Just finished reading Light in August. I finally completed reading Faulkner's major works, and I think he's the great American writer simply because I can't think of an American with five masterpieces to their name. Faulkner has The Sound and the Fury, Absalom, Absalom!, Light in August, As I Lay Dying, and The Unvanquished. One can even mention The Mansion.
I thought I read the best Southern Gothic novel when I read O'Connor's Violent Bear it Away, but this also takes the cake. This is probably Faulkner's best work with regard to characterization, with such vivid outcasts featured throughout the novel. Joe Christmas is also an inscrutable, well-made, damned character.
Any thoughts about Light in August?
>>8045709
>I can't think of an American with five masterpieces to their name
>who is Gaddis
Seriously though, there has to be a re-discovery or appreciation of Faulkner. Too long, he's been the go-to southern Gothic writer. People need to find his work on their own rather than have to slog through AILD (excellent as it is) for senior English.
>>8045730
Here in the Philippines, most English teachers hate Faulkner because he's hard to read. I was called by my lit professor ages ago weird because I actually persevered in reading him.
They usually pick Steinbeck or Hemingway for American literature. Sometimes Morrison is also recommended. No one's heard of Gaddis or Gass, and I've had to do my own stumbling on Hawkes.
I will read Gaddis one of these days, though. Thanks for reminding me.
>>8045730
At most Gaddis has 2 masterpieces
I agree with the OP though, Faulkner is a rare writer who maintains a supremely high level throughout a great many novels. I have yet to read Absalom Absalom but im expecting great things.
I will say however that i believe the Great American novel was Moby Dick but Faulkner may be the Great Novelist.
>>8045730
Carpenter's Gothis is not stellar and Agapē Agape is basically him putting the message of his first two books in a long stylized essay
>>8045730
What's the right order to read Gaddis?
Is there anything by other authors I need to read before him?
>>8045773
why would you need to read something from another author to read him? why would there be an order to reading his books? he's not john fucking barth. Google his books. start with the one your interested in. jesus christ this question is retarded. reeeee
>>8045773
Just start with The Recognitions. Use the online guide for a close reading of the first 100 pages, then use it as much as you like for the rest. It's a very enjoyable read, and by the end you'll be rushing to pick up JR which is slightly more difficult and funnier throughout.
>>8045730
Also what are his letters like?
>>8045793
why would you need a guide for the first 100 pages. this book so far doesn't seem hard at all.
>>8045773
don't do what I did and start with Carpenter's Gothic. I was underwhelmed and put off reading The Recognitions for a few years because of it. Read The Recognitions first.
>>8045793
J R is not difficult to read at all.
>>8045917
It isn't difficult to read, but many people I've tried to get to read it have said that their attention wanes with the information overload. It isn't hard, it just demands all of your attention. Many people find that difficult ("as if the reader could have time to daydream between sentences").
How is Gaddis compared to Under The Volcano when it comes to difficulty? Read it two weeks ago and I absolutely enjoyed, didn't seem hard to me although I had heard it was
>>8046015
Lowry is very visceral. He makes you a part of the landscape, the action. You feel like you're actually there because he's so immediate. Gaddis is more observational, detached. Both are similar in that their landscapes are rife with symbols and religious imagery (especially with regards to Dante).
>>8045889
Imagine the narrator of The Recognitions writing to his mom about Mexico, Spain, Hungary, failure.
Light in August is the only Faulkner I've ever read and to be honest I was expecting more. I thought Burch and Christmas were interesting characters. Maybe im just jaded from reading some of the better European modernists before Faulkner. I hear absolom and sound and fury are better. I'll still give them a try, I can see the potential.
>>8045709
Must ask since Ive been interested in Faulkner, what would you recommend me to read first? Also, if telling you that I love southern gothic lit matters, use that as reference.
