens next. But the excellence of the novel generally depends on other factors.

Well done, ecurb, well done.

Sancho

01-11-2014, 03:10 PM

^Ditto, nice post, E'.

I know I've got a problem, but I'm weak, man. Does that make me a bad person? I'm in a program. Twelve steps. I'm up to step 1 so far. Well, okay, I'm planning to get to step 1 just as soon as I finish this Detective novel. Maybe I should join a church.

My father was a plot junkie too. He used to hide Science Fiction novels all around the house, stuffed behind the sofa cushions, jammed in the pockets of his overcoat, stashed away behind the toilet. My Mom too. She'd call in sick to work just so she could finish a steamy paperback. I never stood a chance. It's genetic, man.

I have a confession to make: last week I bought a book at the airport. I know, I know, pathetic huh? Then I further debased myself by taking it into the restroom by the gate. I almost missed my plane. It was pretty good though. A guy from Mississippi wrote it. It's all about this badass lawyer who gets in a lot of trouble because he won't do things by the book, but then in the end he winds up saving the day.

I need help, man.

Ecurb

01-11-2014, 06:11 PM

Thanks, Sancho and gimissung. But, Sancho, if you've misdiagnosed your addiction, the wrong treatment might have been prescribed. Sci Fi is all about what Tolkien called "sub-creation" -- not plot. And those detective stories are dependent on mood, too. By modern standards, Sherolck Holmes stories have some of the dumbest plots and most far-fetched solutions possible. Yet Shelock and Dr. Watson discussing the case is always good fun, and Sherlock's ice-cool logic creates a great mood even when he's cooly compassing the most ridiculous mysteries.

Find a new doctor. With the proper diagnosis, help is only as far way as the local pharmacy (or dealer).

papayahed

01-11-2014, 06:37 PM

Prince Smiles

01-11-2014, 08:50 PM

I found the anti-gravity novel, 'The First Men in the Moon' by H.G. Wells impossible to put down.:rofl:

Sancho

01-11-2014, 09:17 PM

^Me too!

And no doubt about, E', I may have miss-diagnosed my addiction. And anyway I'm beginning to think that Plot is a gateway to the hard stuff - character development, symbolism, allegory, irony, onomatopoeia, anthropomorphism, and the granddaddy of them all: stream of consciousness. <<shudder>> Go easy up there, man, I heard that those yahoos one state north of you made Plot legal during the last election cycle.

***

Okay, I'm having a hard time staying in character. So I'll ask a question. A couple of people here have put forth the idea that most plots are simply variations of a very few standard plots that have been around for a long, long time. It may go all the way back to a time when a bunch of folks were sitting around a fire, on rocks, in their cave, picking lice out of each others hair, and one of them said, "Hey, you guys remember when that stranger came into our valley? You know, the big fella. He was wearing a sabertooth cat skin, and he was riding a mastodon. Remember? Hahaha, Ug nearly shat his loin cloth."

I've heard the theory before, but do you-all think that most plots come down to variations of these two?
- Stranger comes to town
- Hero takes a journey

"Sing me a song oh muse, of the man..."

Or,

"I was taking a trip out to L.A., tooling along in my Chevrolet, toking on a number and digging on the radio..."

Odysseus was definitely an uneasy rider.

Anyway I also like the connection several people have made between literature and music. There is certainly something comfortable about variations of the I, IV, V chord progression - to western ears anyway.

***

Okay, okay, back to my twelve-step program. Or perhaps I should break out my old dobro and rip into a twelve-bar blues tune instead.

So many parallels in this thread.

Sancho

01-13-2014, 08:13 PM

Okay, I've had a day or so to think about this problem and I'm considering changing my mind. Not about being a plot junkie, oh no, El Sancho digs plot. But rather about plot being a gateway to the hard stuff. Plot in and of itself does not lead to more addictive literary mechanisms, but the criminalization of plot just may:

...I think the problem with literature is the so called "plot" heavy nature of so many people's reading habits. To me, the emotional connection between text and reader is what matters...

Plot is natural. It goes way back, possibly all the way back to the aforementioned cave-man times. Plot defines us. It has made us who we are. But when the so called literati have made plot illegal, it drives plot-heads into back alleys and airport bookstores and dentist's offices to get their "plot" heavy reading material. And those are the kinds of places where somebody just might pick up a comic book, or even a People magazine, and before long those sorts of things will lead to, *gasp*, daytime TV.

The horror, the horror.

Calidore

01-13-2014, 09:49 PM

I'm with you, Sancho. Give me a no-fat, clean-written, plot-driven pulp novel over a smug "literary" novel about unpleasant people behaving unpleasantly or introspecting endlessly.

papayahed

01-14-2014, 04:36 PM

I don't want to be smart all the time. Sometimes I read for learnin' but mostly I read to be entertained and to escape and plot-driven is the way to go.

Scheherazade

01-14-2014, 06:09 PM

I don't want to be smart all the time.Well, at least u ahve a choice... Not such luck 4 me!!!1!!11!! I ma rarely samrt.

Sancho

01-14-2014, 09:08 PM

^agree, agree, and agree. Agree cubed, I suppose.

When you get right down to it, isn't literature mostly just a form of entertainment? A broad form of entertainment, no doubt, that entertains professors of interpretative literature as well as half-bright sixth graders, but a form of entertainment nonetheless. Hey, some people like chess and some prefer checkers, but both groups are playing a board game, eh? (El Sancho enjoys a good game of Chutes and Ladders)

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I've read a number of difficult texts. But since this is a confessional thread, I'll make a confession about my experience - I didn't feel the rapture. It was more like I felt the rupture. The rupture of my...oh never mind.

Anyway, I can just about pinpoint when I became a plot junkie. I was probably eight. I'd read a bunch of Hardy Boys books, and they were okay. But one day at the local library, the librarian suggested Mark Twain's Tom Sawyer, and I was hooked. I couldn't put it down. My mother had to take it away from me so I'd go to bed, and then I'd just lay there wide awake, wondering what was going to happen next. It was stressful. I'd be lying in the bed, staring at the ceiling, thinking - Good lord, Tom, whatever you do, do NOT go into that cave.

I'm thinking Gill must've had a similar experience with Toilers.

Lykren

01-16-2014, 12:31 AM

Do we mean by the word 'beauty' what we mean by the word 'entertainment?'

From when I was about six to when I was sixteen, I read books in a compulsive way - as though I had little control over whether I read or not. The thrill of what might happen next was what propelled me to read on - but when I read Anna Karenina when I was sixteen, I noticed that the aftereffect of the time I spent reading was at least as powerful as the enjoyment I got while actually reading. This was different from what I had grown used to with other novels. With those, I always experienced an intense feeling of being let down by the ending. No matter how surprising, complicated, or dramatic the conclusion was, it never led to anything that made up for that feeling of disappointment that came when it was all over.

The beauty of the descriptions in Anna Karenina led me to a place that felt, and still feels, genuinely transcendent, instead of crushingly hollow. It perhaps takes more energy to engage with works that operate on this level, but now that I have learned of the difference I regret ever spending my time reading that which doesn't reward me in an enduring way.

The parallel I like to draw is with food. Eating lots of candy and pastries is fun for a while, and then you pay several times over for all the fun you've had. In a way, however, I am still enjoying the many fine meals I have eaten, simply by dint of the memories they have provided me with.

In response to Ecurb's point about plot contributing to the mood and atmosphere of a given piece, I would say that selection of detail is a stylistic matter, and that it is this which is the making or downfall of an author. That is, a story may end the same way twice when told by two different authors, but they will be distinguishable by the stylistic methods employed to hasten the story to its conclusion - such as, what to include, and when to include it. A great author will recognize that a sequence of events is not just the sum of its parts, but can have a variable impact depending on how those events are revealed to the audience. In this sense, plot is indeed something we could categorize as a stylistic element.

I think what we mean by 'beauty' is different from what we mean by 'entertainment' in that entertainment is concerned with what happens from an objective viewpoint, where beauty has to do with how it happens. The struggle for beauty, I think, necessarily involves the admission that objectivity is unattainable.

Sancho

01-16-2014, 10:20 AM

I'm a sugar junkie too. It's a chronic condition. If I happen to walk past a bakery, I am immediately transformed into a crazed pastry fiend. Ooo-Ooo that smell. Can't ya smell that smell? A couple of years ago I had the good fortune to be in Boston just before Christmas, and the better fortune to be up in the North End, and the even better fortune to be walking past Mike's Pastry Shop. People were lined up down the sidewalk. (Evidently I'm not alone in my sugar addiction.) So I got in line and a short time later I walked away with six boxes of cannolis.

***

Nice post, Lykren. I like your analogy between good literature and good food, but I don't think entertainment is in competition with beauty. Rather I think beauty can be a form of entertainment. I may be defining entertainment too broadly here. The point I was trying for was that entertainment is relative. A professor of interpretive literature will more than likely only find a work of literature entertaining if it is incredibly difficult whereas a half-bright sixth grader will find The Hardy Boys incredibly entertaining.

