Where are our Steinbecks and Agees?


Do the unemployed read books these days?
Well, other than Harry Potter.

Some of them do. And don’t like Harry Potter…

Yeah, didn’t like Harry Potter, either.

Rereading Foucault’s Pendulum, here.

Read it twenty years ago. Had awful trouble with all the Italian surnames, could never put names to faces/characters. Still struggle like hell doing it today.
When I started reading David Hewson’s Garden of Evil. I had that problem. I made a list of all the members of the police team, and memorised them. As for all the place names! :cry: :cry: It was worth it though. :wink:
Take care

P.S.Finished Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Mentwo weeks back. Keep picking up Grapes…and putting it down again. I’m gonna have to read it sooner than later.

I need to read Eco’s newest novel. Was meaning to, but grad school got in the way. :wink:

so many books, so little time.

Off-topicking…are we? :open_mouth:

That’s a book I will never re-read, and I’m an inveterate re-reader. Having enjoyed The Name of the Rose, I thought I would like Foucault’s Pendulum. Sadly, having ploughed my way through the whole thing being gripped by trying to work out who was actually deceiving who, what was really going on and where the deception lay, I finally came to the conclusion that it was Eco who was deceiving his readers, that the deception lay in the fact that there was actually nothing going on. I felt cheated, that I had wasted time and energy reading a work that was essentially vacuous.

I must either join Jaysen by including myself in the under-educated, or plead that my education and life experience has been in Oriental rather than Occidental culture … or perhaps simply stick to my perceptions of Foucault’s Pendulum. I would rather opt for the latter stance.


That’s kind of the point, innit? Three bored publishers of a vanity press take bits of the best of what they get (total dreck) and make something of it. It becomes a big conspiracy that others start buying into…but there’s absolutely nothing there at the core. I liked that part of the book, actually.

Mr X,

While I would greatly enjoy welcoming you to the club, I am afraid that you do not qualify. Unlike most organizations where there are minimum requirements, this organization has maximum allowances. You exceed at least tow of these allowances. First, you are articulate. To make it worse, you are articulate in more than one language. Second, your own country lets you back in the border without questioning your “usefulness”.

You are welcome to correct these issues and reapply for membership at your convenience.

Thank you.

Combining responses, I find myself once again a potential club of one … a club of the multi-articulate illiterate!

Yes, that is the point … I simply didn’t get that in reading it … that by-passed me entirely, consequently I still feel it vacuous, and therefore cannot claim to be an educated and competent reader of modern literature. A question I might need to address for myself is whether I would like to become an educated and competent reader of modern literature; on the basis of Foucault’s Pendulum the answer is “Probably not”. :slight_smile:

It is too late for me to do anything about being articulate — assuming the truth of that classification — but for your second criterion, my country doesn’t question my “usefulness” or my “uselessness” either … the question is more likely to be my potential “perniciousness” … :smiling_imp:


If that’s the only impediment to re-entry, then how come my feckin in-laws can come ‘n’ go with impunity! :open_mouth:
Border Control aint worth diddly squat these days! :imp:

There’s a story behind my statement. Let me see if I can boil it down to three lines of less than 20 words each.

When the kid and I reentered the US with our US passports we went to the US citizen entry point. No one questioned the electronic gadget that still gets odd looks when taken out in public (pigeon racing clock). But they did ask me “Are you employed and what is your purpose for coming to the US?”

Out of lines but I still have 2 words left!

Well I did tell you and your son, that his hat made him look like Paddington bear, when it (Paddington), arrived in England. You’re iffy looking at the best of times, so it’s quite understandable that Immigration official took you two for a Peruvian performing bear and its keeper.

Well, surely, carrying a pigeon racing clock is enough to make any such person wonder whether you were employed or even employable, I would have thought … I mean can HM the Queen be honestly described as “employed”? Mind you, she probably has someone to carry the clock for her …

Mr X

Interesting view. But I think the HMtQ and i have one thing in common, I did have a clock carrier with me. :wink: