Friday, February 8, 2013
Batman: Arkham Asylum (A Serious House on a Serious Earth) - Grant Morrison & Dave McKean
Arkham Asylum is a tough nut to crack. On the one hand, it is a brilliant examination of mental illness and the violence that can flow from insanity. On the other, it collapses under its own weight and fails to live up to its potential. This may be so because it tries to cram as many Batman Villains (led by the Joker) as it can into one fairly concise story. As the Joker explains, Batman is given one hour to escape from Arkham Asylum after he has entered by way of invitation:
"'Time to begin the evening's entertainment, I think. If you're feeling up to it.'
'Up to what?'
'A nice little game of hide and seek. You have one hour, sweetheart and there's no way out of the building. One hour before all your friends come looking for you. There's the Scarecrow and Clayface and Doctor Destiny, of course. He seems so frail in that wheelchair but all he has to do is look at you and you stop being real. He does so want to look at you darling. Oh, and don't let's forget Croc. He came up out of that damp, dark cellar this morning, dragging his chains behind him. They all want to see you, so why don't you just run along now?'" (23-24)
Not mentioned by the Joker but included in this book are Maxie Zeus (who seems like a demented version of Dr. Manhattan from Watchmen), Professor Milo, the Mad Hatter, Black Mask, and Two-Face. And I must admit that, like The Long Halloween, the best parts of this book involve Harvey Dent.
I count 9 Batman Villains in The Long Halloween, and I thought that book felt was short at 370 pages. This is even shorter (120 pages), includes 10 villains, and eschews page numbers that make for easy excerpt searching (though there are nice "extras" with the book that includes a black-and-white script of all the text, which will be referred to for this review) and it is necessary to say word or two about the drawing style.
The Long Halloween has fairly typical illustration for a Batman book, and I enjoyed it. Arkham Asylum, by contrast, is probably the most shocking Batman book for its visual style. Everything seems blurry and bloody and if the reader is on Amanita Mushrooms or something then they may be tempted to see things in the pictures that aren't really there (or maybe they are really there, and the artist, Dave McKean, has hidden them in such a way that the reader questions themselves). One could imagine that this renders Arkham Asylum a triumph of the graphic novel form, and while this book is at times brilliant, one simply cannot say that the book is "highly recommended" if the second half of it collapses under the weight of its first half.
That is how I feel about this book in a nutshell. The first half is wonderful, and the second half is a crazy collection of action, Tales of the Black Freighter-esque literature-within-literature, and a tidy ending that renders everything that came before almost meaningless.
There are good moments in the second half, such as the Clayface/Scarecrow/Mad Hatter triple threat that bombards Batman one-by-one at the height of the action, or the ending that involves a decision made by Two-Face, but Arkham Asylum would have benefited by extrapolating more background information on the "Rogue's Gallery." Clayface and Destiny, for example, are quite interesting, but they are left behind shortly after their introduction, as are most of the other villains. The result is a story that would be a perfect template for a theme park ride (much better than say, "The Dark Knight" at Six Flags) in a sort of reverse-Pirates-of-the-Carribean situation, but fails as a work of literature. As a "comic book," it is all well and good, but the story is not unsettling in quite the same way as The Dark Knight Returns (or Red Son or Watchmen, for that matter).
I also don't think I am exaggerating the level of sophistication that went into its production:
"The subtitle was taken from Philip Larkin's poem 'Church Going.' The story's themes were inspired by Lewis Carroll, quantum physics, Jung and Crowley, its visual style by surrealism, Eastern European creepiness, Cocteau, Artaud, Svankmajer, the Brothers Quay, etc. The intention was to create something that was more like a piece of music or an experimental film than a typical comic adventure book. I wanted to approach Batman from the point of view of the dreamlike, emotional and irrational hemisphere, as a response to the very literal, 'realistic' 'left brain' treatment of superheroes which was in vogue at the time, in the wake of The Dark Knight Returns, Watchmen, and others." (preface to script)
Will you enjoy Arkham Asylum if you like Batman comic books in general? Probably. Is it as good as The Killing Joke? Not by a long-shot. That was a shorter story, dense and concisely-packed into a neat package. However, I wouldn't buy The Killing Joke (in hardcover at least) because of its length. You can read it in one sitting at Barnes & Noble. The same goes for Arkham Asylum and I bought it off Amazon.
If you are interested in horror or the macabre, this actually might be your favorite Batman book. But I am personally more interested in comedy and drama and imaginative excess. This book has moments of dark humor and a dramatic moment or two--and it certainly shows some imagination in the telling of Dr. Arkham's back story--which is probably the strongest element of the book. And it even pays reference to Batman's often debated homosexuality, when the Joker squeezes Batman's butt and then says, "What's the matter? Have I touched a nerve? How is the Boy Wonder? Started shaving yet?" (14)
But unfortunately it is just not enough. In short, it opens up like a bat out of a hell (terrible cliche and pun, I know, but accurate) and then whimpers its way through its second half. Just when all the fun is supposed to begin, the reader might ask themselves what all of the fuss is about this book.
Regardless, I didn't consider reading this book a waste of time--I would just not want to drum up any unrealistic expectations of its greatness.
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
NIED #10: BLS Student Audit 2012 - PSG Cuts, Tuition Hikes
As we near the end of law school and the Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress column (there will be 24) I wanted to double-check and be sure that every column I had written for BLS Advocate would also be included on Flying Houses (because it is no secret that I often feel my words being ripped from my throat and twisted in just the slightest way to make way for a completely different interpretation).
My guess is that I forgot to post this column (which was written April 7, 2012) because I posted my Presidential Speech when I ran for President of the Student Bar Association last year. Also, I was a bit nervous about posting it because BLS Advocate was in its first year and there were concerns about taking away perfectly good traffic from that site. I think 10 months later, it is safe to post. I also think a lot of students don't really care (or even know) about the way this school used to be, so I post this as a refresher.
Note however that some commentators felt the need to break out the "hatorade" on BLS Advocate. I ask that you please refrain from duplicating that experience. If there was anytime that my "popularity" at the school hit an all-time low, it was certainly around the time of this column. I have nothing against BLSPI and I feel that if I spend $450 to have dinner with Geraldo, then I am entitled to make light of the situation....Also I was corrected about my use of the phrase "Hobson's Choice" but I am leaving it in because I still think it's being appropriately used.
Moreover the situation is even more frustrating now than it was for me then--keep in mind that this was before the NIED column "On the Cusp."