I absolutely agree with you that it takes energy to engage with great books. I also think it takes hard work, and I firmly believe that the hard work is rewarded, as you say - enduringly.

So I'm off to find a copy of Anna Karenina and an arugula salad. Which of the twelve steps am I up to now?

Lykren

01-16-2014, 12:35 PM

The point I was trying for was that entertainment is relative. A professor of interpretive literature will more than likely only find a work of literature entertaining if it is incredibly difficult whereas a half-bright sixth grader will find The Hardy Boys incredibly entertaining.

There's a distinction to be made between a text's complexity and its difficulty. Its difficulty is dependent merely on what the reader puts into it; in that sense, any text can become difficult. Complexity, however, is inherent to a text; no matter how much or little attention is given to a text, its complexity remains unchanged.

Austen's novels are not difficult to enjoy, not initially, but their themes are complex in such a way that they reward their readers according to how much attention they pay to the novels.

qimissung

01-16-2014, 12:51 PM

Also, Sancho et al, I'm not sure I like the idea that if I am a 'plot junkie' then by the same token I must also like 'pulp.' Which is not necessarily true, in my case. I've read many a detective novel and while they are not literature neither are they pulp which is defined as fiction that contains 'lurid' content. I think there is some juxtaposition in writing wherein a writer is able to construct a believable world and believable characters that you find fascinating. I do not usually care for books where style is placed before character because the interesting thing for me is how the author can explore an issue in a way that keeps me connected to the character. As it happens Anna Karenina is currently the supreme example of that for me (having just read it last year). Another good one is This Book Will Save Your Life by A.M. Homes. Obviously not AK, but then not everything can be. But I prefer books like that to books that are all style, like say, Ulysses-which I do hope to read someday, just not today.

A friend of mine once told me that reading for plot is the sign of an immature reader. I'm pretty sure she's right, much as I hate to admit it. I don't care. Like papaya, I don't want to be smart all the time.

Calidore

01-16-2014, 01:55 PM

pulp which is defined as fiction that contains 'lurid' content.

Small correction: "Pulp" fiction was named after the cheap wood-pulp paper used for printing the magazines it appeared in. Much of it was lurid, yes (as was much of Shakespeare), but not nearly all. It was the reading equivalent of a low-budget B-movie, or direct-to-video movie today--there was lots and lots of crap, but there were and are real craftsmen working in that area as well.

A friend of mine once told me that reading for plot is the sign of an immature reader. I'm pretty sure she's right, much as I hate to admit it. I don't care. Like papaya, I don't want to be smart all the time.

With apologies to your friend, I think feeling the need to enforce one's own personal tastes by making insulting generalizations about any other tastes is a much more reliable sign of an immature reader (or viewer or listener). People's willingness to validate such viewpoints by claiming to be less smart doesn't help. Creating and sustaining a complex, absorbing plot takes just as much craft as creating complex, absorbing characters.

Lykren

01-16-2014, 02:25 PM

But I prefer books like that to books that are all style, like say, Ulysses

Since style refers to the aspect of a text which is evocative, I don't see how there could be a book which is 'all style'. Such a book would necessarily deal with many aspects of life.

qimissung

01-16-2014, 02:28 PM

Actually, Calidore, I believe it was you who made the pulp reference: give me a no-fat, clean-written, plot-driven pulp novel over a smug "literary" novel about unpleasant people behaving unpleasantly or introspecting endlessly. I don't think "pulp" and "clean-written" exactly go together. And yes, I remember all that about the paper; and artistic things were created. I'm not disputing that. Nor was I saying that I'm not smart. That was humor. Or intended to be, anyway. :D I realize that that not everything that is not "literary" is not pulp, either. There are gradations of literature. I also remember a professor of mine saying that they always referred to romance novels as sub-lit. And I read many of those when I was younger. And it's even been said that reading those can lead to a "happier" relationship with one's beloved. Good to know, right. So everything has it's place. But plot is secondary. As ecurb pointed out many are timeworn or borrowed. I do think creating complex characters and developing complex themes is more important than developing a complex plot.

I read this in an article on "Gone Girl," a well-plotted novel currently making it's way to the screen. Apparently the screenplay will change significantly from the book:

In his (highly recommended) book “About Writing,” Samuel Delany includes a chapter on plot, in which he observes, “Among those stories that strike us as perfectly plotted, with those astonishing endings both a complete surprise and a total satisfaction, it is amazing how many of their writers will confess that the marvelous resolution was as much a surprise for them as it was for the reader … On the other hand, those stories that make us say, ‘Well, that’s clever, I suppose …’ but with a certain dissatisfied frown (the dissatisfaction itself, impossible to analyze), are often those stories worked out carefully in advance to be, precisely, clever.”

the article is here:

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/16/ending_gone_girl_differently_the_dangers_of_altern ate_last_acts/

So, plot. I like plot because it's a narrative, and it hangs it's hat on something I can recognize. But then I want an author to give me something to behold in my inner life, too, not just one event occurring after another.

Sancho

01-16-2014, 03:26 PM

There's a distinction to be made between a text's complexity and its difficulty. Its difficulty is dependent merely on what the reader puts into it; in that sense, any text can become difficult. Complexity, however, is inherent to a text; no matter how much or little attention is given to a text, its complexity remains unchanged.

Austen's novels are not difficult to enjoy, not initially, but their themes are complex in such a way that they reward their readers according to how much attention they pay to the novels.

Okie-Dokie

But I wasn't really arguing the difference between difficulty and complexity. I was arguing that literature is basically entertainment, regardless of its form.

So, complex or simple, easy or difficult, ugly or beautiful, obscure or straight forward, tedious or ... awe shucks I can't think of a direct antonym for tedious - it's all entertainment for its audience, eh?

I know what your thinking, but it's not true - El Sancho is not an antonym junkie. Antonym fetish? Well yeah, but junkie? Nah.

Hey, speaking of Pulp Fiction:

Vincent: Know what they call a Quarter Pounder with Cheese in Paris?

Jules: They don't call it a Quarter Pounder with cheese?

Vincent: No man, they got the metric system. They wouldn't know what the f*** a Quarter Pounder is.

Jules: Then what do they call it?

Vincent: They call it a Royale with cheese.

Jules: Royale with cheese. What do they call a Big Mac?

Vincent: Well, a Big Mac's a Big Mac, but they call it Le Big-Mac.

Jules: Le Big-Mac. Hahaha. What do they call a Whopper?

Vincent: I dunno, I didn't go into Burger King.

Any dialog junkies out there?

Calidore

01-17-2014, 12:28 PM

qimissung

01-18-2014, 04:27 PM

Absolutely, they do. I think saying much with little is a valid skill. Just like you have artists who enjoy putting in lots of detail and others who can draw a complete picture with only a few perfectly-placed lines.

There I would disagree; I think all those aspects are equally important and the ideal story will have full amounts of all of them. But that's hard to do, and given my druthers, I'm fine with a good plot with adequate characterization for the purpose, where you prefer character and theme. That's simply my personal taste vs. yours, and I would certainly never call you immature simply because you're not like me. What sticks in my craw is the need by some like your friend to pronounce their own personal preferences as the standard to be met and denigrate those who think or feel differently than they do.

And I agree with you: saying much with little is a valid skill. It's not actually one I would have applied to writers of pulp fiction. But let me differentiate between poor writers of pulp-or any kind of-fiction, and good writers of any kind of fiction. I understand what you are saying. There are great writers to be found anywhere in what we who love to label might consider the least noteworthy of the genres. Which is something that happens when we insist on labeling. :D

And, for the most part, I agree with you on the other, too. I don't really care what people read. Reading is, for me, simply a delightful journey that I am glad to be on, and if others are on it, too, that's simply wonderful. However having graduated from the murder mystery to other kinds of writing,, I still believe that it takes a stronger-let's use the word stronger which has fewer connotations than mature-reader to undertake the journey of Ulysses than it does Gorky Park which I really enjoyed and really must revisit one of these days. And even having said that, it's still largely a matter of taste. All that postmodern stuff really doesn't grab me by the throat and say "Read me!"

And I understand your feelings about my friend. She is opinionated. And judgmental. As I can be, just not about reading.

Sancho

01-18-2014, 11:58 PM

I have a humdinger of a confession to make: I've read Ulysses, and er, uh, ahem, I enjoyed it. I read it with a group though, or I'd've probably never made it past the Sandymount Strand chapter.

I've gotta agree with C. There's a vein of snobbery in the world of hoity-toity literature that runs deep, just as it does in the world of fancy-schmancy wine...and luxury automobiles...and classical music...and...