>>8046341
I think the best Faulkner novel, and my favorite novel, is Absalom, Absalom! The story is set in Mississippi (I don't really remember now), and is about a Thomas Sutpen. He tries to get land through unscrupulous means from Indians and tries to build his posterity. He has two children, Henry and Judith. Judith eventually falls in love with a certain Charles.
You have to read the rest of the story for yourself. It features unreliable narrators that possess only part and parcel of the story that reveal more and more about Thomas and his family as the story unfolds. It is Thomas's overbearing concern about race and miscegenation that makes him fail to see love towards people still his family.
It's the only book I threw away in reality because I was so jealous Faulkner wrote it instead of myself. Of course I picked the novel back up, but you get the idea.
I think you'll also like its first sentence: 'From a little after two oclock until almost sundown of the long still hot weary dead September afternoon they sat in what Miss Coldfield still called the office because her father had called it that — a dim hot airless room with the blinds all closed and fastened for forty-three summers because when she was a girl someone had believed that light and moving air carried heat and that dark was always cooler, and which (as the sun shone fuller and fuller on that side of the house) became latticed with yellow slashes full of dust motes which Quentin thought of as being flecks of the dead old dried paint itself blown inward from the scaling blinds as wind might have blown them.'
>>8047328
Light in August is 'easier' than Absalom, Absalom! but is also a good read. While I respect people who have The Sound and the Fury as their best Faulkner, no Faulkner novel is both as cohesive and as good as Absalom, Absalom! It was also ranked by writers to be the best Southern novel of all time.
I think it's really, really good. But if you want less challenging Faulkner to ease yourself into reading him, Light in August, while longer, is a lot more easy to digest.
Faulkner is at the peak of his serpentine writing with Absalom, Absalom! so there's a sentence that runs on about a thousand words. My technique for reading it is just to read as fluidly as possible, only looking back after I've read entire paragraphs, because Faulkner often expands on what he talks about within the paragraphs he's written.
>>8046328
Light in August is a great Faulkner, but Absalom, Absalom! is his best work. So if you've time and patience to keep on despite your disappointment, I think you'll like Absalom, Absalom!
Melville has Moby-Dick, Bartleby, The Confidence Man, Pierre, and Billy Bud. So there.
>>8045793
I got a bone to pick with that online gaddis guide. in the annotated paragraph for pages 60 something to 77 it says how a picture wyatt painted was sold by his mentor and his mentor passed it off as a hans memling painting.
but no where in that actual chapter does it say that his mentor sold his painting. it just says a memling was discovered.
so why use this guide if the guide is going to tell you shit you could only find out from reading further. it kinda just spoiled that chapter for me. I would have liked to find that out myself later on.
thus fuck your guide. guides are for fags. we aren't that stupid. using a guide is tantamount to giving up.
>>8047340
Ok that works, I'll get Sound and the Fury and Light in August first. TSATF cuz its the most popular one and LIA because according to you its the easier one.
>>8046328
> jaded from reading some of the better European modernists before Faulkner
I've honestly always thought this is the reason Faulkner isn't so revered, although he did write so many great works: in the wake of Joyce and Proust, he seems a pale imitation of them, not an original innovator. Just my opinion, although I still love reading his works. He excelled at stream-of-consciousness, but he was far from an innovator in it.
>>8047400
fuck the sound and the fury. its not hard. just shitty
>>8047386
i agree man. i always do my best on a novel without help. lots of people just want to be walked through a novel. most importantly, reread if you are struggling. rereading is the most undervalued and underutilized tool to the modern reader.
>>8045709
>I thought I read the best Southern Gothic novel when I read O'Connor's Violent Bear it Away
m8 that book isn't even good. It's decent at best.
Terrible taste in lit.
>>8047427
exactly. I re-read a few paragraphs. I find if you don't understand it, usually something happens later to explain it. just keep reading.