My guess is that I forgot to post this column (which was written April 7, 2012) because I posted my Presidential Speech when I ran for President of the Student Bar Association last year. Also, I was a bit nervous about posting it because BLS Advocate was in its first year and there were concerns about taking away perfectly good traffic from that site. I think 10 months later, it is safe to post. I also think a lot of students don't really care (or even know) about the way this school used to be, so I post this as a refresher.
Note however that some commentators felt the need to break out the "hatorade" on BLS Advocate. I ask that you please refrain from duplicating that experience. If there was anytime that my "popularity" at the school hit an all-time low, it was certainly around the time of this column. I have nothing against BLSPI and I feel that if I spend $450 to have dinner with Geraldo, then I am entitled to make light of the situation....Also I was corrected about my use of the phrase "Hobson's Choice" but I am leaving it in because I still think it's being appropriately used.
Moreover the situation is even more frustrating now than it was for me then--keep in mind that this was before the NIED column "On the Cusp."
Last week, a few representatives from the American Bar Association
set up in the Moot Court room from 5:00 – 6:00 PM on a Monday. They wanted to hear students’ opinions of our
law school. How many of us showed up? I don’t know—7? 8? I
know that when I arrived I was the 4th.
I used
this opportunity to lobby for a napping room, and for a broad mandate to all
law schools that class sizes must be reduced if the legal market can ever hope
to be fixed. BLS may or may not already
be implementing such a mandate—and the size of next year’s 1L class should help
determine that. I also mentioned a brief
story about the public service grant from last year.
If you
were here, perhaps you remember the one day “push” to get a petition signed by
as many students as possible. Perhaps
you remember our argument—that we had counted on the $5,000 being there for the
summer for which we applied—and to remove it with the simple explanation that
“the government cut our funding,” when there are plenty of other ways to make
up for an $800,000 shortfall (the approximate cost of providing $2,000 extra
per student) does not indicate a willingness on the part of the administration
to really help students manage the cost of law school.
BLS
may, or may not have inflated their “9-months after graduation employment”
numbers. Big whoop. So has everyone else. BLS participated in the merit scholarship
“scheme” where falling beneath the 40% mark in your class meant a reduction in
your scholarship. Big whoop. Some
schools are even tougher—33% was my barrier everywhere else. BLS may, or may have not, participated in
“scholarship stacking,” which is a vague practice that involves packaging all
of the highest “scholarship earning” students in the same section, or same
larger section, first year. This is more
evil than fair, but difficult to prove (though not impossible). And I do know that Section 16 from last year [2010-Ed.] is a powerhouse.
New York
Law School’s case is getting dismissed.
Brooklyn’s case is getting dismissed (I’m calling it right here) because
they can’t allege anything truly audacious—their only hope is the “scholarship
stacking” argument—but even that might fly as a reasonable business judgment. BLS is a 501(c)(3) and it should not care
about profits. But this is the #65 law
school in the nation, and keeping such a high public profile costs a lot of
money. The cleanest way to make up for
the shortfall without harming any existing funding or expenses is to raise
tuition.
Tuition
increased from $46,610 to $48,416 this year [$49,976 this year-Ed.].
3Ls did not bear the cost of the increase—but 2Ls did [3Ls, I think, did bear the cost of the increase this year--note the "I think" because this is not a formal Complaint-Ed.]. And 1Ls find themselves in the fortunate
position of a smaller class by 100 students, and the unfortunate position of
being the final class to have the 40% scholarship renewal barrier imposed upon
them.
It is
worth noting that I have not seen any student movement to reinstate the $5,000
summer PSG. It is a fact of life that we
accept. I would like to argue that it is
not unreasonable for us to seek this additional funding. With the new system, students may be tempted
to work 25 hours per week at the internship and 15 hours at some other place
that might pay and make up for the shortfall.
This may include non-legal work like in a restaurant or something, and
the school is not exactly encouraging students to do this, but they should know
that students will be doing this, and that these sorts of jobs are not going to
make them look any more attractive to prospective employers. Thus, students are left with a choice – work
40 hours a week at one place – 15 of those for free – or try to make up the
difference. The school should not force
students to make such a Hobson’s Choice when it is clear that other funds may
be easily diverted to the cause (look, for example, at BLSPI, and how they fund
scholarships….by getting students drunk and convincing them it’s a really good
idea to spend $900 to have dinner with Geraldo, or $3,000 with the commissioner
of the NHL….). The result is that
students need to think more creatively and do even more legwork to best avoid
financial disaster. But I hate students
that complain about how busy they are.
We all are. Get over it.
BLS is not the only law school to
hike its tuition, and it has to stay competitive. We cannot blame BLS for everything, but we
can try to urge it to be different from other schools and implement some really
original policies. It’s my hope that the
change will be coming soon.
Christopher J. Knorps is a 2L at BLS. He
enjoys studying bankruptcy law. You may
find his other work at flyinghouses.blogspot.com. Like Jamie Moyer, he believes that people
should never count themselves out. You
may fail, and fail, and fail, and people may call you a freak and a loser who
doesn’t know when to call it quits, but when you are still pitching at age 49
in the Rockies starting rotation, you will have the last laugh.
Saturday, February 2, 2013
1Q84 - Haruki Murakami
What I Talk About When I Talk About Murakami: Mystery and Memory in 1Q84
by Emily Dufton
My notebook states that I finished reading Haruki Murakami’s 925-page opus 1Q84, first published in the United States in October of 2011, on March 2, 2012. Almost exactly a month earlier, on February 1, I scribbled in my book that I had finished rereading, for the third time, Murakami’s 2008 memoir What I Talk About When I Talk About Running, which is perhaps my favorite of his works. In the four weeks and one day that spanned the completion of Running and 1Q84, I left behind the stark and direct world of Murakami’s nonfiction and reentered the familiar fictional world this author has so consistently reproduced over the course of a dozen novels and thirty years. Which is to say that I left behind his essays – so clean and concise, about early morning training runs in Hawaii and traversing the route of the original marathon in Greece – and reentered that other, stranger place that I can only associate with this particular writer’s fiction. Here is a man who writes books the same way he runs marathons: methodically and purposefully, creating a world of chaos out of the mundane.
In what can only be credited to the construction of a coherent oeuvre, there exists in the fictional world of Murakami a very specific, if often troubling, place: a Japan that lives on the border of reality and imagination, a world of mystery, confusion, disorientation and delight, where men – and his protagonists are almost always men – are confronted by the fantastic and often surreal as they struggle within the context of quotidian Japanese life. I think of Toru Okada in The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, whose story begins when his cat runs away. This small event seems to trigger (or release) a series of events, some of which border on the completely phantasmagoric, even as Toru remains chained to his everyday routines. Throughout the book there are these wonderful, quiet moments, far outside the scope of missing cats and missing wives and psychic prostitutes and newly acquired abilities to heal, that reveal the majesty of Murakami’s craft: it is within descriptions of Toru making small meals, drinking a beer at the kitchen table alone at night, or the thoughts Toru has as he looks up at the sky where the real beauty of Murakami’s writing lies. These moments, far more than the mysteries, seductions, and action that also suffuse the text, interested me most during my initial reading of the book and they’re the ones that I carry with me now, years after I put the book back on the shelf.