Lykren

01-19-2014, 12:38 AM

By snobbery I suppose you mean pretending to like something that you don't in order to seem smarter? If that's what you mean, what exactly makes you doubt people's word when they say they enjoy something? And if it isn't, what do you mean by snobbery? Please clarify. Thank you.

Sancho

01-19-2014, 09:37 AM

I suppose there is an inward-looking element to snobbery, but I think a snob is primarily someone who looks outward and more importantly downward - right down the ridge of his nose at the rest of the world. A snob is someone who likes to feel superior to others (or smarter or better looking or whatever). So if it means pretending to like something that he doesn't, well then that's just some of the collateral damage a snob does to himself. More likely, it seems to me, a snob has convinced himself he likes something, and somewhere along the line, who knows, he may actually have begun to like that thing. But I don't pretend to know what others actually like, and I certainly don't go around doubting others objectives out of hand. Hey man, I ain't no reverse snob!

But since we're on the subject, sort of, let me ask you a question. Suppose there's a big-time production of, say, Hamlet, and it's going to be at the swankiest of all the theaters in Manhattan, and the cast is made up of the best Shakespearian actors of the day. Everybody who's somebody is going to be there. The hoi polloi can fuhgeddaboutit. Now everybody's sitting there in their finest duds, watching the show with rapt attention, the look of wonderment on their faces. When Hamlet buys it in the end, cheeks in the audience are wet with tears. My question is, percentage wise, how many of the theater goers are truly enjoying the play and how many would really rather be at the ball game?

I remember a story about two great artists walking down the street, an older man and a younger man. By convention, when they met a group of nobles walking the other way, they were supposed to step aside and doff their hats. The older man did, but the younger man did not. Once the two groups separated, the younger man admonished the older man with something like: Why do you defer to them? There are thousands of them, but there are only two of us!

Anyway, that's how I heard the story. It's about Goethe and Beethoven.

Calidore

01-19-2014, 10:42 AM

And I understand your feelings about my friend. She is opinionated. And judgmental. As I can be, just not about reading.

I'm sure she's a lovely person, and I hope I didn't come across as being judgmental of her character in general.

By snobbery I suppose you mean pretending to like something that you don't in order to seem smarter? If that's what you mean, what exactly makes you doubt people's word when they say they enjoy something? And if it isn't, what do you mean by snobbery? Please clarify. Thank you.

I think of snobbery as pronouncing one's subjective likes and dislikes to be a higher objective standard to be met. "I like this because I am enlightened, and you can either show that you're enlightened yourself by agreeing with me or disagree and show yourself to be less than me." Pretending to like something one doesn't is done more by sycophants who buy the snobs' opinion of themselves and are kissing up.

Lykren

01-19-2014, 12:49 PM

My question is, percentage wise, how many of the theater goers are truly enjoying the play and how many would really rather be at the ball game?

This question is misguided, because 'enjoyment' is really too narrow a term for what we can get out of the greatest art. Such art introduces us to ourselves, which can be a pleasure, but can also be an immensely painful experience. We choose to undergo the experience of difficult art not for the pleasure alone, but because it makes us more alive to the less familiar of our own emotions.

Calidore, your post also makes the mistake of assuming that 'likes and dislikes' are all that is at question here. Art offers neither a pleasurable nor a practical experience; it might be said to be closer to the spiritual, though that's not quite exact either. Because we live in a world of emotions, we must apply ourselves to understanding them, or suffer the consequences. Although art is not an instruction manual for doing this, it is a useful template for engaging with them.

Sancho

01-19-2014, 04:35 PM

There you go again.

I thought we'd worked over to a discussion about snobbery, not about the subtleties of art appreciation.

Lykren, you keep joining the thread, but you don't seem to go straight at the argument. You keep coming in sideways. Rather than dive straight into the deep end, you sort of belly-flop in. (How's that for a 3-meter-springboard metaphor?) Sheesh, I feel like I've stumbled into the wrong side of a Socratic-method discussion, only with someone who doesn't quite have Socrates' gift for logic.

So, considering my earlier hypothetical situation, here's my question again, slightly reworded: How many of the people at the play would rather be at the ball game and how many are actually being "introduced to themselves" and becoming "more alive to the less familiar of their own emotions?" Really, what's the percentage? By the way, did you mean "difficult" art or "complex" art?

Yes, well, so anyway, earlier I mentioned Goethe and Beethoven, but since I'm still rolling with my diving-board metaphor, this time I'll go with another great artist:

"If it's somewhere around christmas time and somebody mentions the Nutcracker and it reminds you of something you did off the high-dive last summer, you might just be a redneck." -- Jeff Foxworthy

qimissung

01-19-2014, 06:00 PM

I think most people are where they want to be actually.

Calidore

01-19-2014, 07:45 PM

[QUOTE=Lykren;1251364]Calidore, your post also makes the mistake of assuming that 'likes and dislikes' are all that is at question here.

:confused5: My post was simply answering your question: "...what do you mean by snobbery?"

If we're now going into art appreciation, I would still say that like and dislike matter. Even if the art is challenging or unpleasant, people will still like the feelings it invokes or the way it makes them think, just like an MMA fighter, while in constant discomfort or pain from training and regular beatings, still on a higher level loves what he's doing. For that matter, some people prefer drama and conflict in their personal relationships; on a different level they enjoy being stressed and miserable. In the end, you like or dislike a work of art whether that pleasure is invoked directly or indirectly.

Lykren

01-19-2014, 08:22 PM

I thought we'd worked over to a discussion about snobbery, not about the subtleties of art appreciation.

Since you posited a connection between snobbery and some aspects of art appreciation (by implying that not all professed appreciation of art is genuine) I addressed that connection.

Sancho

01-19-2014, 11:41 PM

Alright then, I guess you don't have to answer the question.

Buzz-buzz-buzz goes the gadfly.

I have another confession to make: I've read every word Socrates ever wrote.

Lykren

01-20-2014, 12:11 AM

Do you mean the percentage question? I thought that was a joke.

papayahed

01-20-2014, 10:12 AM

I have another confession to make: I've read every word Socrates ever wrote.

Did you enjoy it??:conehead:

Speaking of percentage. I only have one data set. Years ago I organized a family activity. We went to see The Nutcracker then dinner. Out of 15 people the majority sat through it, my cousin loved every aspect, I like the music, my two other cousins liked the dancing, and 3 didn't know it was a ballet. The dinner was great.

Sancho

01-20-2014, 12:35 PM

Well...that's a tough question to answer. You see, I'm afraid that was sort of a joke. Perhaps a lousy joke, but a joke nonetheless. As far as I know, Socrates never wrote a word in his life. What we know of him we get through his student, Plato, who wrote all those dialogs with Socrates as a character long after Socrates' death. By all accounts, Socrates had a tremendous intellect. The reference to the gadfly was how Socrates described himself. He liked to buzz around Athens and annoy everybody with his questions. He had the ability to get at the truth by asking a series of questions and using his impeccable logic - The Socratic Method. He wound up paying for it with his life. They had him drink the hemlock tea.

Last year I read a wonderful book by the British historian, Bettany Hughes, - The Hemlock Cup. She has a real knack for describing what life in Athens was like during Socrates' time and taking the reader there. (Not a plot-heavy book, though)

qimissung

01-20-2014, 12:38 PM

Did you enjoy it??:conehead:

Speaking of percentage. I only have one data set. Years ago I organized a family activity. We went to see The Nutcracker then dinner. Out of 15 people the majority sat through it, my cousin loved every aspect, I like the music, my two other cousins liked the dancing, and 3 didn't know it was a ballet. The dinner was great.

:lol: That is hilarious. As is your rendition of it, papaya.

Ecurb

01-20-2014, 02:36 PM

I recently read an essay by C.S. Lewis called “High and Low Brows”. Lewis argues that the distinction between “high-brow” and “low-brow” literature is a false distinction. Among his points are:

1) When he was in school, ALL English language literature was “low-brow”. Greek and Latin were taught to the tune of the hickory stick, and school boys snuck Keats and Shelley into their dormitories at night. Lewis deplores the notion that reading “low-brow” fiction is seen as a pleasure, while reading “literature” is seen as a painful duty.

2) It is reasonable to make a distinction between “easy” and “difficult” books, but the tendency of the “experts” to prefer difficult books (because they allow the expert to show off his expertise) is silly. Lewis claims that his childhood tastes in reading were just as good as his adult tastes. As he learned to appreciate more difficult (and different kinds of) literature, he did not abandon his childhood favorites. Although he didn’t say so, I’d guess Lewis thought that liking ONLY difficult literature is a form of snobbery. As adults, we like wine and highly fermented cheese (which we hated when we were children). He have developed our palates for such food – but that doesn’t mean that we should deplore the flavor of bacon and eggs.