>>8045899
You're missing a ton of references if you don't look at the guide
>>8047442
if you are reading just to "get" every reference then you're doing it wrong m8
>>8047442
nigger I'm not stupid. he references painters, religious types, places in Paris, etc etc. I don't need an exact explanation of who/what those people/places are to enjoy the story. I get the point. the only thing I'll Google are a few french words I don't know.
>>8045914
I started with CG. I loved it. Perhaps not quite a masterpiece, it is very good. The first chapter as a short story would be a masterpiece. But as to the topic at hand, there is no writer as consistently top-tier as Faulkner. He has more masterpieces than any writer except Shakespeare.
>>8047357
I'd say that only Moby Dick and Bartleby are the masterpieces there.
>>8047427
I failed reading The Sound and the Fury twice before I finally figured out that each change in font face was actually a different memory. After realizing I still didn't understand much, I re-read the novel another time and that's the reason why Faulkner's one of my favorite authors. When I got to Absalom, Absalom! it no longer was as tough because I already had been there and done that with The Sound and the Fury.
The novels I do end up re-reading usually also end up as my favorites. I did the same thing with Petersburg, totally devoid of help, and I enjoyed it too. I also did the same with Finnegans Wake, but that was shit.
>>8047418
Do you like other works by Faulkner?
>>8047439
This happens with Faulkner, too. Just keep reading.
>>8047512
I guess like some anon wrote in this board he doesn't get much love because the stream-of-consciousness technique was already put into practice by masters like Proust and Joyce. I've always found Faulkner the most readable among them, however. The former are more concerned with aesthetics in contrast with Faulkner who uses it as a device to tell a good story.
Faulkner had some turds like Mosquitoes and Fable, but he also has more masterpieces than most authors I've read.
Faulkner absolutely dumpsters Gaddis. Don't believe me? Let a critic have at it.
http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2013/jan/22/great-american-novelist-tournament-opening-matches
lol I will never read Gaddis because I don't need nameless voices, so fuck your shit.
>>8045709
Greatest American author is between him and Melville. No, not Pynchon, Gaddis, or DFW. Fuck your memes.
>>8047941
>http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2013/jan/22/great-american-novelist-tournament-opening-matches
What the fuck is this shit?
Also, matching Faulkners best work against Gaddis's second best work is not even fair.
AMERICAN NOVELIST TIERS:
>S TIER
FAULKNER
MELVILLE
>A+ TIER
GADDIS
PYNCHON
>A TIER
GASS
>B+ TIER
HEMINGWAY
>D TIER
STEINBECK
>>8048622
What about Henry James and F.Scott Fitzgerald?
>>8045730
>>who is Gaddis
haven't read jr but the recognitions is really not a masterpiece by any stretch
>>8048622
FIXED AMERICAN NOVELIST TIERS:
>S TIER
FAULKNER
MELVILLE
>A+ TIER
PYNCHON
>A TIER
FITZGERALD
GASS
JAMES
>B+ TIER
HEMINGWAY
>C TIER
GADDIS
>D TIER
STEINBECK
>NIGGER TIER
MORRISON
what about Intruder in the Dust?
>>8048622
Swap Hemingway and Steinbeck. Steinbeck is very good if you've read Malory so I think he deserves a little better.
>>8048695
but Hemingay is far superior than Fitzgeral old sport.
>>8048713
Steinbeck is not even a literary writer. He shouldn't be included on the list at all.
>>8048720
lol you're utter shit
since when was steinbeck better than hemingway?
>>8048695
good list
i'll put gaddis at B though
>>8045739
>Here in the Philippines
This explains a lot. Faulkner has his moments, but you'd need to have some sort of fascination with American culture or the dirty south to really enjoy him to the point of putting him over most other American authors, even if it's a very standard, uncontroversial opinion among older readers of American fiction.
>>8047386
It was implied that the "discovered" painting was a forgery when Wyatt mentioned doing one in Memling's style and reacted to the magazine guy's offer the way he did. Another hint is the chapter's epigraph that talks about how the most beautiful paintings attributed to the Masters are all forgeries, and the overall sense of "fakeness" throughout the chapter.
