Stoner
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
Just finished this amazing book. Any similar recommendations? Also, Stoner general
>Stoner
>doesn't get stoned even once
He raped his wife
>>7943296
Started this book on Tunein audio book and got 4 chapters in and loved it. Then I go to listen to it the next day and they removed it.
Feelsbadman
>>7943316
Read it dude
>>7943296
I read Stoner and loved it and I also loved Revolutionary Road. I'm interested in recs too
>>7943307
>Stoner
>weed not mentioned even once
>>7943296
one day off l m a o d u d e
>>7943296
>>7943296
DUDE
>>7943335
Yes, anything by Richard Yates really.
>>7943296
That one part where Kristen had "For W.S." in her book. FUCKKK MAN. That's real literature right there. And fucking idiots cry when they read Twilight. Wow. They have no idea how great books can be.
Yeah, Stoner is a great book. I think /lit/ has generally accepted this as great literature. Possible consideration into the /lit/ canon.
What did you all think of edith? And lomax?
What did you think of stoner's life in general?
Also, I loved the book but want to know why others like it so much and what they think of stoner and the people he interacted with.
>>7943296
You should check out Williams' other books. Butcher's Crossing and Augustus are really fucking good.
>>7943863
I thought that the fact that Edith is so consistently described as being pale is worth analyzing. I don't have too many thoughts on Lomax, maybe someone can enlighten me?
There's a lot of symbolism in the imagery. Anyone else notice that the word "gray" is used literally every other page. Anyone else notice that the word "gray" isn't used a single time during the his affair with Katherine, and then when the affair ends the word "gray" appears almost immediately after. Similar phenomenon with "numbness" and "dim".
I could go on and on about the imagery, but right now I'm curious what you guys think.
>>7944994
One last thing I have to add. Stoner notices that Katherine's eyes aren't black but actually violet and her skin not pale but actually warm (lots of mentions of the word flesh here) during, when? The beginning of spring.
>>7945031
>Stoner is on both the entry level and exit level lists
>go on lit for first time
>exit immediately
>>7945046
By exit-level it means suicide.
>>7945149
It doesn't, though. The guy who made the list never had that intention.
Stoner's on it because it only surged in popularity in the last few years. It wasn't always so widely loved.
>>7944994
>>7945000
I hadn't noticed the persistent description of edith as "pale" but it makes sense to me. This is how stoner saw edith: as a person devoid of warmth, feeling and affection. She lacked any humane compassion towards stoner (after a while) and her behavior was reflected in how stoner perceived her.
Also, I agree with his emphasis on numbness because that is exactly how one would feel when caught in the dull monotony of a life devoid of individual freedom. What choice do you have? What could evoke an emotion or passion in you when the things you've been denied the things that you hold dearest. When someone imposes themselves in your life to a degree that you have no choice but to cower and acquiesce, living in a reduced form. You feel anger and grief but those are emotions that can not be sustained over a long period of time and therefore give way to numbness and indifference. When you just give in to monotony. That is what stoner experienced imo. Life in a dull gray world.
Of course it becomes more vibrant when katherine comes into his life, igniting some hope that he might become a person that has the capacity to be more than he currently is and feel more than he currently does. His life takes color until of course lomax intervenes.
I'm a bit torn on lomax though.
I doubt that lomax thought his student was competent so Was it a matter of professional integrity that he defended his clearly incompetent student? How could someone be this vitriolic against someone(stoner) who they know is right? Was lomax just that petty? That he'd tyrannize someone through their entire life simply because they had professional disagreements?
>>7944994
Masters was great. Shame he wasted his life so early.
>>7945278
I always thought that Lomax saw his younger self in Walker. Both were a little deformed. Lomax thought that Stoner made fun of Walker's disability. He took it personally.
>>7945279
yes. masters was an interesting character. I suspect that the book (and stoner's life) would have been very different had masters lived instead of finch.
>>7945290
This, it's spelled out so clearly, how the fuck can you not realise this?
>>7945331
>>7945290
Of course it's spelled out clearly. Stoner even realizes that walker is an "exaggerated" version of lomax, almost to the point of a "parody". to stoner walker is a replica of lomax. but we don't get lomax's perspective on this.
sure, it is a reasonable thing to figure that lomax saw himself in walker but is that really enough to hold a lifelong grudge? when is it alluded that lomax thought stoner was mocking walker's disability? lomax just accuses stoner of being discriminatory but does he really believe that?