3) Making the distinction between “literature” and “Low-brow fiction” suggests that the kind of pleasure one gets from literature is different from that one gets from popular fiction. It is, somehow, more meritorious. Lewis disagrees. What makes “literature” superior to bad books’ is not a difference in kind, but a difference in quality. An adventure story like “She” (good book, by the way) is very good in some ways, but in other ways does not rise to a standard of excellence. Those who have read it with enjoyment have enjoyed literary merits also found in the Odyssey – however, that latter tome produces a more consistent enjoyment in the reader – it is more in touch with the essential nature of our imaginations, and leaves those who read it richer than “She” does.

kelby_lake

01-23-2014, 08:05 AM

cacian

01-23-2014, 05:10 PM

I like an interesting story- I think Hardy is very good at that. Dickens has aspects of his novels that are intriguing but you just know that you're going to have to cope with a gigantic cast and lots of plot meandering until everything is resolved.

Hardy novels tend to boil down into exciting premises. For example, The Mayor of Casterbridge- a man drunkenly sells of his wife an child, only to meet them again years later now he has reached a power of position. That's the sort of story that sounds interesting and full of drama. And Hardy tends to deliver on his promises- Jude is as depressing as it sounds, Tess is tragic and romantic, Far From The Madding Crowd is comparatively light and romantic.

what I find incredibly hard is how does one drunken become powerful? it is lacking credibility when it comes to down to it. it does lack that crunch.
to sell one child and wife is another incredible thing. I may never believe it to be credible it is in fact unbelievable even in the dark ages.
just because it is a story it does not make digestible to the mind logically speaking I could not settle for it just because it is a book.
credit is where credit is due is part of the good of any story.

papayahed

01-23-2014, 08:34 PM

kelby_lake

01-24-2014, 06:05 PM

what I find incredibly hard is how does one drunken become powerful? it is lacking credibility when it comes to down to it. it does lack that crunch.
to sell one child and wife is another incredible thing. I may never believe it to be credible it is in fact unbelievable even in the dark ages.
just because it is a story it does not make digestible to the mind logically speaking I could not settle for it just because it is a book.
credit is where credit is due is part of the good of any story.

Wife selling was a thing back in those times. One man sold his wife for a pint of beer!

ennison

01-26-2014, 06:35 AM

cacian

01-26-2014, 06:42 AM

How does one drunken become powerful?? Ygoddabekiddinme! Does the mayor of Toronno do crack? Only when he's out of his skull on rye. Did Yeltsin "sometimes"take too much tattiewater? Does the Pope go to church? Did Churchill ever go a day without uisgenabeatha? Power for some of these fellahs pours from the neck of a bottle.

let's for a minute consider the meaning of a drunken.
definition:
unsteady or lurching as if from alcoholic intoxication

from my own personal understanding a drunken is someone who is constantly drunk. how is one manages power when drunk?

kelby_lake

01-26-2014, 07:07 AM

let's for a minute consider the meaning of a drunken.
definition:
unsteady or lurching as if from alcoholic intoxication

from my own personal understanding a drunken is someone who is constantly drunk. how is one manages power when drunk?

I suppose you have a point in that alcohol is a depressent so it seems strange that he should have the ambition and will to gain power. However I think it would also feed delusions- some drunks feel invincible when they're drunk.

cacian

01-26-2014, 07:24 AM

Wife selling was a thing back in those times. One man sold his wife for a pint of beer!

did it? that is one hell of a story. a pint of beer for a wife. what would he have done for champers? sold himself?

Sancho

01-27-2014, 10:17 PM

The four basic stages of drunkenness, according to, and as experienced by, El Sancho:

1 - Strongest Man in the World

2 - Smartest Man in the World

3 - Being Invisible

4 - The Paramedics Show Up*

*my favorite

Sancho

01-29-2014, 09:23 PM

I don't want to be smart all the time.

Yep, I've spent most of my reading life thinking George Eliot was a dude.

AuntShecky

02-01-2014, 11:44 PM

I was already a member of the ecurb fan club.

I saw the movie version of "First Men In the Moon" last night on Turner Classics-- what a kick!

And Sancho, your original posting is astute and your subsequent little scenarios are funny.

I see your fascination with plots-- "page turners." But I've got a soft spot for great stylists, too. P.G. Wodehouse is a master of plot, but nobody can turn a phrase better. One of the few authors who made me laugh aloud.

Three memorable novels I read last year in which the plot (and the '"execution") moved me greatly: Middlesex by Jeffery Eugenides, The Echo Makers by Richard Powers, and Any Old Iron by Anthony Burgess. I read Bridge of Sighs a few years ago and I still think about it. Richard Russo isn't known primarily for his plots and even less for his style, but there's something about his writing, a sine qua non that keeps me turning the pages and being moved emotionally.

papayahed

02-02-2014, 02:33 PM

Ruben Meijerink

02-02-2014, 03:20 PM

I liked the Jesse Stone detective novels by Robert B. Parker (†). The first one even had a great plot.
The snappy dialogues/humor and barely forced personal life issues mingled in are always fun.

Sancho

02-02-2014, 10:29 PM

^That's one of the many things I like about this website - I get good book recommendations. Thanks Auntie, and thanks Ruben.

Wait, where's the "I love you man!" and "I'm gonna punch you in the face" stages?

That sounds like a scene from every family reunion I've ever been to (on the Irish side of the family anyway).
- Get lubricated
- Get in a fight
- Roll around in the mud
- Get up
- Hug
- Say, "I love you, man. This was fun. Let's get together again next year, cuz."

Annamariah

02-04-2014, 07:58 AM

I have to confess, too, I'm totally a plot-junkie! A bad writer can ruin even a great plot, but a good plot makes many otherwise mediocre books well worth reading. I find many highly-praised books utterly boring if the plot is bad or if the actual story seems to be just an excuse the writer to show off their experimental vocabulary and grammatical structures. This is not to say that I don't enjoy a beautiful phrase, but if the whole novel sounds like postmodern poetry, I'm not going to like it.

Sancho

02-04-2014, 10:52 AM

STEP 1
We admit that we are powerless over plot, and that our lives have become unmanageable because of it.

I have to confess, too, I'm totally a plot-junkie!

Hello, Annamariah, and welcome.

Mr.lucifer

02-04-2014, 02:51 PM

Without a plot, your characters would literally do nothing. Even a plot where it is just two characters sitting around talking is still plot. If you really wanna go intellectual, have a novel without characters.

Sancho

02-04-2014, 09:05 PM

^ Exactly!

And welcome, Mr.lucifer, to PJA (Plot Junkies Anonymous). Do you have a story you'd like to share with the group?

Annamariah

02-06-2014, 09:37 AM

STEP 1
We admit that we are powerless over plot, and that our lives have become unmanageable because of it.

Hello, Annamariah, and welcome.

Thank you! What should I do now? I'm not even sure if I really want to be cured. Does that mean I'm in denial and my problem is even bigger than I thought?

Sancho

02-06-2014, 05:57 PM

Thank you! What should I do now? I'm not even sure if I really want to be cured. Does that mean I'm in denial and my problem is even bigger than I thought?

Indeed, I think it does. And yet I agree, Annamariah, I'm not sure I want to change either. But I think we should try to stick to the program.

Step Two: We have come to believe that a power greater than ourselves, such as lyricism, can restore us to sanity.

This is not going to be easy. Oh no.

Annamariah

02-07-2014, 07:20 AM

Indeed, I think it does. And yet I agree, Annamariah, I'm not sure I want to change either. But I think we should try to stick to the program.

Step Two: We have come to believe that a power greater than ourselves, such as lyricism, can restore us to sanity.

This is not going to be easy. Oh no.

Oh no. Does this mean I should start reading poetry? Wouldn't it be enough if I just appreciated beautiful song lyrics?

Sancho

02-07-2014, 10:20 AM

Whew!

Going full-on poetry mode, it seems to me, would be a little extreme for a Plot Junkie. I don't think my system could take it. It'd probably trigger a relapse. My whole life has been one big back-slide anyway, so I'm going to have to take baby steps. Perhaps we should start with lyrical prose. The Great Gatsby comes to mind. Or as Auntie recommended - one of P.G. Wodehouse's books.

I like the idea of song lyrics too. When I listen to Sarah Vaughn, I go all weak in the knees. Or here's a sad little number about lost love. The chord progression is interesting to me:

Begin The Beguine
Performed by Sheryl Crow
http://youtu.be/iZ7ifstcOtQ

Annamariah

02-08-2014, 05:03 PM

Oh, I have the perfect song and lyrics to introduce here! It's Lilja's Lament (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2ZslKL5Yyc&feature=kp) by a Finnish band called Indica. It tells about the dangers of reading and what can happen if you're addicted to reading too many stories. A sobering example for all the plot junkies here.