>>8047416
He does pale in comparison to Joyce.
The idea that anyone would deliberately write in a stream-of-consciousness fashion is baffling.
>>8048795
It's more that I prefer reading older, 20th century classics than anything. I did read some Roth and Pynchon, I just prefer Faulkner because he strives to ultimately tell a story, and the oldfag in me likes good stories.
>>8048795
I would also like to add that I try to make my reading of classics to be holistic, and that I've read classics from all of the world's continents (except Antarctica). Faulkner is just that impressive for me because he admixes creativity with competent storytelling especially in his greatest works. Although I do tend toward modernist works, I prefer him best.
(I've also read Joyce, Boll, Bely, Woolf, Proust, and even Djuna Barnes, but Faulkner just has that exquisite balance.)
>>8048824
The idea that anyone would write in a different way is baffling.
>>8048795
or he's just really the bestbecause he is
>>8047416
>He excelled at stream-of-consciousness, but he was far from an innovator in it
There's a lot more to Joyce, Proust and Faulkner than stream of consciousness. They all do different stuff.
Faulkner will always be considered less simply because he didn't write a really huge novel.
>>8048914
>but Faulkner just has that exquisite balance.)
Borges said the same thing about Faulkner. And he didn't really like Joyce or Proust.
Our Corncob Cavalier was not a good writer. His prose is like a winding country road through East Bumfuck.
>>8049379
Joyce, post-Portrait, seems too meandering for me. I just don't like Proust (still read through Guermantes Way, though).
>>8049677
Sure, but you can't seriously tell me all the weird shit from Ulysses is actually telling a good story.
I think I understand where both of you come from, though.
>>8049861
Yes
>>8049677
I have a little difficulty in explaining it, but even with his circumlocutions, the best of Faulkner always drives toward a resolution, a denouement. It's not like Joyce or Proust where they just talk about extremely topical events that don't even cohere by the end of the book. I mean, who cares about that Prince that you met and his inconsistency and shallowness? What does mentioning it even bring to the reader?
To me the later works of Joyce and Proust are just masturbatory tracts (that possess meaning and are great works of literature) that ultimately tell me nothing. Faulkner creates characters that one eventually could sympathize with, even Joe Christmas, for example. So not only does his work have an overarching plot, Faulkner also creates characters one feels for. And while your point is perfectly valid, I think that having a cohesive plot with well-written characters constitutes good storytelling.
>>8050101
Finnegans Wake: jsadasjdsaudashdsaudasdsadhsaudsa portmanteau sjdhasudsahdashd aportmanteau
port man teau por t m anteau sidajsdasndjasdnajsdaskdaskda
God.
>>8047416
"Absalom, Absalom! is comparable to The Sound and the Fury. I know no higher praise." - Borges
>>8050101
Literally reading for the plot: the post. Kill yourself baka desu fampire.
>>8050744
So that's not in vogue nowadays?
I laughed at your post, though, thank you.
>>8050744
The fuck is wrong with reading for the plot?
>>8051460
All of it. I don't know how you do it.
>>8051460
Everything because the plot is the most basic aspect of any work of fiction. It's like eating for the calories.
>>8051460
the plot is just a device. it's like looking at a painting for the canvas.
>>8048622
I agree
I like Faulkner's stylistic creativity the best among his peers. I like pre-1950 fiction best, and to me, Faulkner is at its helm.
>>8048622
>provincial corncobbner at the top
>no Hawkes
>no Nabokov
W E W
E
W
>>8052897
>Hawkes
W E W
E
W
>>8053265
Your opinion about literature is instantly invalidated if that's the reaction you have to him.
>>8053289
nope, not really.
no one but quasi-patricians know about hawkes, or those attempting to be high-brow. most americans and academics know about faulkner.
you can try sucking his cock all you like but he isn't as good as faulkner ever was.
