What does that mean?Originally Posted by Paulclem
Do you think, considering that we are responding to the written musings of a contemporary of the Romantics, who were themselves not shy in populating their sentences with asides, we should respond in a like idiom to our venerable fellow posters?
Should we post our discussion in the style of De Quincey.
After a few side trips to other texts I’ve finally finished this book, and although I thought it written in an engaging style that warmly brought the reader into the narrative, and which followed the well-known curve of so many present-day addiction-and-recovery biographies – that is to say: after some sort of initial catalyst, the protagonist is enticed towards a drug of choice and then has a period of pleasant euphoria but which is marked by a steady escalation of use and amount of the habit-forming substance, followed by the desperation of addiction that inevitably involves several unsuccessful attempts to shed the monkey from his back, and after suffering through the agony of withdrawal, he finally manages to move beyond the offending narcotic and into his scarred yet clean life – I nevertheless enjoyed the book and believe it to be, if not a great work of literature, at least a fine work of literature, and a pure example of writing from the British Empire during the Victorian age, an age in which I was surprised to find was much less judgmental than our own towards opium eaters, possibly a direct result of the unfamiliarity of opium by the majority of the population at that time and its effects even though they were quite aware of the ravages of alcohol within their communities, as evidenced by a parliamentary program in Victorian England to promote ale as healthful alternative to gin, and, at any rate, as I think I’ve already mentioned in this incredibly convoluted run-on sentence, I enjoyed the book and feel somewhat enlightened about the physiological strains as well as the more complicated sociological ramifications of not only the availability of Occidental opiates, but also the governmental trade policy concerning opium in the Orient, and despite the rather spirited defense and promotion of the book by a certain forum member, I do not necessarily consider it the greatest work of the western literary canon to be ensconced between two book covers, but a fine book none the less,and I will recommend it as a text for anyone who enjoys reading good books.
That was exhausting.
Last edited by Sancho; 10-13-2011 at 12:02 PM. Reason: correction of a tragic speling error
Uhhhh...
I fear you are mistaken my good fellow, notwithstanding your good intentions in posting within the spirit of the thread. It was surely written after 1800 was it not, being that he was a contemporary of the Romantic poets and all.
It was written in 1821 so it is acutally pre-Victorian, which spans the time of 1837-1901
Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before. ~ Edgar Allan Poe
Thank you Dark Muse. trust you to come and save me from my laziness. Had I your undoubted energy, i would have heaved myself from this surfing stool and gone to the aforesaid book, and looked up the very precise date you supplied, and enriched my respose with facts rather than my own brand of poor speculation.
(I bet the conversations with the academics were a bit tedious then).
Haha yes one can tell I am someone with too much time on my hands
Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before. ~ Edgar Allan Poe
Correct-a-mundo mis amigos.
Right you are, my friends. After an exhaustive search and much primary-source research into the history of England and the categorization norms for historical eras as defined by the Modern History Department and the Interpretive Literature Department at Cambridge University, (really I only checked Wikipedia) I have determined that Muse is indeed correct – The Victorian era in England squares almost exactly with the dates of Queen Victoria’s reign: 1837 – 1901.
Please forgive me my sketchy knowledge of English Monarchs. You see, I am an American and the victim of a public school education. Therefore, my understanding of the British system of government comes to me through a very tattered textbook with a decidedly American viewpoint. So, although my understanding of Queen Vic’s dates may have been a bit off, I am quite certain that King George III was the sovereign in 1773 when Sam Adams and a bunch of the boys were whooping it up in the small town of Boston and wound up tossing about 45 tons of high-grade East India tea into the harbor. We’re still pretty much a coffee-drinking nation to this day.
So, what in the world does that have to do with the book-club discussion you may ask? Well, I’m getting to that – and I better get there quickly or Scher’s going to come in here in one of her stay-on-topic moods, with a crazy look in her eyes and her finger on the delete button, looking for some satisfaction.
The book was written towards the end of the Georgian era in England, which was named for the four King Georges (and oddly enough one William), and which immediately preceded the Victorian era, which, I think we’ve already established, was named for Queen Victoria. They were all Hanoverians. Queen Vic was not only the Queen of England from 1837 -1901, but she was also the Empress of India from 1876 – 1901. And it was East Indian tea that hot-headed Sam Adams and the boys deemed intolerably taxed and hence pitched overboard into Boston Harbor – strangely enough some of the boys were thinly disguised as North American Mohawk Indians. At that time over on the other side of the Atlantic in parliament and among the general population of England there was a good deal of sympathy towards the American colonists, but Dr. Samuel Johnson was not one of them.