Other examples of the Murakami Man are myriad: the unnamed protagonist in A Wild Sheep Chase who follows a sheep (and a ghost) to the mountains of Hokkaido while he revels in the stark silence of the cold northern territory. There is young Kafka, in Kafka on the Shore, who runs away from home and hides in a library near the ocean, reading books as rain quietly falls and a man who kills cats wanders the streets. And there is Tengo, one of the protagonists of 1Q84, a young writer and math tutor in Tokyo whose introduction to a remarkable young woman named Fuka-Eri and his induction into a parallel world do little to stem his interest in listening to records at home or wandering through a nearby park. And these are just a few of the many Murakami men who sit idly by as the strangest and most remarkable situations draw them into their grasp, these men-boys who so often live alone and exist in that strange, liminal, crepuscular world between no-longer-adolescence and slack-jawed-adulthood, looking through the fridge for another beer or something to eat while, outside of their apartments, two moons are rising in the sky.
It’s as though Murakami himself doesn’t quite know what to focus on, probably because he loves both stories – the magical and the mundane – so dearly and so deeply, as they both so profoundly influence his work. There is mystery, challenge, tension and thrill hovering around the nucleus of all this writer’s work, but there, at the dead-center of the story’s very core, is thick description so anthropological in shape that its attention to the minute details of quotidian Japanese life could allow aliens to mistake Murakami’s books for lessons in the post-World War II, late-twentieth century Japanese experience. And this is the purposeful (or concomitant) result of a man who writes his books on the fly. In a 1997 New York Times review of The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, Jamie James noted that Murakami “does not plot his novels beforehand but lets the story reveal itself to him as he writes.” This makes sense. In some sense, a reader could get the feeling that if a character busies himself with stir-frying leftovers for an entire scene, it was most likely written on a day when that was all that Murakami wanted to do too.
But this is not a retrospective on Murakami’s collected works; it is a review specifically of 1Q84, which I intend to write in a specific way. March 2, 2012, is eleven months ago now, and 1Q84 still sits on my shelf. I’ve hardly opened the cover since I finished the last page and noted the date of its completion in my little book. But I’ve decided to keep 1Q84 there, shelved and unopened, while I write this review. I don’t want any new experience to influence what I want to say. Instead, this review is going to be written blind, based entirely on the memories and feelings I’ve retained after finishing the book. Why? Because it is only in Murakami’s work where I find myself paying such close attention to the quiet moments that lie so far outside of the story’s main action: to food, to drink, to a character sitting on the floor, to the moments late at night when the wind blows or there is quietly falling rain. 1Q84 is full of such moments – one might argue that these moments make up too much of the text – moments of solitude and loneliness, of characters trapped in place, of people trying to work through issues of magnificent scope (religious cults! Parallel worlds! Mysterious pregnancies! Missing children! Unanswered questions about a mother’s marital fidelity!) in a manner more befitting of trying to figure out what to have for lunch.
So, that being said, I don’t want to provide a synopsis of the tale, which is too convoluted to be adequately explained, nor do I want to focus exclusively on what I liked or didn’t like. Instead, I’m going to focus less on 1Q84 itself than on two other, very specific things: first, on how the book made me feel when reading it, and second, on what I can continue to recall about the text nearly a year after completing it. Less a traditional investigation of style and form, this will be an analysis of the reading experience and an examination of the metaphysics of memory as they concern Murakami and 1Q84.
What I remember most from 1Q84 are people stuck, trapped if you will, in places they cannot leave for reasons they do not entirely understand. Everyone seems trapped in 1Q84: Aomame and Tengo trapped in a parallel world, Fuka-Eri and young Tsubasa trapped in a cult, the Leader of the cult trapped in a painful body, and nearly all of the characters trapped somewhere in the past. Then there are the physical, constructed restrictions as well. This book features more people trapped in apartments than any of Murakami’s works I’ve ever read before, and this is an author notoriously fond of placing his characters in constrictive locales.
First there is the long period where Aomame, Murakami’s female protagonist (a trainer at a Tokyo gym when she’s not a hired assassin), is stuck in a new apartment in a new complex in an underdeveloped section of Tokyo for – what is it, days, weeks, months? She is kept there by the Dowager, her employer, for her own safety and is sent groceries, a stationary exercise bike, and weights to lift to keep her fit. Her only access to the outside world is through the deliveryman who comes weekly to bring supplies from the Dowager, a window and balcony that look out onto a park, and the NHK man/ghost who knocks on her door from time to time. She is kept there for chapters, maniacally exercising in the apartment to stay in shape, chopping and stir-frying vegetables for meals, and waiting through the time by reading or staring outside. She is caught between the interior and exterior worlds in the apartment in the same way she is caught between 1984 and 1Q84.
(Is it strange that, after reading those chapters, I wanted the same solitude? A blindingly white apartment in a place where I knew no one and no one knew me, where people brought me what I needed and I had no responsibilities other than riding a stationary bike and preparing simple meals?)
Then there is Ushikawa, the private detective hired by the religious cult Sakigake to investigate Tengo and Aomame. Usikawa, whose constant descriptions of being ugly made me pity him (surely he can’t be that bad; no one is), camps out on the ground floor of Tengo’s apartment building to keep an eye out for Tengo’s comings and goings. He has nothing in the apartment but a sleeping bag and a hot plate. He wraps himself in the sleeping bag to avoid the cold and stares out the window with binoculars and a camera, eating cans of beans that he’s heated up for dinner. Is there a more pitiful existence, even for a private eye? Staring between the slats of a Venetian blind, hoping the person that you’re looking for walks past? Not only does Ushikawa spend multiple chapters waiting in this empty apartment, but if I recall correctly, it’s also the site of his death. Poor Ushikawa – Murakami never gave you a break.
Fuka-Eri also remains housebound. As public interest in her novel "Air Chrysalis" reaches fever pitch, she is forced to remain inside Tengo’s apartment, sleeping in his nightshirt and listening to his records while he’s at work. Here is, as Murakami describes her, a preternaturally beautiful 17-year-old girl who lives with Tengo for days and weeks, forced into house arrest because of the strangeness of her visions. When she and Tengo finally have sex (in the weirdest sex scene I’ve ever read, even for Murakami), it is, of course, Aomame who gets pregnant. How? Why? Do these questions even matter? And when Fuka-Eri disappears – a clean break if I ever read one – we don’t need to know where she goes, in the same way that we, the readers, don’t seem to have to know the answers to any of the questions Murakami brings up.
