Reading the Chunksters discussion

Another mysterious and demanding book is about to be discussed, another worthy challenge, another delightful labyrinthine reading experience.

I would encourage you to use spoiler marks because there will be only one thread for the whole novel; thus, make sure that you indicate the week's selection and use SPOILER html.

Week 1, Part 1
(view spoiler)[
1. How do you find the main character? For a while (20-25 pp) he does not even have a name. He still is only known to us and to other characters as 'Kid' or 'Kidd' . Do you think it is intentional?

2. What happened in Bellona? We are not given a definitive answer, but we might make assumptions. What are the essential clues?

3. How does Delany create the feeling of nearly post-apocalyptic world in Bellona?

4. What are the other questions to which the answers have not been given yet, but you think they will be essential?

5. Many describe the novel as having a 'trippy' or 'psychedelic' quality. Do you agree or disagree? Please rely only on the reading material for this week.

6. Any anticipations? Can science fiction be also literary fiction?

(hide spoiler)]

Sorry for the delay in posting - we are closing our November financials and that means 12-14 hour days for me. But I've done the reading and intend to respond, hopefully, tomorrow night :).

BTW, thank you so much for putting together such thought-provoking questions. It's so nice to have a guide for the discussion.

Thank you for your kind words, and I hope more people will join in.

Yes, life is treacherous, and I shamefully remember how I was disconnected from this sight for nearly three weeks because of us buying a new home, moving to a new place, and eventually being in a wreck with all the unpleasant repercussions.

WEEK 1, PART 1
Sorry for the delay in posting, but it’s all to the good, because I went back and reread this section and gained even more from it. What I find interesting in this experience is that, even though I know I’ve read this book (albeit waaaay back in the 1970’s). I seem to remember it as being very confusing, very much a product of the time and I seem to remember not liking it. Which probably led me to skimming, which is probably one of the reasons I remember nothing about it.

But this is good because now it’s like a brand new read for me. And although it’s unusual right off the bat, I feel I’m a much more educated reader now than I was back then (when how well-read you were depended heavily upon how good a local library, or a college library, was stocked).

Anyway, enough of that. I’m going to put the rest under a spoiler tag, but wanted you to know that I have only read the current week and I don’t consider anything that follows to be a spoiler, so, if you are just getting started, feel free to unhide and read.
(view spoiler)[ My overall impression of Kid…intelligent, well-traveled, unstable, easily bored, difficulty with concentrating for any length of time, but gives an overall impression of politeness and sensitivity. His amnesia is interesting and he even references that. He remembers a lot about his travels, speaks several languages…he’s articulate, well-read (he remembers the Daphne myth and applies it to his own recent, very weird experience with the tree girl).

He remembers his parents, his growing up, where he went to school…but yet, he doesn’t remember his own name. My take from that? He has some short-term memory issues as well. Early on, he hitches a ride from a trucker transporting artichokes, but just a short while later, when the word “artichoke” pops into his head, he is puzzled and doesn’t remember the source of the word.

Sometimes, he seems very lucid and other times, very confused and disoriented. He is the ultimate unreliable narrator in a completely unintentional way. His confusion becomes our confusion. Literally, we can take nothing Kid says at face value. It’s an almost hallucinatory experience riding around in his head. Knowing myself as a reader at the age of 20? I would have hated a book like this. Now I find the mystery, that labyrinthine writing, to be intriguing and thought-provoking.

Bellona…well something definitely happened there and yes, it’s definitely apocalyptic in feel. Crashed cars, a city that is perpetually burning without being totally consumed, little to no food, reduction in population from over 2 million to about a thousand, gangs roaming the streets, extorting food for “protection”, the “slipping” of time (or is this yet another byproduct of experiencing this apocalyptic city through Kid’s hallucinatory mind?), small groups of young people huddling in commune-like collectives (very 1970’s)…where are the old people? Did they get out? Are they the ones hiding in their ruined homes? Whatever happened seems to be restricted to the city. And the rest of the world seems to be curiously uninterested in it. Which seems even more weird to me than the strangeness of Bellona itself.