And, De Quincey mentions Dr. Johnson several times early on in his book.
Ta Da!
Like Churchill, the always quotable Dr. Johnson had a quick wit and an uncanny ability to get to the heart of the matter succinctly. He had this to say about American Independence: "How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?"
We got our independence anyway, and I don’t remember reading anything about Dr. Johnson in my South Carolina Department of Education approved textbook on U.S. History.
Uhhhh...
I can see that it is an early type of confessional, given that his paragraphs wind from one character to another situation seemingly randomly. Nowadays, the books we get are tightly structured, but De Quincey meanders, as does his sentences, to which we are grateful in order that we can mimic his style and bask in our own verbosity.
I think that’s what I liked about his book: it was not tightly structured and it didn’t have writer’s workshop stink all over it.
Last weekend I was browsing the fiction section at the local bookstore and came across a promising looking novel, but then I read the author’s bio on the flap. It said he had an MFA from the Iowa Writers’ Workshop, a PhD from some danged place, and he now teaches writing at Harvard University. So, I put the book back on the self and moved on down the line.
Uhhhh...
I finished reading the book this evening. Though I searched everywhere in Taipei and bought it years ago, after my translation professor recommended this author in class, I never finished reading it over the years. I always wanted to read more and learn more from the book, but I never did, for reasons beyond me, and it was not until this evening that I reached the end of the book. To my surprise, I enjoyed the book more than I thought I could have, if I did read it years ago. The second half of the book is even more fascinating than the first half, some parts of which I read for a couple of times since I bought the book. True it is, that it was written in a very good style of English, but what allures my attention to this book, especially toward the second half, is the facts behind the words. I seemed to get the feeling that the writer was talking in his sleep, and was recorded of his voice by a machine lying next to his pillow, when he, never noticing the fact of the machine all the while he was talking wildly and feverishly.
I was enchanted by almost all the ideas he presented in the second half of the book, some of which include a blur of his waking hours into his dreams, the depths into which he descended each night with melancholy, when he was not awake, and a miraculous return to the way a child views the world, in his wild dreams. He wrote down several scenes which he saw in his sleep, and some of which really stood out among the rest. I didn’t remember all of them, because it was the first time that I read the book. However I want to read the book for a second time and perhaps a third, to learn more. Now I am thinking of the never ending ladder which grows toward the heaven, more and more quickly, and the scene in which he played with crocodiles. He wanted to eat opium because he wanted those vivid dreams.
I want to know more about wine, so I searched for the paragraphs which I’ve read in this book about wine and its effect on the author. I do not want to repeat what was written in the book about wine. I read them over again, and I know I feel love.
I haven't finished reading yet, but I'm having a hard time staying interested.
Our writer goes a long way to try to convince the reader (or himself) that he isn't just your average user, but he is.
He leaves school, takes to the streets, gets involved with some unsavory types, gets whatever money can from those who will give it to him (he says it never even occured to him to get a job) and, suprise, starts abusing drugs.
This story is not uncommon. It isn't now and it wasn't then.
I will continue reading, and I hope to get more out more out of it.
Right now, I have my doubts.
I like poetry,long walks on the beach and poking dead things with a stick.
I think that is a common thought process for many users as well, the self-denial in which they convince themselves that there case is special or different in some way, that they truly are not typical, run of the mill addicts. Their need not to say themselves as such and try and convince others that their own addiction is a special circumstance.
It is akin to users who try and make the claim that they are not truly addicts, and that they could if they wanted quite any time, they choose not to do so.
It is a fantasy they need to avoid confronting the truth of their situation, and it can also be the very same thing that acts a crutch in their recovering, if they are not willing to admit they are indeed addicts
Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before. ~ Edgar Allan Poe
I think that's why I'm a little turned off. He's still making excuses rather than being really honest, even after he's clean.
I like poetry,long walks on the beach and poking dead things with a stick.
Yes that is one of the things I noticed about the book, though I am still enjoying the writing and find it an interesting experience.
Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before. ~ Edgar Allan Poe
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