At first the symptoms are not too bad, but the alarm bells should start ringing at this point:

Stories had been spun, a sea of metaphors were done
And Lilja heard but wonder's thunder
All the books she read kept her in bed and hurt her head
Her tragic flaw was not a blunder

If the situation goes on for too long, the consequences may be tragic:

Stories had been spun, a sea of metaphors were done
But Lilja lived her blunder thunder
All the books she read put her to rest on a seabed
Her tragic flaw still makes me wonder

Sancho

02-09-2014, 11:12 AM

That is the perfect song for this thread, Annamariah, and a sober reminder of what awaits a Plot Junkie at the end of the line.

We'd better stick to the program.

Annamariah

02-16-2014, 03:05 PM

papayahed

02-16-2014, 04:08 PM

Gilliatt Gurgle

02-16-2014, 04:26 PM

Hah, there you go^

Sancho

02-17-2014, 12:51 AM

Tsk-tsk-tsk, Annamariah, Annamariah, Annamariah, *heavy sigh* tsk-tsk-tsk.

Why'd you do it? What will the neighbors think? How will you live with yourself?

Step 3 - We must decide to turn our will and our lives over to the care of Vladimir Nabokov - as we understand him.

Ah, what the hey. I myself am a recidivist backsliding plot junkie. Falling off the wagon is half the fun. Just last week I read a Tana French detective novel. (Broken Harbor) It was grand - kept me up late at night. I suppose I should climb back on the wagon, but while Ms French's novels keep me up late, Vladimir Nabokov's novels make me sleepy.

Annamariah

02-18-2014, 03:28 AM

Tsk-tsk-tsk, Annamariah, Annamariah, Annamariah, *heavy sigh* tsk-tsk-tsk.

Why'd you do it? What will the neighbors think? How will you live with yourself?

I blame the public libraries! I would never stoop so low as to buy those books myself, but when I can get them for free from the library, it's only too easy to pick them up... And my neighbours don't need to know! I'm pretty sure none of them read this forum.

I am trying to sober up by reading a serious novel about Pakistan in 1970s... So far I've read a bit over 100 pages and I'm not the least bit interested in what happens next. Does that mean it's working?

ambient_woolf

02-21-2014, 09:48 AM

Sancho

02-21-2014, 10:01 AM

Step 4 Make a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

I blame the public libraries! I would never stoop so low as to buy those books myself, but when I can get them for free...

Is it really the library's fault, Annamariah? Look deep into your soul. That is where you'll find your inner Plot Junkie. We must be fearless when we confront our addiction. We must slay the beast.

Well, part of me thinks that. The other part part thinks, awe c'mon, Sanch', one li'l ole action-adventure book can't hurt you. Is that my inner Plot Junkie speaking? Or is that my nature? Maybe that's everybody's nature, our Yin and Yang clutched in a death struggle with each other. Could this be the duality of man?

So, I'm off to the library. Maybe I'll get with the program and go to the classics section, or maybe I'll head for the popular fiction selves. Who knows? Not me. ambient-woolf? We could use your help here.

Lykren

02-21-2014, 04:38 PM

A heavy reliance on plot is the reason most genre fiction bores me. To me, books from Grisham/King/etc read like outlines where the author forgot to include any characterization or flair. The "heavy handedness" and more insightful nature of so-called real literature is not stuffy to me: it's exciting; it's what makes art interesting and fun.

Yes, although I'd say that 'heavy-handed' is a description that better fits genre fiction, with its oft-repeated archetypes and over-used and cheap plot twists.

qimissung

02-21-2014, 06:59 PM

Help me! I must confess I fell off the wagon :( I just read two more books of a really badly written young adult series (I mean the language and the style is so bad and annoying it makes me cringe), simply because I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS NEXT! If even really bad writing isn't enough to keep me off those dangerous books, what hope do I have? What should I do now?

lol. I have to admit that I was unable to continue reading the Twilight series after the first two books due to the rather leaden writing.

I actually enjoyed the first one. While it wasn't very well written, the story was compelling (i.e. Edward +Bella) enough for me to finish it.

On the other hand, in between some decent literature I have been reading books from the Stephanie Plum mystery series to get me through these dark and cold winter days. Talk about heavy-handed writing. :D

Calidore

02-21-2014, 07:25 PM

On the other hand, in between some decent literature I have been reading books from the Stephanie Plum mystery series to get me through these dark and cold winter days. Talk about heavy-handed writing. :D

I liked the first couple of Plum novels a great deal, but then Evanovich seemed to either lose interest or confidence and started resorting to gimmicks like novel-ending cliffhangers to keep people coming back, while the books themselves became more forced and less fun.

qimissung

02-21-2014, 10:10 PM

Well, she's churned out about twenty of them. That might have something to do with it.

Gilliatt Gurgle

02-21-2014, 10:37 PM

Step 4 Make a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

Well, part of me thinks that. The other part part thinks, awe c'mon, Sanch', one li'l ole action-adventure book can't hurt you. Is that my inner Plot Junkie speaking? Or is that my nature? Maybe that's everybody's nature, our Yin and Yang clutched in a death struggle with each other. Could this be the duality of man?...

Step IV begins to stir the yellow bile quadrant of our humors, we seek out the less complex slice of our ethos, where "blondes have more fun". It's ok to reach for the Flemming, the Asimov, perhaps Gentle Ben. Heck, there's been times my bile still leads me to the good doctor, no not Hippocrates, I'm talking about Seuss of course.

Sancho

02-23-2014, 04:38 PM

I gotta tell ya, I was on the edge of my seat waiting to see what happened to Sam-I-Am.

qimissung

02-23-2014, 07:57 PM

While I really was not so interested in the outcome as the journey-the rhyming which roller skated along in the most delightful fashion, and the ever insouciant Sam-I-Am. I was actually a teeny bit disappointed to see him go along with the status quo.

Annamariah

02-28-2014, 10:29 AM

After the last time I reported here, I went to the library and borrowed a novel by Nabokov. I also got the next part of that awful series, though... Do they cancel out each other? I did finish the novel about Pakistan too, does that help?

Sancho

03-02-2014, 09:20 PM

Step 5: Admit to the Litnet, to ourselves, and to another Litnutter the exact nature of our wrongs

Well done, Annamariah, I think they do cancel each other out. But what do I know? I'm a recidivist Plot Junkie myself. Oh yes, and welcome back. How have you been? We've missed you here at PJA (Plot Junkies Anonymous).

I have another confession to make. I've taken to streaming mysteries on NETFLIX. This can't be a good thing. I can't help but to think it's a setback. It feels like I've fallen off the wagon...again. Curses!

Most recently I've found myself hooked on the mini-series, Top Of The Lake. It's about a young girl who goes missing and the investigation that ensues. It's filmed in a gorgeous area of New Zealand. As the plot unfolds, it just gets weirder and weirder. I can't wait to see what happens next.

dark desire

03-03-2014, 01:41 PM

youngsquire

03-03-2014, 04:34 PM

I think a good comparison to this would be films; although many of us are familiar with what we would consider "good" movies (ex. Citizen Kane, Casa Blanca, Schindler's List etc...), there's a reason why there are so many "bad" or "ok" movies that make more money -- and the reasons are: 1) It takes less effort to try and follow a complicated plot than to watch a movie that is easy to understand. 2) Because it makes us happy. Usually really good movies are considered "good" because they portray real life -- which is, most of the time, sad and depressing -- instead of portraying a fictive world in which the good guys always win and very cool and interesting stuff happens to them every second of their lives. 3) Because most of the general public watch movies in order to escape from their normal lives -- to imagine life as something more, something better -- something that it is not.

This analogy relates to books because when we look at the books that are making the most money (ex. J.K. Rowling, Steven King, James Patterson) they have a lot in common with the highly enjoyable and addicting movies that we as a society are so addicted to. And there's a reason why -- they are MADE to be entertaining and easy and exciting. And although, I admit that I enjoy watching the occasional bad movie, or reading an addicting mystery novel -- I feel a lot better about myself at the end of the day when I know that I put forth the extra effort to read a book in which allows me to gain something in return: enlightenment, erudition, instead of just capitulating to my own, easily satisfied, indulgences.

qimissung

03-03-2014, 06:12 PM

That's a good analogy, youngsquire. I read somewhere that a lot of fiction aimed at middlebrow readers often contain a lot of cliches. The cliches act as signifiers, making these works easily read and understood. I think the same is true of the tropes used in a lot of action movies and romcoms. And whereas "good" movies use more challenging symbols and metaphors that require more thought to decode.

Sancho

03-03-2014, 10:24 PM

Hey Sancho,

The girl I am dating had a similar thing about literature. I gave her Sanctuary by William Faulkner which is simultaneously a thriller and a stream of consciousness writing. She praised it quite emphatically saying that il that was way way better than the other thriller stuff available out there. I'd like to know if hers was a solitary case or you would agree with her on this.

A great number of people have addiction to thrillers. It isn't rocket science to understand that. Regular normal life isn't all that exciting anyways! Isn't it?

