Sigh.
I feel like I have found my people. I really did not like that book.
I read the book because so many people recommended it, that it was hilarious and interesting.
It is neither. It is a boring tale of an inept clod who can’t do anything right and could care less, has no morals and is content to be carried along. I found it revolting. Maybe I don’t like it because I can’t stand that sort of person.
It does portray the character of some New Orleans natives very well, and I did learn why the local city accent is Jersey-ish.
Add me to the pile on. I had really looked forward to reading it, as I had heard from so many how brilliantly funny it was, but I thought it was absolutely tedious. I got sick of hearing about his eructations.
It is mildly amusing with some very funny bits. It lacks a strong story line and really needs editing. After I read it I remember thinking that I wasn’t surprised Toole couldn’t find an interested publisher.
On its own the book it fine for a read, I especially liked the scenes in the pants factory. The real problem with the novel is over-hype. It is often described as the funniest book ever written, or the the most hilarious American novel, etc. Ridiculous. I don’t know if it would make the top 50 humorous novels I have read. I think much of the negative reaction comes from this over-hype that pops up when this book is mentioned in certain reviews and book lists. One can say Beyonce is talented and no one will bat an eye, but claim she is the best performer in history and people will justifiably get upset.
I think this is spot on. Certainly, for me, I came in with great expectations. That made the book’s weaknesses seem all the more glaring and numerous, and the book itself even more vacuous.
(I was actually surprised when, earlier in the thread, someone disagreed with my statement that it had been over-hyped.)
I had never even heard of the book before the day I read it. That probably says more about me than the hype level, but it still surprises me people think it was over-hyped.
It’s hard to say if being aware of the hype would have caused me to like it less. I don’t think so, since it won me over with the writing style immediately. I was already pretty sure I would love it after the first paragraph.
One of my friends mentioned it to me recently. I had never heard of it either. (35 y/o from Boston FWIW)
Can a Pulitzer Prize winning novel really be called “over-hyped”? Sounds well-earned.
As I mentioned before, it was the same experience with me. (I was actually drawn to it as I saw it on a friend’s bookshelf, and the cover that apparently everyone hates intrigued me.) I’m not entirely sure how I missed it, as I was an English lit major, but somehow it’s never come up and only come up one or two times that I could remember outside of the SD. I don’t get this “over-hype” people are talking about. Maybe I just should start hanging around more literate folk or something.
I hated Catcher in the Rye, but I loved Confederacy …
Ignatius is the quintessential American – smug, overbearing, utterly morally certain of himself, utterly unconcerned about anyone else. If he was a disease, he’d be an epidemic.
About eight years ago I picked up two books that I had heard were hilarious. Confederacy was one of them.
I spend about an hour or so trying to get through it, then I just gave up. I grabbed the other book I got, which was Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.
Read it ages ago, remember it being unengaging and unrewarding. I’d give it a “C.”
I’d never heard of it until a couple years ago when it was mentioned in a Cracked.com article. I downloaded it to my Kindle … and found it to be one of the funniest things I’d ever read.
I’ve not read this book in particular (and it doesn’t sound like I’d like it), but, in general, I’d say it usually goes the other way. Most people don’t like it when they can’t identify with a character. The character may not be anything like you, but you have to find something endearing or understandable about them. If you can’t connect with them, they are just an asshole or a whiner or whatever.
This seems to be the case for me. For example, I never was that much into the original Harry Potter, but I have an unhealthy love for the version in Methods of Rationality. Why? Because his character is pretty much me, right down to the ethical considerations and even the dark side (albeit he is much smarter than I.) Contrast this with a movie I absolutely hate: “Meet the Parents”: the main character is a complete wimp who should have given his girlfriend an ultimatum and walked out. If she loves that asshole of a dad more than her boyfriend, then there is no hope of a relationship.
That, coincidentally, hits on another issue: the type of humor. I hate humor that is based on eternal conflict, and that’s what was going on in Meet the Parents. In fact, that is my usual reason I cite for not liking the film. I think it is much more likely that people who don’t like this book just don’t like the humor. I know I didn’t like the preview chapter on Amazon for this reason.
It is funny that one of the complaints raised in this thread is that the cover of the book is bad. No point in quoting the maxim to those who apparently have never heard it, but have any of you considered that the author might not have designed the cover to which you object?
Regardless, it’s a shame that so many here seem to think the book is intended as a rip-roaring comedy lampooning that silly Ignatius and his zany antics. Read that way I can see how it wouldn’t be much fun. Not much material that is actually intended to be read that way is worth reading either.
Maybe multi-camera sitcoms with laugh tracks and unchallenging humor would be better received? Just google Chuck Lorre and watch whatever he has most recently pinched out.
This doesn’t speak well of you. Methods of Rationality is ham-handed and pretentious. Fan fiction is best avoided.
I’ve been aware of this book for several decades, think I have a copy around here somewhere (may have given it away), think I tried reading it at one point, and if I did, gave it a big “Meh.” Had no idea what the big deal was–the protagonist is unattractive? There are specimens like that all around me every day. Couldn’t pay me enough to finish it.
I know it perfectly well*. That doesn’t change my visceral response on seeing the cover. All the adages about not judging a book by its cover really don’t make much of a difference to your gut, and if there are other books to be read, it can tip the balance against that book. If I was trapped somewhere with no other reading material, I’d probably give it a go. But this is why they pay cover designers to make something marketable. That the book continues to sell, with that cover, suggests that they might actually be on to something, despite the dislike in this thread. This does not make me feel closer to The Common Man.
*I had the great good fortune to have the publisher accept my cover design suggestion. Or maybe it was bad fortune, and if I let them design it, I would’e been on the NYT bestseller list. How can you tell?
You have every right to your visceral reaction to the cover, the stock, the typeface, or any other irrelevant aspect of the book. At issue is that your objection based on any of these reactions causes me to take your criticism of the content less seriously.
Not saying there has been any big media campaign, or that it has been a bestseller or anything. But I’m having difficulty imagining any reader having not heard of this book - and generally in glowing terms.
I’m trying to think of books that I had heard more folk describe as more effusively as either their favorites. Well, maybe Tolkein, the Bible. Maybe some Jane Austen, or Wuthering Heights. Drawing a blank on any book more folk have described as “the funniest book ever.”
Maybe folk feel moved to say such things, because there might be some kind of cachet in claiming a book with such an unattractive protagonist appealing. And, as widely read as it is, the book seems to have retained some “outsider/underground” aura. Likely due to factors concerning the author and the conditions under which it was published.
I’ve only heard about it from one person ever, so it’s not surprising to me if someone reads but has never heard of it.