Ultimately, what remains with me almost a year after finishing 1Q84 is how unsatisfying the storyline really is. More than any other feeling, and more than any other of his books, Murakami’s latest opus left me feeling sad. It was a half-finished, half-baked, coitus interruptus of a text, one that brought forth all of my favorite Murakami ideas only to leave them, half-assembled, in the nearly-1,000-page book on my shelf. There is a startling number of questions unanswered at its end. I remember being two-thirds of the way finished, then three-quarters through, then four-fifths complete, wondering when Aomame was going to get out of the white apartment, when the questions about Tengo’s mother’s relationship with that strange man were going to be resolved, how Murakami was going to explain all of these things, while the number of pages dwindled and the storyline seemed stuck. It was frustrating, watching the remaining pages on the right side of the book diminish while so much remained to be explained and understood.
There is so much beauty in Murakami’s work. The descriptions of the hothouse where the Dowager would meet Aomame for tea, where exotic flowers grew and butterflies fluttered and landed lightly on the Dowager’s shoulder, are such lovely visions of Japan (or anywhere) that I can’t get them out of my head. The meal that Aomame shares with her policewoman friend Ayumi at the Italian restaurant, with thick description of their entrees and choices of wine, seemed as comforting as eating a rich Italian meal myself. Tengo standing on top of a children’s playground slide, staring up at the moon (two moons? One moon? How many did Tengo see?) at night, is a stunning scene in its powerful simplicity.
So why then does Murakami’s book have to ultimately feel co-opted? Lost? Half-finished and unsatisfying and DOA? There was so much discussion of him receiving the Nobel Prize for Literature a few years back, with various reviewers calling 1Q84 genius, his chef d’oeuvre. But I couldn’t help feeling a little gypped at the end, as though I bought into a promise someone made but couldn’t fulfill.
For all the reasons I love Murakami – his creativity and vigor, his intelligence and prolificacy, the quietness of his writing that centers on moments of such stunningly peacefulness even in the midst of so much surreality – I enjoyed 1Q84. But for all the reasons Murakami pisses me off – his lackadaisical style, his hanging questions, his unplanned endings and his liminal characters – 1Q84 also deeply pissed me off. Maybe it’s impossible to answer all the questions Murakami brings up. Secret religious cults, tiny creatures that emerge from dead goats’ mouths to spin an ethereal chrysalis, mysterious pregnancies, a world with two moons – I mean, it’s all a lot to deal with, a lot to convey. And I’m not suggesting that every question an author brings up demands an answer within that same book; certainly, I’d assume, neither is Murakami. Instead, what he notes, and what is necessary to understand, is that there is mystery in the world – deep and trenchant mystery – especially in a place as otherworldly as Japan, which deserves to be looked at and examined, if not understood.
And the grace of Murakami’s books is not only that he brings up such luscious mysteries, but that he cloaks them in the quotidian ubiquity of daily life: there might be a woman who covertly kills abusive men for her job, but her days are still filled with the quiet rising of the sun and the silent nights when she stays up long after everyone else is asleep. There’s still the daily question of searching the fridge to see what could be stir-fried into dinner, and that is comforting, even if it makes me upset.
But still – still – I wanted more. I didn’t want 1Q84 to end like the television series "Lost," with a quick and ill-conceived wrap-up that was superficially satisfying while doing nothing to illuminate the larger story. But it did. Both "Lost" and 1Q84 started big, making enormous promises that ultimately neither could fulfill. Did they take storytelling too far? Bite off far more than they could chew? Perhaps, and maybe that’s why Murakami didn’t win the Nobel Prize and "Lost" became a laughingstock rather than a television series that earned a rightful place in the pop culture canon.
Even so, I’ll probably never get rid of my copy of 1Q84. Like when I finished Infinite Jest, there’s always an element of pride to completing a large and monumental work. And that, I guess, is the strange relationship we have with texts: we keep our books long after we’ve completed them because, in the process of reading, they become our friends. 1Q84 will stay on my shelf even as it remains one of my most frustrating friends, a book I’ll look at again from time to time just to remind me to keep away from starting things I know I can’t complete. Still, it’s a friend I won’t abandon any time soon. Friends like these are important – or at least some of them are – because they remain meaningful long after we’ve finished reading what they contain.
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Batman: Year One - Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli with Richmond Lewis
The opening page has something very titillating:
THE CRIME BLOTTER
by Slam Bradley
OOPS! SHE DID IT AGAIN!
Gossip diva Vicki Vale got her legendary, notoriously firm, shapely fanny tossed into the hoosegow yet again after trying to lift an estimated $11,320.00 worth of merchandise from the Sprang. The cutie klepto pled guilty. After paying for the loot and promising on a whole big heap of bibles to seek counseling, she got off with a wink and nod to the judge.
Leave us say the dame knows how to wink.
One juror says she even blew a kiss to the horny old fart.
You can't make this crap up!
It is with something of a heavy heart that I cannot recommend Batman: Year One as highly as some of the previous comic books reviewed here. Make no mistake--Year One is a good read--but I came into it expecting The Long Halloween to get blown out of the water. Now, Year One may be a "more perfect" and "concise" work than The Long Halloween (and indeed lacks the "triple-twist" which perhaps undermines the rest of the story of Halloween) but it is not as creative or imaginative as Red Son, Watchmen, or The Dark Knight Returns. In short, the last review (of The Long Halloween) included a statement by Jeph Loeb that Year One was the true masterpiece in the Batman graphic novel world (even though The Dark Knight Returns possessed the greater cultural cache). I cannot agree with him.
There is really very little to complain about here, and so this review will likely be short. The story opens and closes with Lieutenant Jim Gordon. He and Batman share equal billing in this volume--Gordon may even get higher billing. This could be a flaw of the book--that Batman's character is not as well-developed as you would expect for his "origin" story. Bruce Wayne does appear, on the second page, returning to Gotham City after 12 years "abroad." He has not yet become Batman, and (while I do seem to be dismissing the praise this book has received) there are a few excellent scenes where he takes his first stabs at crime-fighting.
