I found it interesting, however, that Palahniuk offers the following artistic moment: "She was working in a new vein. A new twist on a classic Dada theme. In her studio, she had the little teddy bear already gutted out, its fake fur spread open autopsy style, ready to turn into art. Her rubber gloves smeared with brown stink, she could hardly hold the needle and red suture thread. Her title for all this was: Illusions of Childhood." (p. 79). That's right, she's stuffing a teddybear with crap and calling it art. Based on this, I was a consummate visionary when I poked food and presents from my own diaper into my big white and green bear as a child.
And I also finished "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time" by Mark Haddon. I didn't like it as much as the universal hype about it, but it was a good story and very well-written: sort of Rainman from the savant's viewpoint (albeit, that's a gross simplification). It was supposed to be uplifting by the end, as the main character's (John Francis Boone) parents finally put aside their own (selfish, but human) needs to benefit their (rather exceptional) kid, but for the most part it depressed me because the story really doesn't need a kid who straddles both extremes (once again, think Rainman) to get across something that happens every day to millions of children who don't even have special needs, the idea that some parents are so concerned about their needs and their grudges against others that it's to the detriment of their children, even when those needs aren't as important in the light of what their child might be going through. Sure there are a lot of subthemes: some adults are more like children than their children, children can be incredibly resilient despite the odds stacked against them, you can learn lessons from your children and from people who might not seem exceptional, but in their perseverence and outlook on life are exceptional, or at least worth examining, there's a counterexample for showing that certain forumlae about right angled triangles can not be conversely proven based on the right angle assumption, etc.
1 comment:
Ahem...I believe there is another book you need to finish. "Another Road Side Attraction"
Post a Comment