Hey Dark Desire,

It seems to me that you are a very good friend to your girl. Everybody in the PJA 12-Step program needs a sponsor. But one thing to be on the lookout for when you sponsor an intimate friend is the possibility that she is projecting her love for you onto the fine work of literature that you have recommend for her. Does she really love the work of William Faulkner for the sake of the work, or does she love it because she is trying to be closer to you? This is a tricky business.

Oh yes, a very tricky business indeed. You should proceed with caution - Plot Junkies can become wickedly dangerous when cornered and confronted. But you must seek the truth: Is she hiding a cheap dime-store novel deep in the bottom of her shoulder bag? Have you checked for a romance novel on the bookshelf behind The Complete Works of William Shakespeare? Has she ever told you that she was going to the library to study the classics, but then returned late-late at night, her clothing rumpled, her hair disheveled, her fingers stained with cheap news print, and her speech peppered with not-so-clever cliches?

Be very careful, my friend. Be very-very careful.

I have another confession to make: one of my favorite novels of all time is William Faulkner's Light in August.

All the way from Alabama a-walking. A fur piece.

It's been a while since I last read it, but I still vividly remember parts. I'll read it again someday. And I'll find things I didn't notice in earlier readings. It'll mean things to me that it didn't when I was a younger man. I'm looking forward to it. By the way, there are cheap thrillers I've read last month that I can barely remember anything about today. Go figure.

Annamariah

03-06-2014, 11:33 AM

When I go to library, I try to balance things out by borrowing more serious books in addition to the silly ones. For each one that I'm truly ashamed of I try to read one that people might actually talk about in civilized company. (Other than saying how horrible it is, of course.) At the moment I'm reading an Italian novel called New Finnish Grammar. I picked it up because the title caught my attention. It is always interesting to see how foreigners write about Finland. The book is quite different from what I usually read, so I guess it's some healthy variation and keeps me on my path to recovery.

I do have some great page-turners from the library just waiting to be read, though. I will just finish the Italian one first and then I'll reward myself with one of those...

Snowqueen

03-06-2014, 11:40 AM

I also have a confession to make. I've read last three parts of Harry Potter series and thoroughly enjoyed these books, especially The Half Blood Prince. Do I fall into the category of plot junkies? By the way I was only 24 years old kid then. :D

Annamariah

03-06-2014, 06:45 PM

If you feel like you are a plot junkie in need of help, I'm sure no one is turning you away from this thread! Welcome aboard.

Then again, if Harry Potter is enough to make you a plot junkie, I'm in a worse condition than I even realized before. I have all seven Harry Potter books in both English and Finnish (plus the last one in Russian), and I've read the first four or five ones in Swedish, too. I can't even say how many times I've read the series, they are among my all-time favourites. The thing is, I must confess, I HAVE NEVER BEEN ASHAMED OF LOVING HARRY POTTER BOOKS. My guilty pleasures are much worse than that. So hi again, everyone. I'm 25 years old. My name is Anna, and I'm an incurable plot junkie who is only beginning to realise the full proportions of her problem.

Sancho

03-06-2014, 10:14 PM

Step 6: We are entirely ready to have high-brow, hoity-toity literature remove all these defects of character.

Hello, Snowqueen, an welcome to PJA (Plot Junkies Anonymous). As Annamariah mentioned, we are an inclusive group. Our doors are always open. Here at PJA, we are all trying to better ourselves through literature and yet we seem to keep back-sliding. This plot addiction of ours is pervasive and permeating. We are enslaved and obsessed, paralyzed and powerless, stupefied and mortified, dazed and confused. But we're trying.

As for the Harry Potter series, I say, "Hooray for J. K. Rowling." She singlehandedly got an entire generation hooked on books, and increased the membership in PJA many fold. As for the legions of Harry Potter detractors, I say, "P'Tooey on you, and - Get thee to a nunnery."*

I have another confession to make: the Harry Potter books weren't around when I was a teenager, but I did get badly hooked on Edgar Rice Boroughs' Tarzan of the Apes series. I binged on them. I wanted to be Tarzan - swinging on vines through the jungle, fighting lions and tigers, defending the weak, protecting my ape family, basically kicking arse and taking names. I could picture it. It involved me wearing a leopard-skin loin cloth.

*Bawdy Bill Shakespeare-speak

qimissung

03-06-2014, 10:30 PM

Have you read King Solomon's Mines, , Sancho? You're never too old for adventure on the written page, as we all know!

I'm getting ready to go to the library to get something "fun" to read as an antidote to the serious book I'm currently reading.

qimissung

03-06-2014, 10:30 PM

Snowqueen

03-07-2014, 09:40 AM

The pleasure is all mine! It's very nice to be a part of this thread. You guys are the coolest junkies I have ever come across. :D
Yo, Sancho I read Tarzan of the Apes too I was probably 8 or 9 then and enjoyed it a lot. King Solomon's Mines is still one of my favourite books, Qimi.

Sancho

03-08-2014, 10:13 PM

Haha, agreed, we are the coolest - just like Fonzie.

This is also the grooviest place to get book recommendations to feed your addiction. Thanks Qimi, I haven't read King Solomon's Mines, but I found a free copy of it on the web from the Guntenberg Project. I'm about half way through Emil Miller's book right now, which I must say has been great fun so far. I can't wait to see what happens.

ennison

03-11-2014, 06:02 PM

S ancho you could easily make a good living as a stand-up comic. I feel my inward laughter bubble agreeably with you. I too like a good plot. I come home like tonight very knackered - old age does not come alone! Brickie wanted the scaffold raised and loaded for tomorrow and we did it. So my brain needs a bit of entertainment, a good yarn well told. It's relaxing. It's the equivalent of a Radox bath.

Sancho

03-12-2014, 07:19 AM

Hello ennison,

And welcome. You're amongst friends here at the Litnet's PJA. Our membership is growing and I'm thinking we may soon need a bigger meeting room. This little broom closet at the public library is getting cramped. You see, I'm certain there are more Plot Junkies out there. In fact, just reading through some of the earlier posts on this thread, I see several glaring examples of Litnutters in denial. C'mon, folks, take the first step.

"C'mon in, take off your skin, and rattle around in your bones."
"C'mon in, take off your skin, and rattle around in your bones."*

*Trapper John in harmony with Margaret Houlihan to Frank Burns

Hal

03-13-2014, 02:22 AM

Most readers nowadays prefer plot or "story". This wasn't always the case. If you look at the best seller lists from the first half the 20th century its mostly literary works. What Americans chose to read had a dramatic change in the 1980's. In 1970 Hemingway's "Islands in the Stream" was the 3rd most popular novel of the year. A decade later and the top ten list is full of spy thrillers. The Cold war had been around since the end of World War II. So,what happened?

Television and the cinema probably. People wanted to read the same things they were watching at the movie theater. Their brains changed. The narratives they were enjoying with movies made them more likely to enjoy the same narratives in print. Or it could be that we still have all those literary readers but that mass media/television/film etc created a new kind of reader with a cinema brain.

Personally, I cannot read genre fiction. But I love watching thrillers at the cinema. I'm not into page turners. I'd rather finish reading a page and lean back in my chair and ponder its brilliance.

Sancho

03-13-2014, 10:09 AM

Thanks for poking your head in, Hal. I think you may be on to something.

Surely addiction is a brain-changing malady, and television may be a causal factor for Plot Junkies. Just the other day I flipped on the tube to watch an episode of Bay Watch and, BOOP, my forehead sloped back. Later that day I walked into Classics Section of my local library and, BOOP, my forehead popped back upright again. Weird.

I have another confession to make, and this one's a doosey: as a young adult I read Peter Benchley's Jaws. You see, I've had this plot addiction from a very young age. All of us kids in the neighborhood were reading it, skipping school, hanging out in back alleys, basically ruining our lives.

Then that summer a few of the parents from the 'hood loaded up their station wagons and we all caravanned down to Myrtle Beach. I remember it distinctly. It was early evening. The sun was low in the sky. There must've been 8 or 10 of us kids out in the water just beyond the breakers, arranged in loose circle, the waves lifting our feet off the sand and then setting them back down again. We were talking and laughing and splashing each other and generally having a grand old time. Then, of course, the conversation turned towards - SHARKS. The circle grew tighter. Everybody started sneaking peeks towards the shore. A few of the girls started hugging themselves and shivering a little bit. The fat kid was getting particularly nervous, figuring he'd be the first to go. Things were getting serious.

Well, Sancho being Sancho (and a bit of a dick), decided to have some fun. I had a few sand dollars in my pocket, so I ducked under the water and swam over behind and underneath one of the girls. I had a sand dollar in each hand and I simulated a shark's bite on her ankle - Chomp-Chomp-Chomp, not very hard, just enough to liven up the discussion...

So that was the first time in my life I got my nose broken with a kick to face.