Bruce Wayne appears in public as a "playboy" who is given to drunken excess and womanizing. This is all a ploy to detract attention from his new role. In his first "fighting scene" he walks through Gotham's red-light district and gets solicited by a very young looking prostitute, who is also not very experienced. Her pimp explains that she is doing it all wrong, and that she is picking out the "wrong" type of client--that Wayne in his disguise (which is really just a scar he makes across his face) could be "vice." Selina watches from a window above, making catty comments: "Oh. Geez...Can't be Vice. We're Paid up. Just some idiot out to get himself killed....You know what I hate most about men, skunk? Never met one." (11)
Selina (or Catwoman) makes a couple appearances and, as usual, establishes herself as neither an ally or enemy of Batman--though certainly leaning towards the former.
This book is not really about Batman so much as it is about Gordon and the corruption of the Gotham City Police Department. D.A. Harvey Dent does not get a much bigger role than a few choice scenes. The Mayor of Gotham and the Commissioner are corrupt. Many police officers are just as bad as the criminals, and are in fact in cahoots with the criminals (Carmine "The Roman" Falcone--who is a major character in The Long Halloween, makes a brief appearance towards the end of this story).
It is mainly about Gordon fighting corruption within the Department, but also about Batman's fumbling first attempts, which are quite entertaining:
"The costume works--better than I'd hoped. They freeze and stare and give me all the time in the world...I come in close on the one who looks the strongest--throw him a growl I've brought all the way from Africa----and suddenly everything falls to pieces. The one to my left calls for his mother----to my right the other collects his senses and leaps to position--he'll be trouble----the strong one gets scared--too scared--No----I'm no killer----he screams like a girl----can't be older than fifteen----a child--just a child----the one I was worried about takes his shot----he's trained--kick's got power--" (31)
Probably the strongest part of the book is Chapter Three: Black Dawn, in which Batman is trapped in an enclosed area and surrounded by cops who are intent on killing him. He uses a device that he has not yet tested out on these conditions. This is probably the best scene in the entire book, in terms of Batman action. And that is a lot of what this book is about--action and fighting sequences. I would have liked to see more character development.
Lieutenant Gordon, as noted, gets the majority of that. In fact, there are a few nice panels that certainly bring the paintings of Edward Hopper to mind (and are referenced accordingly) and show that Gordon is certainly not perfect, either. This is the first time (maybe the only time) that he takes a somewhat immoral tack, and for that alone it is significant. By the end of the story, Gordon has made a few strides in his war on crime, and has befriended Batman (at something of an arm's length) and is waiting for help because someone named the Joker has poisoned the Gotham reservoir.
So, the opening page, which seems to identify this book as The Dark Knight Returns Pt. 2 sadly does not come to pass. Vicki Vale is just a name, not a journalist as in the Tim Burton film. We don't get to see her, or her apparent fall from grace. There is no Robin, male or female. There are no bad guys who are trying to hide their identity. There is just police corruption. So in one sense this book is the "most realistic" of the Batman comic books, but that quality also makes it the most mundane. It is well-done on the whole, but lacks the sort of excitement and imaginative excess that the other pieces boast. It is not long and it is probably worth reading--many others seem to view it as the epitome of the "Batman renaissance" in the comic book world, so I suggest you check it out before buying into my view. But I can't help the way I feel--for my money, The Dark Knight Returns is the book that will really "knock your socks off"--Year One will just serve as a nice ottoman as you relax by your fire.
Friday, January 25, 2013
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress #19: Fighting Words and the Reading Period
On the morning of December 2, 2012, a group of ten students
gathered in the lobby of Brooklyn Law School, waiting for the library to open.
It was 9:05 AM and several students found the prohibition on entering the
library unreasonable, arbitrary, and capricious. One student in particular was
a worker at the library (hereinafter the “off-duty librarian”)—indeed he had
opened up the library the previous day—but was told that he was not allowed to
open it today, since it was not his shift. This set another student off.
While several students became extremely vocal about the
ridiculousness of the situation, one student became noticeably more upset than
the others, and threatened to have the students responsible for opening the
library at 9:00 AM—sharp—fired. The off-duty librarian, who had repeatedly
requested that everyone “calm down” and “relax,” was dealt the harsh blow of
the vague-sounding threat, “I’ll deal with you later.”
The off-duty librarian became
upset and said that he was getting his feelings hurt. The other student responded by saying that
their feelings were being hurt too. At
this point a couple other students emerged from the student lounge and further
suggested relaxing and calming down—they were then told to “stay out of
it.” By this point, the other extremely
vocal students had quieted down to a degree—a consensus seemed to be developing
(perhaps the marketplace of ideas and counter-speech were effectively combating
the threat of violence). The security
guard in particular was subjected to verbal abuse.
The off-duty librarian attempted to maintain
peace, but the abusive speech would not abate.
He finally took out his First Amendment Law casebook and sat on the
ground in front of the security guard table, outside the view of the anxious
mob. At roughly 9:10 AM, the on-duty
librarian arrived, the doors were opened, and the anger subsided.
Never before has there been such a shocking display of the
“50/50 Rule[1]”
as this incident. If anything it was
near perfect proof of the truth of the theory (at least amongst the
early-risers of the law school): of the 10 students present in the lobby, about
four were un-cool and six were cool.
The situation was also extremely ironic in light of First
Amendment concerns – these were fighting words if any – and though some readers
may be laughing at the prospect of such a situation, it was certainly plausible
that a fight was about to break out. If
one other student had accepted the invitation to threaten more severely as a
rejoinder, it would have come to blows.
There was no better illustration of the misery that other law students
can heap on their innocent classmates.
Afterward, this off-duty librarian was shaken and upset,
fearing the other student now, indeed worried about the threat to be “taken
care of later.” The off-duty librarian
may, for once, make a colorable claim for Negligent Infliction of Emotional
Distress. Indeed he fears for his
safety, and the incident left him so distressed that he could not concentrate
on his work—indeed threatened to keep him out of the law school entirely—merely
because he wanted the mob to “settle down.”
I would list damages at $25,000—or the cost of one
semester—if indeed this precluded the off-duty librarian from attending
exams. But this off-duty librarian does
not like to take chances in court. Indeed
the injury may be viewed as a de minimus
from a certain perspective. However,
from a different perspective these are fighting words indeed, and outside the
protection of the First Amendment, unless we are to attach crucial importance
to the word “later.” See, e.g., Hess v. Indiana, 414 U.S. 105
(1973).
One hopes that an apology is forthcoming. However, the “40%” never fail to amaze me
with their utter indifference to common human decency, fueled by their sense of
entitlement. I expect this to be “war”
and a conflict that is only going to end with more destruction in its wake.
It may indeed be time for the school to purchase a puppy for
the library to help students relieve stress.