>>7945315
I think that is painting it a little too colorfully.
You have to look at the era. Deformed people and cripples were often looked down upon in general. That's why Lomax is such a 'try-hard' and has such an ego about him. He earned his position and flaunts it, despite his abnormality.
So when a bright young student comes in who is also crippled, Walker, it would be very easy for this kid to be wrote off by all other professors as just 'crippled'. So Lomax uses his swing to help him out, probably like he would have wanted. Then Stoner comes in, rips on him and Lomax takes it to heart, thinking Stoner is just getting on his case because he is crippled and Lomax's protege.
>>7945349
this makes sense and is closest to what i figured as well.
>>7945278
Both Lomax and Stoner were wrong. Walker was gifted, but lazy. He had a bright future in the field, but Lomax overestimated him and Stoner underestimated him. Lomax was wrong in been so keen to forgive his errors without correcting him and Stoner was wrong in trying to destroy this student's future instead of making an effort to help him flourish.
Did anyone else feel that lomax and edith represented the two things that beat a kind man down into defeat in life?
>those in power (lomax)
>those in a personal relationship.(edith)
I guess in a way Edith held power over stoner too.
>>7945384
>stoner was wrong
>stoner underestimated him
>stoner was wrong in trying to destroy this student's future instead of making an effort to help him flourish
huh? did you read the book? stoner never acts out of malice and gives walker leeway literally every chance he gets. He allows walker to submit his thesis considerably late, puts up with his interruptions and a completely pointless impromptu attack against a different student.
Stoner acted in the most professional way possible. Walker was a fraud and did not deserve to teach and stoner knew that. Walker deserved to be kicked from the uni desu and stoner was too kind to his bullshit. stoner was too kind to everyone's bullshit imo,
>>7945410
Except I feel his standing at the end of situation was only trying to exclude him on the basis that he would corrupt the literary world and other students, which is a very personal reason to limit someone.
At the end of the day, Walker was clearly an expert in the topics he researched and enjoyed, and the fact that he took Stoner's class only to for minimim requirements. In the end that makes Stoner seem petty, just as petty as Lomax's grudge against him afterwards. While I do think Stoner had his reasons to dislike Walker, who is a very flawed character, I just felt that at the end of the chapter he was forcing the issue too much. Walker's "opportunities" to pass would clearly be a blotch on his permanent record, which would be most likely be enough.
I don't know why the reader is always kept unaware of why Edith loses interest in Stoner just at the start of their marriage. She could have easily refused to marry him. What is usually a gradual decline in relationships is described as so sudden in this book, and with no apparent reason.
>>7945463
>only trying to exclude him on the basis that he would corrupt the literary world and other students, which is a very personal reason to limit someone.
no. you might have missed the part in which stoner clearly shows reluctance in having anything to do with walker. when the committee for his defense is scheduled, stoner immediately asks finch if he could NOT be a part of it. there is literally nothing personal in stoner's method of dealing with walker.
now, when stoner can't possibly avoid walker and has to (by rule) fulfill his duty as a judge, he is objective and fair. he asks basic and simple questions which walker fails at answering (EVEN on the topics in which he is an expert). stoner tests him with basic questions on different areas including those in which walker is supposed to be proficient.
it is painfully apparent that walker is a fraud. his skills are limited to oration and pretension at something valuable.
in case you did not know, in academia, people don't judge you based on "feels" and "poor baby's future". They are objective and fair which stoner was. It would be an injustice to unfairly give walker a bloated grade just because of "poor guy".
So no. stoner wasn't forcing the issue. it's just that you're not used to ruthless objectivity and fairness.
(PS: even some students in my uni complain against profs who're too strict and don't give them leeway. The more serious students laugh at them and their incompetence.)
>>7945384
>>7945463
>Walker was clearly an expert in the topics he researched and enjoyed
Dude, he improvised his term paper in Stoner's class and couldn't answer a single question about any literature prior to the 19th century when Stoner interviewed him. What's more is that he and Lomax were clearly collaborating to conceal this fact. This should piss the reader off, not make him question Stoner's judgement.
>which is a very personal reason to limit someone
What? No. Stoner thought (and was probably correct) that Walker would be a horrible teacher.
If your analysis of Walker is anything but saying he's in the novel to advance the tragedy that is Stoner's life, then you're wrong. He's not a dynamic character at all.
>>7945506
She never loved him. He married her because she was superficially attractive, she married him because it was her only way of getting out of her house. She only had that initial bought of intense lovemaking solely to make a child. By the time both matured and realized they were not meant for each other, they wee too far involved to through it away.
>>7945506
I don't think she was interested him at all ever. There wasn't any passion in her parents' marriage, and I think that's how she thought things were supposed to be.
Edith doesn't really seem to have a soul, so I doubt she'd be capable of passion to begin with.
>>7945534
>she married him because it was her only way of getting out of her house
And then years later Grace gets pregnant so she can get out of the house. Sign of the times, eh?
>>7945557
Its strange though. I still had some empathy for grace but absolutely none for edith when it can be argued that both turned out the way they did because of their upbringing.
Maybe because grace never acts as malevolently or outright cruelly as edith does.
>>7945579
>empathy for grace
I agree. I think it was because Grace WAS showing promise to turn out to be a good person, and a positive influence on Stoner's life. That is, until Edith recognized this and intervened in any way she could.
These stupid threads.
>any similar recommendations?!
Try starting with the author's other works
>>7945579
I think both the reader and Stoner never stop seeing Grace as she was when she was 6. For both the reader and Stoner the most vivid memories of Grace are her in his study when she was young, and as she gets older Williams frequently reminds us of that Grace by inserting things about a fleeting smile or a brief bit of dialogue that reminds Stoner of how things used to be.
IMO that's the saddest part of the novel, the way that Stoner loses his relationship with Grace.
>>7945674
they're not that similar, although they are very good.
>>7945688
>I think both the reader and Stoner never stop seeing Grace as she was when she was 6
Yeah. Pretty much. We see her childhood and how it developed from her being a sweet child to a reticent messed up introvert under edith. Moreover, grace never displayed a capacity for cruelty to the extent edith did.
>IMO that's the saddest part of the novel, the way that Stoner loses his relationship with Grace.
I felt that as one of the saddest parts too anon. Stoner's relationship with her daughter was extremely endearing because his time with her was one of the few times in the book where he feels love and happiness. To watch his own child be set on the path that she was by edith was pretty sad.
>>7945688
There's a gorgeous line towards the end where he says something like "You were always there", referring to when she was younger and had her own little desk in his study. That really brought me to the edge of tears.
Also the description of Stoner's death at the end was so surreal. Obviously no one can validate what death 'feels like', but man I really felt like I was dying with him. It was described perfectly.
>>7945046
/lit/ 360
Start pushing through the NYRB
Any good academic texts or essays for the study of symbolism in Stoner? Really feel I have missed out on a lot of it
>>7946095
Agreed.
(but.. but .. dude that pic.. )
>>7946095
Can you use spoilers next time please?
>>7947086
Well, keep in mind that no one really noticed Stoner until a few years ago, so there's not likely to be a whole lot of scholarship on the book. I did a JSTOR search and did a ctrl+f on a few articles about Stoner and I didn't come up with anything. Although I suppose it's possible to discuss symbolism without using the word "symbol", but it doesn't seem likely.
Luckily, the symbolism isn't exactly opaque. If you're really interested, then read it again and annotate. Most of the symbolism I noticed had something to do with one of the following:
-Edith's pale eyes
-the color gray
-numbness and dimness
-Stoner often looking out of a window
-the way the shadows creep up the columns outside of Stoner's office.
-descriptions of the landscape during spring and winter
That's enough to start with, and keep in mind there's definitely a lot of stuff I left out or missed altogether.
>>7948951
maybe you shouldn't read a thread discussing a book you haven't read if you don't want it to be "spoiled"
regardless, the book opens with the line
>William Stoner entered the University of Missouri as a freshman in the year 1910, at the age of nineteen. Eight years later, during the height of World War I, he received his Doctor of Philosophy degree and accepted an instructorship at the same University, where he taught until his death in 1956.
so I don't understand what you could even be complaining aboutyou little bitch