Snowqueen

03-14-2014, 09:47 AM

That is very funny incident, Sancho. Well, I was mischievous too. I loved Jungle Book story and film when I was a kid and used to imagine myself to be a man cub raised by a pack of wolves. Thank God my family didn't know about my wild imaginations.
I was the silliest kid with an adventurous soul! Oh, and I sometimes stealthily used to feed on seeds and grains that my uncle kept for birds. Unfortunately, I was caught red handed one day!

Calidore

03-14-2014, 10:47 AM

I have another confession to make, and this one's a doosey: as a young adult I read Peter Benchley's Jaws.

I read Jaws also. I only did the entire novel once, but I went back to the shark hunt at the end a few times; that was very well done. If the editors had done what Spielberg did for the movie, removing all the domestic padding in the middle and sticking with the shark-related stuff, the book would have been much tighter and better.

So that was the first time in my life I got my nose broken with a kick to face.

The first time?

ennison

03-14-2014, 04:50 PM

Well there is another similarity Sancho. I've had my conk broken a few times too when I was younger (even younger than I am now). Adds a bit of character to an otherwise bland face from the point of view of my own physiog-challenged features.

Sancho

03-14-2014, 06:14 PM

I agree completely, ennison. In fact, I'll go one further. I've always thought that one measure of a life lived fully (or at least lively) is the number of your bones you've broken, the number scars you have, and this goes with the others - the number of wild animals you've been bitten by.

Calidore, I'm not proud to say, the second time was more inglorious than the first. 8 or 10 years after the Jaws incident, I was doing some hand-to-hand training with the Army. I wasn't in the Army; I was in the Air Force, but the job I had at the time put me on the ground with the Army a lot (I was a Forward Air Controller), so I got to do all that fun stuff they do in the Army and the fun stuff they do in the Air Force. At any rate, my grappling partner got me pretty good. I guess it was more of a knee to the face than a kick to the face, but it was totally uncalled for, in my opinion. They got it straightened out pretty good. Next time I'll be ready. Swear to god!

Snowqueen, I honestly think what you wrote is the key to the whole Plot Junkie problem. And please indulge me while I wax philosophic for a moment. I think we humans are hard-wired for plot or story. Our lives are themselves a story of a sort, which has a beginning and an end and a bunch of stuff that happens in between. We are intuitively drawn towards a good story. We identify with the characters. We're happy when they triumph and we're sad when they fail. We can see ourselves in them. (I wanted to be Mowgli too when I was a kid. Now, of course, I'd prefer to be King Louie) Anyway, to be human is to have story, and to have story is to have that unique human capacity for - empathy.

Alright, enough philosophizing, here's another confession: I strongly identified with Will Robinson when I was a kid. This was a number of years prior to the broken-nose incident at Myrtle Beach.

Does anybody remember the TV show, Lost In Space. It was a show more-or-less on par with Gilligan's Island or I Dream Of Jeannie, only instead of being marooned on a tropical island or at Cape Canaveral in a bottle, this one was about a family - lost in space. One of the main characters was a kid who was a little older than I was, Will Robinson. The Robinson family had a robot that looked something like a shop-vac on some corrugated drainage-pipe legs. In retrospect, the effects weren't very special, but at the time they seemed spectacular. Anyway, whenever Will was in peril, the robot's arms would flail back and forth and he'd yell, in his metallic robot voice, "DANGER, WILL ROBINSON. DANGER-DANGER, WILL ROBINSON."

One night while watching the show, I became so concerned for Will's safety that I climbed up onto a shelf beside our TV set and attempted to jump into it, just to help Will out. We had one of those old console sets that was popular back then. I remember the top of the console was polished oak, and it was quite hard. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure I was wearing a cape. It was one of my finer moments.

As I recall, my Dad said something like, "What the ..."

**Sorry, folks, this confession got a little windy.

Gilliatt Gurgle

03-16-2014, 12:01 PM

Step 6: We are entirely ready to have high-brow, hoity-toity literature remove all these defects of character.

...

"Defects of character", are you referring to the pre high-brow (HB) childhood tomes ?
I look upon the Gentle Ben's, Where the Red Fern Grows, Chitty, Chitty Bang Bang 's, Are You My Mother? as the, albeit now lichen covered, stepping stones of youth that pave the way to that HB summit. My HB ascent is still in the woods, but getting close to the tree line after having flirted with plots from the likes of Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, Hugo, Conrad, Dickens, Dante and a few others. My greenhorn lungs will certainly require supplemental oxygen trudging forward into what seems an infinite display of HB authors/plots. When I turn that last page, can I walk away confident that I fully comprehended the plot? Or will I find that the liquid leaked out of my Silva leading my down the wrong path forcing me to retrace old ground?

Does anybody remember the TV show, Lost In Space. It was a show more-or-less on par with Gilligan's Island or I Dream Of Jeannie, only instead of being marooned on a tropical island or at Cape Canaveral in a bottle, this one was about a family - lost in space. One of the main characters was a kid who was a little older than I was, Will Robinson. The Robinson family had a robot that looked something like a shop-vac on some corrugated drainage-pipe legs. In retrospect, the effects weren't very special, but at the time they seemed spectacular. Anyway, whenever Will was in peril, the robot's arms would flail back and forth and he'd yell, in his metallic robot voice, "DANGER, WILL ROBINSON. DANGER-DANGER, WILL ROBINSON."

One night while watching the show, I became so concerned for Will's safety that I climbed up onto a shelf beside our TV set and attempted to jump into it, just to help Will out. We had one of those old console sets that was popular back then. I remember the top of the console was polished oak, and it was quite hard. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure I was wearing a cape. It was one of my finer moments. ....
I remember Lost in Space along with a few of the characters; Will, the robot and who could forget Dr. Smith? In terms of plot, I felt that LIS plots were shank gristle as compared to Star Trek (tos), a 64 oz prime Porter House. Btw speaking of plots and robots, the plot junkies should take a hit of Rossums Universal Robots a book and play also credited with introducing the word "robot"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.U.R.

Your TV cabinet crawling reminded me of how my parents encouraged us to slide and shuffle across the parquet floor in cotton socks.

Sancho

03-17-2014, 08:43 PM

R.U.R., go figure. Gill, you always seem to come up with the coolest connections. That Wiki page was fascinating on many levels. Wikipedia - ain't it grand?

As for Plot Junkies having "defects of character," I'm not sure when exactly it starts, or whether or not you can grow out of it. In my particular case, I'm pretty sure I was already a Plot Junkie in utero. Which is a clumsy way of saying it's a genetic disease in El Sancho's family. But here at PJA, we don't discriminate. Also we don't blame others for our failings. We're all just trying to better ourselves through literature, and trying to help each other get along in this mean old world.

So, on to Step 7*

We humbly ask high-brow, hoity-toity literature to remove our shortcomings.

*Psst, Gill, I'm just lifting these steps from the original AA 12-step Program, which I cleverly cut and pasted from Wikipedia. (I changed them some)

qimissung

03-17-2014, 09:03 PM

I think I've read that entry before, Gilliat. Have you posted it elsewhere here? It strikes a dim memory in my poor overheated brain cells. Something that seems to be happening more often lately.

Lost in Space. I feel so fortunate to have grown up during the golden years of television. Danger, Will Robinson, danger!

Is it any wonder I cannot pry my mouth from the teat of popular culture, that I am the plot junkie I am today?

Paulclem

03-18-2014, 04:35 PM

I remember Lost in Space too - though on reflection there seemed to be little about space. I remember Dr Smith - with his archtypal English ambivalence. I didn't really associate us Brits with him because he talked posh - like a lot of British villains. We though posh people were villains too. We certainly didn't meet any of them.

Robbie the Robot went on to be in Forbidden Planet with a younger Leslie Neilson -of Naked Gun fame. Great film Forbidden Planet. I remember watching it the first time as a kid. It was on at a weirdly obscure time - something like 6pm on a Wednesday. It was a surprise bonus for that time of the week.

AuntShecky

03-18-2014, 05:34 PM

Lost in Space was a futuristic Swiss Family Robinson; in fact the latter-day SciFi series retained the family name. I abhor the term "pop cultural icon" but that series must have etched itself on the brain of many a Baby Boomer. Even one of my older daughter's doctors referred to it one day with the line: "Danger--Will Robinson!"

The movie, Forbidden Planet, also is a familiar plot transplanted into a space cadet setting. This time Shakespeare's The Tempest is the classic that was copped. When I recommended this movie to my younger daughter, she was reluctant to view it because she'd been made to read The Tempest in high school as well as for two different courses as an undergrad. But this isn't the work that she is most sick of-- that would be Lord of the Flies. I have to agree with her there. Being forced to read that thing even once is close to torture!

But it should show us how old plots never die; they just get recycled into a different setting.

Gilliatt Gurgle

03-22-2014, 01:15 PM

... Also we don't blame others for our failings. We're all just trying to better ourselves through literature, and trying to help each other get along in this mean old world.