Violent verbal assaults should be reserved for the uneducated masses and
the people who exploit them – not students that seek to define how a
“reasonable person” should react in a certain situation.
Christopher J. Knorps
is a 3L at Brooklyn Law School. He works at the library and enjoys studying Constitutional
Law and Bankruptcy Law. He does not like
fighting. He is organizing a 2nd
Annual Open Mic with proceeds going towards Sanctuary for Families. Please e-mail him at Christopher.knorps@brooklaw.edu if you are interested in reading or performing.
[1]
The 50/50 Rule was first stated in writing on March 14, 2012 here http://blsadvocate.org/2012/03/negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress-trust-no-one-dr-jones-the-5050-rule/. It was later amended to the 40/60 rule on
April 19, 2012 (the un-cool students now outnumbering the cool students) which
is documented here http://blsadvocate.org/2012/04/nied-cubs-win-world-seriesagainst-miami-bls-in-2015/. It will now stand as the 60/40 rule—as the
numbers of this all-too-clear situation must dictate.
Thursday, January 24, 2013
The Bond Project: The End?
by Jay Maronde
Well
Dearest readers, as we’ve come to the end of a very long road, I would
personally like to offer my extreme thanks to the entire Broccoli Family and the EON productions team, and also to the original spymaster himself Ian Fleming,
for without this cadre of genii none of
this could have ever been possible. I, however, would most of all like to thank
my fantastic editor Mr. Jack Knorps because again without his tremendous
encouragement and editing none of this could also be possible. Now having considered all this, my tremendous,
gracious, and wonderfully understanding editor Mr. Knorps has asked me to write
this wrap up. To wit: how could I refuse such a wonderfully respectful request
from such a dear friend?
Now, I
initially thought that this wrap up would be much easier as we had earlier discussed a formal interview sort of context. During the course of our
interviews it quickly became apparent that the big question most of all would
be a ranking, a full and complete ranking of all the films. This is
extremely difficult for me, like asking a parent to choose their favorite out
of 23 children, and then rank the rest,
so there was simply no way I could complete this task just off the top of my head. I assured my dear editor that I would sleep on this scenario and do my best
to rank them.
I also want to note that my initial idea for this article was
more of a “best of” type compilation, so please continue to read even after you
reach the final end of the ranking because I think some of my favorite gems may
come later on, but without further ado…
If you read my reviews it
was probably most apparent that this was my favorite. Director Marc Forster set
out with a very specific goal of making a tight, hard-hitting action film that
was “like a bullet.” Forster’s vision for this shorter, hard-hitting Bond is
perfect for what is the only direct sequel in the entire franchise. Further, his
allusions to other great films (including the demise of the lovely Strawberry
Fields) comprise some of the finest filmmaking in the entire Canon. (Less charitable review here)
#2 Skyfall
Bond 23, the movie whose
formerly impending release inspired this entire series of reviews, was more than
worth the wait. The actors are fabulous. Dench and Bardem are the biggest snubs of this season’s awards shows' nominations. If
the film were only slightly shorter I would have probably made it #1--it's really a
personal preference (and a strong one) that I feel all films should be short so
as to force the director to really tell his story concisely. But Skyfall is
nonetheless amazing, I saw it in the theaters numerous times, and I will
probably wait in line to purchase the Blu-Ray on release day. It was the first Bond
to be filmed in large format, and if you still have the chance I would highly
suggest viewing it in IMAX as it’s totally worth the extra cost. Bond simply
cannot ever be big enough, and Skyfall Is a huge film that such an epic Canon
deserves. (Slightly less charitable review here)
I know,
I know, I know, “How could I put all three Daniel Craig Bonds right at the top
of the list?” No, I'm not just obsessed with the newest things. Daniel Craig’s portrayal of Bond is beyond
reproach! He is fantastic, and in this film during a discussion with M, Bond
asks, “So you want me to be half monk, half hitman?” For me this statement is at the crux of why Daniel Craig
is so fantastic in this role: he’s so fucking cold I want to offer him a cup of
tea. Like geez--warm up a just little bit! He's so cold and so perfect that it makes you ask
yourself: what you would be like if you killed people every day for your job? I
feel like Craig asks himself this question every morning before filming Bond.
This film could have easily been number one on the list except for the fact
that if you are to watch it without watching Quantum immediately afterwards you
are left feeling almost a little empty inside. (Equally charitable review here)
# 4 Goldfinger
The man
with the Midas touch! This could easily be Sean Connery’s finest Bond. It’s the
first time we see the DB5. It has Oddjob and Pussy Galore. It has Jill
Masterson covered in gold in a scene which was so iconic that it’s been
referenced by other films in the series. The Shirley Bassey theme is delightful
and unforgettable, and I think what
really makes me choose this of all the Connery Bonds is that he seems so
comfortable in the role, he’s smacking asses and really playing the role as a
classic cad, in way that all other Bond’s up till Daniel Craig have tried to
emulate.
Classic
early Bond. Watching this film you can easily realize why the franchise has
become so successful. Connery is young and lithe, and the scenery and sets are
fantastical in a way that the franchise is still seeking to emulate.
#6 Thunderball
The Tom Jones epic theme
song is outstanding--it's honestly the first thing that comes to my mind when I
think of this movie--but a close second is that this is the only Bond film ever
to be completely remade. The remake, NeverSay Never Again, could be the worst thing ever to happen to the James Bond
franchise and if I were forced to include that tripe in my evaluation it would
easily be the very last film on this list, as the essentially-bribed-Sean
Connery was sooooo old in the remake that the Health Clinic should have been a
convalescent's home*. The original film was very good though, and for the time the
special effects were beyond reproach: the underwater sequences are still a
blueprint for those making underwater films.
#7 Dr No
The
original Bond. Sean Connery & Ursula Andress. Nuff said.
This
could be the most under-appreciated Bond, and as such I wanted to rank it
highly. The movie suffers from one glaring flaw: it was the very end of the
Roger Moore era, and Moore is beyond geriatric. Not even all the best plastic
surgeons in the world could make him look any younger. That being said, Christopher Walken not only is fantastic but completely redeems all of the film's other flaws. He’s so perfect, and he's so evil in a way that
only Walken could be. Further, the sets and locations are remarkable and very
memorable.
#9 Moonraker
Again,
I hate to rank the Roger Moore Films so highly, but the fact that the producers
brought Jaws back, coupled with the outstanding scenery, sets and plot (Bond & Jaws save the world while in outerspace) really does it for me. Also many many people
I know always say Moonraker is their favorite, as it in some ways is one of the
more "approachable" Bonds.
The sets, scenery, and characters are exquisite. Plenty O’Toole
is a super classic Bond girl name. The reason I put it here is Connery was a
little bit past his prime and the “camp” value is a little too high for me.