There are a couple of “mysteries” that definitely piqued my interest. First, the disorienting change in tense from 3rd to 1st person and back again. It’s almost like Kid takes himself in and out of his experience. At first, I thought it was just a one-time thing, but no, it happens over and over again. I want to know more about that, and I went back and put markers where it happens, which is a lot.

My favorite mystery is this notebook that one of the girls found. It begins in exactly the same way as the book itself begins. This made a huge impression on me because I found it very evocative of Calvino’s “If On a Winter’s Night a Traveler”. I’m interested to see if this disorienting experience continues.

Regardless, the notebook seems to rock Kid’s world. He recognizes the opening lines, but that’s strange because - why would he? If he’s a character in Delany’s story, why does he know how it’s written? And then it deviates, which confuses him even more. This section made a big impression on me and I find that I want to know more about this notebook. I really hope this isn’t something that gets dropped, or shelved as yet another weird event in Bellona.

As I went back and read, I was surprised by the overall “organic” feel to the book. I started underlining references to trees: leaves, boughs, roots, bark…those references are everywhere. I wonder what that means – if anything. It’s almost like the city itself is alive in some way.

Overall, I’m excited to read more. (hide spoiler)]

As to the last question put forward...can science fiction be literary fiction? I feel that of course it can. In fact, science fiction was born out of the idea of exploring larger themes by creating more expansive environments, basically untethering us from our more restricted versions of reality/existence. Some of it is very well-written indeed...beautiful prose, again, exploration of over-arching themes, pushing the literary envelope either in story or structure.

Although, so far, I'm not getting a science fiction feel from Dhalgren. I only have these 54 pages to base anything on, but for me, it's more postmodern in feel, which to me, puts Delany right there with DeLillo, Calvino, Pynchon, and, later on, DFW, etc. The almost "fractal-like" quality to their prose and their themes.

Paula wrote: He is the ultimate unreliable narrator in a completely unintentional way. His confusion becomes our confusion. "

I think part of the charm is its deliberate labyrinthine nature. You mentioned Italio calvino's novel, and its only purpose is to entice us into the labyrinth. I feel that same is true about this novel as well.

Whether the confusion is only deliberate is another question. The novel is 'trippy', but whether it is trippy because it was intended so or because it happened due to extra-literary circumstances ... addiction, is the question that is beyond our understanding.

The labyrinths of mind are the most intriguing ones, that is for sure.

At the same time, even if the novel was written some time ago, I still feel the topicality of the novel and its immediacy.

The post-apocalyptic genre is very popular now, but I am not sure it was in vogue scores of years ago, so in this aspect, Delany is definitely a visionary.

Paula wrote: " but for me, it's more postmodern in feel, "

It is postmodern, but on the modernistic side of it. The author experiments with the prose and the form more than with the subject matter. Modernism liberates literary form, and postmodernism liberates reality and questions its oneness.

On the other hand, the 'trippy' and slighly psychedelic nature of the novel definitely allows us to question the reality we observe through the eyes of Kidd/Kid.

So far, I have read just ten or eleven pages from the next chapter, and I am behind, and I will try to catch up, but my general expression is it is getting curioser and curioser.

The feeling of space and place is nearly tangible, but it is also not conclusive or definitive. The novel so far looks like a collection of sketches where many things have not yet fallen into their place, but I really like this surreal feeling.

Regarding the novel having a trippy feel - yes, I definitely get that vibe and I think it is in large part because of when it was written. Delany was in his 20's during the 1960's and his writing is very much a product of the times. I was born in 1955, so I was still pretty young during that decade, but I remember the flower children on the streets and later, when I attended college at James Madison University, there were several communes that formed around the area. I visited one of them a couple of times because I had a friend who decided to join them. The Harrisonburg and Charlottesville areas in Virginia were very popular for that kind of thing. Lots of hippies everywhere :). All of it was brand new.