...So, on to Step 7...
Sancho, who better to lead us through step 7 than the dynamic duo; Dante and Virgil?
After passing through The Inferno ringers, our shortcomings will be sufficiently cauterized allowing the healing powers of HBHT to shed those defective scabs.

Like Dante, we are lost in a wood seeking a better understanding of plot – (Gusatve Dore engraving)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Gustave_Dore_Inferno1.jpg/317px-Gustave_Dore_Inferno1.jpg

If I may alter a famous Captain’s quote, quoting John Masefield:
“All I ask is for a tall book and a solid plot to steer her by”.

Here’s the Captain’s version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eXB1Yj05Fw

I get goose bumps every time I watch that clip!

I think I've read that entry before, Gilliat. Have you posted it elsewhere here? It strikes a dim memory in my poor overheated brain cells. Something that seems to be happening more often lately.
..

Your synaptic cylinders are still firing fine, I have posted comments on RUR a couple time in the past. it is a great read. it is loaded on my long lost Nook, missing for about a year now.

AuntShecky

03-22-2014, 04:38 PM

my long lost Nook, missing for about a year now.

How hard did you look for it? Did you check every nook and cranny?

Sancho

03-22-2014, 07:03 PM

Well, well, well.

Oh me oh my

Jesus, Mary, and Sancho's great uncle José!

This changes everything.

Auntie, if plots are just formulas that have been reworked over and over again, then my theory of life as a story, and human-beans being hard-wired for story is..., well, a bunch of hooey.

This is bad. Bad, bad, BAD. Hmm, unless of course I sign up for one of those weird Eastern religions where everybody gets reincarnated, and keeps on getting reincarnated until they get it right: Birth-Life-Death, Rebirth-Life-Death, and again, 1-2-3, 1-2-3.

That's it! Sancho's new theory of life as story in three-quarter time. And you can waltz to it.

http://youtu.be/_CTYymbbEL4 <My favorite, The Blue Danube, by Johann Strauss

Everybody now: 1-2-3, 1-2-3, Step-Shuffle-Shuffle, Step-Shuffle-Shuffle, we go in a circle. Holy-Moly! It's the circle of life! Man-O-Man a good theory just writes itself. Am I right?

Whew! I feel so much better.

Gill, hmm, Gill-Gill-Gill. Uh, I don't know, man. Dante and Virgil? I've scoured the 12-Step program and I can't find anywhere where it says, Abandon all hope Ye who enter here. (Although maybe it should)

Wait! Wait just a chicken-fried minute. You got 12-step problems? Then El Sancho has 12-step solutions: Alls we need to make this work is one more person - Beatrice. Ta-Dah! If I'm remembering correctly that Comedy which was so Devine, Virg' led Dan' through Hell and Purgatory, but it was Beatrice who took him by the hand and led him to Paradise.

Whilst I'm looking for the lovely and Devine Ms Beatrice to guide us, and in keeping with certain themes and motifs of the thread, I think we should all go Star Trekkin' and waltz our way around the universe.

http://youtu.be/FCARADb9asE

BTW, I left my nook in the seat pocket in front of me around about a year ago. This was after one of the Stew's warned us about that.

Gilliatt Gurgle

03-23-2014, 10:30 PM

...Alls we need to make this work is one more person - Beatrice. Ta-Dah! If I'm remembering correctly that Comedy which was so Devine, Virg' led Dan' through Hell and Purgatory, but it was Beatrice who took him by the hand and led him to Paradise.

Whilst I'm looking for the lovely and Devine Ms Beatrice to guide us, and in keeping with certain themes and motifs of the thread, I think we should all go Star Trekkin' and waltz our way around the universe.

http://youtu.be/FCARADb9asE

BTW, I left my nook in the seat pocket in front of me around about a year ago. This was after one of the Stew's warned us about that.

Sancho, let’s pull back the reins on that 200 Evinrude, Achron is a no wake zone! Here; toss this oar to Cheron, he’ll gently ply the waters of your 12 step program on toward Purgatorio. We still gotta ride a spell fore we reconnoiter with Beatrice in Paradiso.

Great Virgil’s ghost, what has gotten in to me? I hope the group can forgive my tumble off the wagon. The other night it was the last of the Hennesy , (or was it the Mohicans? (talk about a plot) and tonight it’s the Chianti.

“As God may let thee, Reader, gather fruit
From this thy reading, think now for thyself
How I could ever keep my face unmoistened,
When our own image near me I beheld,
Distorted so, the weeping of the eyes
Along the fissure bathed in hinder parts.
(Canto XX; L 19-24)

Sancho this is your gig, take us out of my relapse.

----------------
“There’s Klingons on the starboard side”- hilarious video, reminds me of that old chamber pot adage; “Watch out for those Klingons around Uranus…keep an extra corn cob handy.”
My father told me they were known as “thunder jugs” up there in Shidler Oklahoma.
“Stews”, be careful using that today.

How hard did you look for it? Did you check every nook and cranny?

Haha, there’s still a couple of travel bags I need to check. Aunty, I bet you could tell us, what is a “cranny”?

Sancho

03-24-2014, 10:33 PM

I just had a revelation.

It occurs to me that I may have been too hasty in considering Gill's 12-step proposal. One of the reasons Dante's Divine Comedy has remained relevant for all these years is because we all have periods of Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso in our lives. If you live long enough (and your not a dullard) that's the curve of a life. The Divine Comedy speaks to us. It spoke to me anyway.

So I was waltzing across the universe in search of the Divine Ms Beatrice, but instead I ran into the Divine Ms O'Connor. And I didn't need to go clear across the universe; I only had to go a few miles south of Atlanta, to Milledgeville, which is where Flannery O'Connor is buried. Here's how her story, Revelation, starts:

The doctor’s waiting room, which was very small, was almost full when the Turpins entered and Mrs. Turpin, who was very large, made it look even smaller by her presence. She stood looming at the head of the magazine table set in the center of it, a living demonstration that the room was inadequate and ridiculous. Her little bright black eyes took in all the patients as she sized up the seating situation. There was one vacant chair and a place on the sofa occupied by a blond child in a dirty blue romper who should have been told to move over and make room for the lady. He was five or six, but Mrs. Turpin saw at once that no one was going to tell him to move over. He was slumped down in the seat, his arms idle at his sides and his eyes idle in his head; his nose ran unchecked.

Get the picture? Mrs. Turpin is a snob. The story goes along like this for a while and she looks right down her nose at just about everybody in the doctor's office. She takes turns hating on everybody. She notes that the child's mother is wearing a print dress that matches the print on the sacks of chicken feed she has in her barn. Well in this world, what comes around, goes around. So eventually a girl in the waiting room (an ugly girl according to Mrs. Turpin) accurately reads the situation and calls Mrs. Turpin an old wart hog. And that cuts her where it hurts the most. You see, Mrs. Turpin is a hog farmer. A dirty, smelly, low-rent, hog farmer. Hahaha! She has no right to look down at anybody. She's just putting on airs.

And there's the rub. That's what makes the Divine Ms O'Connor so divine. I found myself looking down at Mrs. Turpin in much the same way she looked down at everybody else. Ms O'Connor showed me a fool in this story, and the fool turned out to be me. And that was a revelation.

Spoiler Alert!

And so in the story, Mrs. Turpin's revelation comes to her in a vision. As it turns out, when her time comes, she's not exactly at the front of the line for the Pearly Gates:

Until the sun slipped finally behind the tree line, Mrs. Turpin remained there with her gaze bent to them as if she were absorbing some abysmal life-giving knowledge. At last she lifted her head. There was only a purple streak in the sky, cutting through a field of crimson and leading, like an extension of the highway, into the descending dusk. She raised her hands from the side of the pen in a gesture hieratic and profound. A visionary light settled in her eyes. She saw the streak as a vast swinging bridge extending upward from the earth through a field of living fire. Upon it a vast horde of souls were rumbling toward heaven. There were whole companies of white-trash, clean for the first time in their lives, and bands of black niggers in white robes, and battalions of freaks and lunatics shouting and clapping and leaping like frogs. And bringing up the end of the procession was a tribe of people whom she recognized at once as those who, like herself and Claud, had always had a little of everything and the God-given wit to use it right. She leaned forward to observe them closer. They were marching behind the others with great dignity, accountable as they had always been for good order and common sense and respectable behavior. They alone were on key. Yet she could see by their shocked and altered faces that even their virtues were being burned away. She lowered her hands and gripped the rail of the hog pen, her eyes small but fixed unblinkingly on what lay ahead. In a moment the vision faded but she remained where she was, immobile.

Early on in this thread we had various comments deriding plot junkies. Evidently a Plot Junkie is no better than someone who would wear a dress made of chicken-feed sacks. I took great pleasure in applying reverse snobbery to the situation, and in doing so I made myself a flunky to pretentiousness. And that's a fine how-do-ya-do.

Good literature is a fine thing.