I like
Connery, I really do, But the only notable parts of this film are Ken Adam’s
ridiculously amazing volcano set, and Bond’s Adventures one the mini chopper
“Little Nellie.” The Volcano makes up for a lot though, and without a doubt a
critical entry in the Canon.
Telly
Savalas is downright fantastic and easily the best of the Blofelds. Everyone
hates George Lazenby, but I personally think he's great as Bond: his
athleticism, youth, and enthusiasm shine through. The problematic and singular
reason why this very important film ranks so low on my list is Diana Rigg’s
distaste for Lazenby. It is so palpable throughout the whole film that it's almost
like someone wrote “I was promised Sean Connery” across her face.
#13 GoldenEye
Pierce
Brosnan’s first entry into the World of Bond was a fantastic restart for the
series. He was my initial Bond, and GoldenEye was the first Bond I ever saw.
The women of the film are utterly perfect in their roles, the plot was ahead of
its time as Republican presidential candidates were still discussing EMP’s
during this past election cycle. And while I don’t necessarily like Bond in a
BMW, the use of the Z3 is still considered the world’s most successful cross
promotion ever.
#14 Live and Let Die
Blaxploitation
Bond! Everyone loves Jane Seymour but me;
I just don’t feel as though she's dynamic enough to be a Bond Girl. However, as
much as I hate Moore I feel this movie is critically important to history as
it’s a very British take on the entire Blaxploitation genre and provides an
important historical perspective from an outside viewpoint.
#15 Octopussy
I
really liked this movie, and if Brosnan been able to take the role, it would have been much higher
on this list. Again, Moore’s aged-ness is completely distracting. Q has an
amazing role, and the India scenes are wonderful. And let’s be honest, Bond
diffuses a nuclear bomb in the middle of a circus while wearing a clown suit.
I like
this film, I even like Timmy Dalton (a great deal actually). I like the plot, I
like the girl (she always brings back very strong feelings of the epic Daniela
Bianchi in From Russia with Love), but unfortunately, the villains are like some sort of bad joke,
and not even all the great “sledding in a Stradivarius Cello case” scenes can
make up for villains that can barely even make you laugh.
I feel
like the initial Jaws film should have been a little higher on this list, but I
completely loathe the plot and the Bond girl. Roger Moore is hard pressed to
get any love from me.
#18 Licence to Kill
I wish
I could rank this movie higher on the list as Carey Lowell is easily one of my
favorite actresses ever, and the opening scene where Bond sky-hooks Sanchez’s
plane is epic to the point that Christopher Nolan borrowed it for his new
Batman trilogy. Benicio Del Toro alone makes the film worth watching, but the
concept of having Bond quit, (almost exclusively so Bond can pursue a villain
the British would have no jurisdiction
over) is too contrived for me.
I
really like this film also. I really wish I could put it higher on this list.
Brosnan makes it look way too easy, Denise Richards (while a gorgeous Bond
girl) is a horrible actress, and a villain who is not dead even with a bullet
in his brain, but is a complete sucker for love, is just too much for me to swallow.
#20 Die Another Day
AKA BUY
ANOTHER DAY. Everyone hates the Vanish, but I think for Bond to have an
invisible car is cool. My problems are essentially that we have already seen
the space laser plot, that there is too much early CG looking very bad, and the
rampant cross promotion really detracts from the film. I’m also told the Korean
being spoken is atrocious.
I hated this movie. I Loathe Roger Moore. I
don’t think that this film makes much sense at all.
You Only Live Twice part 2.
I hated
this film. A lot. I really, really, really, hate the way Roger Moore beats up
women to increase his macho factor in this movie. The only redemption is Hervé
Villechaize.
___________________________________________________________________________
*I have idea what Mr. Maronde is getting at by this statement but I felt the need to include it. -JK
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
The Rules of Attraction - Bret Easton Ellis
The context in which one reads The Rules of Attraction may color one’s
view of it. That was the case for me, at
least. The first time I read it was in
September of 2003. I was 20 and going to
Paris for the semester. I seem to recall
reading the entire book on the plane flight from New York to Paris. I seem to recall considering it a very good book
for the reason of such speed—considered it to be on the same level of Less Than Zero. Recently I
have felt the opposite—that Less Than
Zero is clearly the superior work, and that The Rules of Attraction is the “weaker sophomore effort.” This is not the way I felt about The Beautiful and Damned (which oddly
enough is the most popular review on Flying Houses—and by a long shot) and
people tend to think of Bret Easton Ellis and F. Scott Fitzgerald in a similar
vein. For one, they both go by three
names, which people generally do not take as a sign of pretension, but may be
so (think of the “stature of the artist” view—or maybe just an attempt at
accuracy for the names they were called).
They both write about young people and how their social lives affect
their interior and exterior selves. They
both had success when they were very young (Ellis younger, however) and both
were tagged as emblems of the generations they sought to capture in literature. Popular films have been made out of their
novels and short stories—and they continue to be made.
They have also both been equated
with the characters they portrayed. And
it would be too hard to ignore Ellis’s recent doings: the recent New York Times
article about The Canyons is more
than an instructive exercise. In it,
Ellis is painted as a screenwriter who has seemingly abandoned the novel
writing for which he is known and generally admired. It is worth noting that Ellis is not known
for having written the screenplay for anything yet—so a good deal of whether
this latest entre into film remains to be seen. But I will make a small prediction that The Canyons is going to be about as
memorable as The Informers. Which is to say, nothing compared to Less Than Zero or American Psycho. The Rules of
Attraction and Glamorama get
mentioned as secondary works (though I personally believe there is a strong
argument that Glamorama is Ellis’s
best work—but see also this present review, regarding re-assessment of Ellis as
one ages) and most people only know about Imperial
Bedrooms or Lunar Park if they
are devoted readers of Ellis. Maybe
Ellis has achieved his goals in literature and is now seeking success in
film—but it is irresistible to question whether this is just another fact by
which to compare him to Fitzgerald—that late Hollywood period, when he had to
write for the movies to make a living, and where he burnt out too young. Fitzgerald died at 44 and Ellis is currently
49 but there have been advances in longevity.
Rumors have flown about Ellis (hardly ignored by the author in his two
most recent efforts) and whether he shares certain characteristics with his
literary creations. I will just say that
personally, I have my views on this matter (okay I went to NYU and more than a
couple people I met claimed personal connections to him—then again one kid in
Los Angeles claimed that B.E.E. read his self-published first creative
non-fiction book and as time as passed I have increasingly felt that the kid
was a liar) and no review of The
Rules of Attraction should fail to mention its obsession with “gossip,” but
I will decline to offer any personal tidbits that might paint an unfortunate
view: we will respect the separation between artist and art object in this
review.
To
return to context, then: I liked The
Rules of Attraction much better when I was 20 than I liked it when I was
29.75 years old. Maybe it’s because of
something that’s captured in one scene: dismay over the reality that you have
reached a certain age, which Sean experiences when he finds out that a
centerfold in the pages of Playboy is
19 years old—two years younger than him—when he has always seen centerfold
models as being “older”:
“This girl is younger
than me, and that does it—instant depression.
This woman, this flesh was always older and that was part of the
turn-on, but now, coming across this, something I’d never noticed before upsets
me more than thinking about the conversation that Lauren and Judy must have
had.” (210)
And perhaps it summarizes my view when I say I don’t
consider it a spoiler to tell the reader that Sean has had sex with Judy while
Sean was going out with Lauren. This is
because I seriously doubt any reader gets into the nitty-gritty details of this
text—draws a massive chart detailing every relationship and how they are part
of a larger intelligent design—but also seemingly rough outlines of variations
on the same theme: spoiled brats at a small liberal arts college, drinking and
doing lots of drugs and having lots of sex.
It is hard not to mention the context in which I viewed this
book at age 20, too. Briefly, from
September through December of 2002, I was the editor of the film review section
of the NYU student newspaper. That
context matters for two reasons. First,
the film version of The Rules of
Attraction came out while I had the editorial reigns, and I published a
vaguely positive review of the film while not feeling an especially strong urge
to go out and see it (this in contradistinction to American Psycho). Second,
New York University is a college filled with the same types of characters as
those that populate The Rules of
Attraction. So the book is
successful on the second front. If you
have been to college—and more specifically, this “type” of college—then you
will be able to identify with this book in at least some small way. Even though
the characters are ensconced in the mid-1980s, one may indeed be shocked by how
little youth culture has changed—apart from “screen time” which is vaguely
anticipated in certain scenes, such as when Sean thinks Lauren will think he is
cooler if he says he is majoring in Computers….but I cannot find the page that
this detail emerges in.
And that is one important thing to
note about this book: it is either one long chapter, or about 80 mini-chapters
(maybe I’m off on that number—it’s just off the top of my head—I don’t want to
spend the time to count up every single number of times that each character
speaks in an attempt to make some sort of numerological quotation, nor do I
believe that Ellis wants us to do this)—and if that parenthetical is any sign,
it’s harder to view it as the latter.
This plot evolves over the course of one fall semester—roughly the
months of October and November. This
includes Halloween and it is worth noting here that it bears a similarity to Daylight Savings Time, in ways that I
did not even think about. Really, I must
have considered this book to be of such an inspiring nature that I adopted one
of its narrative techniques: present tense first-person shifting narration (except
that I kept it in third-person). Indeed
some of the scenes we both include probably share some of the same “one-liners
at party” dialogue. I wrote Daylight Savings Time when I was
twenty-three and twenty-four, and Ellis published The Rules of Attraction when he was twenty-four, and while I would
not suggest that I was on the same level of Ellis at that age, I would suggest
that our “mental age” was probably not far off.
This
can be interesting material—but generally it is not. It suffers from the same problem as Palo Alto (recently reviewed here) by
James Franco: we don’t know which character to root for because we’re not sure
of what they care about, or how smart they really are. It appears that Sean is smarter than he
appears, but we never really get any satisfaction out of seeing that side of
him, except maybe in the scene at Vittorio’s (a 70-year-old poetry professor
relocating to Italy that makes passes at Lauren)—that is, we do not know whether
the things he tends to remember have significance or not. At one point Sean mentions how his "hippie" ex-girlfriend knows
to talk about Ginsberg, but then does not realize he wrote “Howl.” I suppose Sean is supposed to appreciate that
he can see through her “feigned coolness,” but the reader is never exactly sure
how much of the behavior of the three major characters is “feigned
coolness.”
This is
most apparent in Paul’s interactions with Sean, and perhaps less apparent in
Sean’s interactions with Lauren. Which
leads me to recognize that I have not provided a plot-line for this novel
yet. It concerns Sean Bateman (younger
brother to Patrick Bateman, who makes an appearance and even gets his own
“monologue-mini-chapter”), who rides a motorcycle and says “rock and roll” and
“deal with it” in response to other people’s random statements, Paul Denton,
who is bisexual but seems more gay than straight, who is from Chicago and
generally seems the most “stuck-up” of the characters, and Lauren Hynde, who pines for her boyfriend Victor who
is “spending some time in Europe,” who keeps
changing her major, who slept with Paul before the action of the novel
“starts” and who sleeps with Sean in the course of it, and who may be the
social conscience of the book itself.
These characters attend the same school as Clay from Less Than Zero (who also has his own
“mini-chapter monologue”): Camden College.
Maybe it says something when I recall that Clay’s “excerpt” is one of
the best parts of this novel, and apparently shows that Ellis has not “lost his
gift” but has just shifted it in a less interesting direction. This is not to say that the subject matter of
this book is boring: it takes on a topic which is rarely examined in literature
and provides a somewhat fascinating resolution of that issue. The issue is sort of referenced in Less Than Zero but attacked head-on in
this book—but maybe it’s the case that a good deal of the allure of Less Than Zero is its almost mystical,
mysterious quality. This is not as
strongly the case here, and though Ellis begins and ends the novel mid-sentence and
includes a “blank” Lauren mini-chapter, he generally is content keep his
authorial gaze fixed upon “society” as the “topic” of the book.
Maybe I
am putting words in his mouth or providing my own interpretive gloss but I
swore I once read an article where B.E.E. claimed to be inspired by Balzac’s La
Comedie Humane and that his work was his take on that sort of vision. If this is the case, the problem mentioned
above (i.e. the same problem with Palo
Alto) makes this attempt a failure.
But, like Palo Alto, it is a
book that I read very quickly the first time around, and that will certainly
remind liberal arts B.A. holders of scenes from their own life and maybe cause
them to write books vaguely imitating its literary style that lack sufficient
quality for publication. However I doubt
that any of them had as much sex as occurs in this book. Aside from the hypersexual element, the book
is generally true to life, and thus good.
However, I would consider it to be a notch below even Imperial Bedrooms, which, while no
masterpiece, at least involved a more mature narrator. For the uninitiated to Ellis, reading about a
Dressed to Get Screwed Party and then holding your own Dressed to Get Screwed
Party is reason enough to experience this book once—just don’t expect to be as
blown away your second time around.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