Right now, I'm also reading J.G. Ballard and I just finished Iceby Anna Kavan. I'm finding very strong connections with their writing and Delany's.

Zulfiya wrote: "So far, I have read just ten or eleven pages from the next chapter, and I am behind, and I will try to catch up, but my general expression is it is getting curioser and curioser.

The feeling of s..."

I've already read this section, but it's been a couple of weeks, so I'm going to go back and reread.

WEEK 2, Part II, The Ruins of Morning

I'm going to post in smaller chunks, so it's more manageable for me.

This is Chapter 1 of Part II. No spoilers yet. Again, such an organic feel to the novel. "A good wind would wake this city". Continued constant references on just about every page to trees: "upper branches", "trees", "in a tree", "leaf-grey and twig-grey", "the trees waited", "first leaves", "apple eyes--apple green", "roots thick as her arm", "heavy trunk", "free of foliage", "it's stupid to be afraid of...trees". It just goes on and on. I don't know if it means anything, but it's hypnotic how Delany does this. Maybe that's the whole point. No idea.

And then, wow, this jolted me and I mentally jerked to attention:

(view spoiler)[ The notebook has resurfaced, hurray! But this here! A list of names on one of the pages and one of them is...William Dhalgren!!!! Could this be Kid? If not, who then? I know I'll be coming back to this list as we encounter other people on Kid's travels. He's just getting started after all, so he will probably meet lots of interesting and weird people.

And what's with the orchid and how it just magically seems to stay with him?

I'm wondering about Lanya...very interesting girl. Almost Pan-like with her harmonica ("Pan-pipes"), living in the open by herself under the trees. Kid emphasizes her unearthliness (at least in his own mind, but who knows? He's a very unreliable narrator) when he thinks:

"You can't make that discord on a harmonica. Not on any harmonica he's ever had."

So...is Lanya, like Pan or Coyote, a big bunch of strange trouble? Someone who likes to stir the pot? Instigator?

Or is Kid just seriously messed up?

Or both?

Again, no answers and I have no idea. But I'm looking forward to finding out!

(hide spoiler)]

I agree with you - the language is beautiful, sad, very poetic. It does create the feeling of desolation and emptiness of the place. In general, the feeling of immediacy and presence is palpabale and uncannily eerie.

I was going to continue posting, but I'm wondering if everyone has other reading commitments that are keeping them from participating. Totally understandable. Maybe now isn't the right time for this book? At any rate, I think I'm going to continue reading because I have some big group reads coming up starting in January and I don't want to fall behind. Besides, this is a fascinating read and I'd like to keep going.

I've been deliberately holding back from reading ahead. I've only read through the second week of the schedule, but if anyone who finishes Infinite Jest wants more in a similar vein (I.e. beautifully fractured time, plot, place, events scattered about for you to pick up and connect), you might enjoy this book.

Happy reading!

I am halfway through part three and plan to finish it today if life permits. I guess there will be the two of us, Paula.

I got distracted by other books and didn't really feel like I could tackle this until I finish Infinite Jest which I'm really close to doing. So if anybody still wants to discuss I'll be starting soon.

Zulfiya wrote: "I am halfway through part three and plan to finish it today if life permits. I guess there will be the two of us, Paula."

I didn't realize you had finished Part 2. I will pick it up again :)

Hi guys. I am so sorry that I haven't been on here. My reading schedule for December got completely screwed up and I only read about half of what I should have. I will be on the ball in Jan and I'll get all caught up. Sorry ladies.

I went ahead and finished the book yesterday. It was really intriguing until a little more than halfway through, when it started to jump the track. I kept on, hoping this was temporary, but it just devolved and fell apart for me. It's not that I found it upsetting or offensive...it just got tedious and boring...and very dated. I think if I were about 5 or 6 years older I could wax nostalgic about my wild, rebellious years immersed in the whole tumultuous counterculture movement, and I would probably be able to enjoy it a little more. Or maybe if I were a 15 year old boy. But I think we've moved on and become more sophisticated in our thinking. Of course, we owe a debt to those who cleared the way in freeing up our thinking. But here, the writing got so darn clunky, it didn't hold my interest. Glad I'm done. I can't think of what I could talk about with this one. So much potential and them, whew, so self-indulgent.

Paula wrote: "I went ahead and finished the book yesterday. It was really intriguing until a little more than halfway through, when it started to jump the track. I kept on, hoping this was temporary, but it just..."

You are a reading monster, Paula. I have a question about part III. (view spoiler)[ Do you think a poet with amnesia is a good one? Do you think Kid is a good poet? (hide spoiler)] Has it something to do with his past experience?

I've only just finished part one and I don't have a lot to add. The mention of trees, roots, bark, and such is a fascinating one. I didn't specifically notice it, but once I read Paula's comment I remembered a bunch of them.

I don't have a lot to add since it seems like this first chunk is a bit too small for me to have formed any kind of opinion. Here's what interested me:

(view spoiler)[The whole thing about him not having a name. This does make him the ultimate in unreliable narrators because we can't even be 100% sure that HE exists. I recently read another book, Annihilation by Jeff VanderMeer that also used characters with no name. It fascinated me there because in doing that he made the wilderness itself the main character. Maybe there's something of that here?

His strange memory problems are weird. I don't think it's possible to know what is truly going on in this novel. Yet. Hopefully there's some explanation later.

The shifts from third to first person were also very confusing for me. It's a bit disorienting. Could this be deliberately used to make us feel the characters disorientation? (hide spoiler)]

So far I'm enjoying it. I'm hoping to get part II and some of part III done today.

I've read Part I & II and I don't really feel like I have alot to add either. I am enjoying it so far and hope to get a bit more read by this weekend.

(view spoiler)[ I recently read the Area X trilogy books too and I thought the same thing about the wilderness/environment as a character. The part where he was going into and coming out of the apartment and things seemed like they were on different sides of the street reminded me a little of House of Leaves. (hide spoiler)]

Right now I'm interested in the story but I agree that the change in POV is very confusing and I do think it's intentional.

(view spoiler)[ Isn't it odd that Tak didn't notice that the exits were changing around? (hide spoiler)]

(view spoiler)[ There is a some more explanation of that coming that I don't think you've gotten to yet but it was very confusing at the time. And Tak wow he's an interesting one... (hide spoiler)]

Okay, so I feel like a first rate jerk and you guys are all welcome to hate me forever, which would be a bit extreme, but I'm not going to continue with this. I finished section two and I'm just so not a fan of things that get hippy-dippy on me. Inherent Vice made me absolutely batty, and Stranger in a Strange Land made me positively homicidal.

There are things that intrigue me about the story but I've only read 100 of 900 pages and I'm not willing to endure the things I don't like. Especially when I look at my pile of TBR's.

Sorry again :(

I am sorry you can not continue, Sarah, but it is not getting more straightforward even in part IV.

Now, what's wrong with the Heinlein's novel? I thoroughly enjoyed it. It is so surreal, but also quite realistic in its own way :-)It was a solid four-star read for me.

Well, I was already struggling before the rather sexually adventurous commune. It just felt so very 60's. I swear you could hand someone (that didn't know anything about it) that book and they would still peg it as the 60's. The 60's are not a bad thing. They were actually a pretty significant time, imo, but apparently I just really don't like reading about them. They meander too much for me. Apparently I'm much more task focused. That was recommended to me, too, and I still haven't figured out how to tell the guy I didn't like it.

Is this book as challenging as Ulysses or Gravity's Rainbow

On par :-)