The FBG Top 300 Books of All Time (fiction edition) | #11 A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole | Running list in posts #3 and #4 (46 Viewers)

[rockaction]

Also, I didn't read Moby in hs. I read it at 33 in 95. I was in a writing group led by a literary agent with one of my then best friends. She was Dean Koontz literary agent, btw. She was shepherding 9 of us wannabes. We had the spirited Melville discussion. I hadn't read it and just kept quiet. She pointed out those that read it in hs, likely abridged, were anti. Those that digested the full tome later in life were pro. Our discussion was a byproduct of a comment that was going a little viral from a tv talk show: "Nobody has really read all of Moby ****." This was met with laughter on the show.

So like Mrs.Marco, being a sucker for seafaring stories (mostly pirates for me), I decided to really read all of Moby. It was such a humbling experience for a wannabe, it contributed to me coming to my senses and giving up my dream of publishing a novel.

Write your bad novel--and then keep at it making it a better novel. I promise that's what Melville did. It's the process

She'd never tell this about herself, but I will. Mrs.M has published 4 novels, 2 YA and 2 middle grade. Three with Harper Collins and one with a small indie press.

I've watched her read, research, write, read and research more, re-write (x 25) and get rejected, so many times over the past 20 years. But it eventually paid off for her. So hold on to that dream, @Chaos34 !

I have to say it. That’s so cool.

 

[kupcho1]

Here at any rate is Ignatius Reilly, without progenitor in any literature I know of—slob extraordinary, a mad Oliver Hardy, a fat Don Quixote, a perverse Thomas Aquinas rolled into one—who is in violent revolt against the entire modern age, lying in his flannel nightshirt, in a back bedroom on Constantinople Street in New Orleans, who between gigantic seizures of flatulence and eructations is filling dozens of Big Chief tablets with invective.

11

A Confederacy of Dunces

John Kennedy Toole

kupcho1, TheBaylorKid, Mrs.Marco, Barry2, Oliver Humanzee, rockaction, Long Ball Larry

11. A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole
kupcho1: #2
Barry2: #7
rockaction: #10
Long Ball Larry: #12
Mrs.Marco: #21
TheBaylorKid: #23
Oliver Humanzee: #36
Total points: 567
Average: 81.0

A Confederacy of Dunces was published in 1980 and won the Pulitzer in 1981, but the road to get there was not a smooth one. The book was actually written in 1963 and, well let me just pull this from Wiki:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[T]he book would never have been published if Toole's mother had not found a smeared carbon copy of the manuscript left in the house following Toole's 1969 death at 31. She was persistent and tried several different publishers, to no avail.

Thelma repeatedly called Walker Percy, an author and college instructor at Loyola University New Orleans, to demand for him to read it. He initially resisted; however, as he recounts in the book's foreword:

...the lady was persistent, and it somehow came to pass that she stood in my office handing me the hefty manuscript. There was no getting out of it; only one hope remained—that I could read a few pages and that they would be bad enough for me, in good conscience, to read no farther. Usually I can do just that. Indeed the first paragraph often suffices. My only fear was that this one might not be bad enough, or might be just good enough, so that I would have to keep reading. In this case I read on. And on. First with the sinking feeling that it was not bad enough to quit, then with a prickle of interest, then a growing excitement, and finally an incredulity: surely it was not possible that it was so good.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I still find the book to be hilarious even though it was written in 1963 and I've only been to New Orleans once so I'm unfamiliar with a lot of the local references. Here's Walker from the foreward:
"I hesitate to use the word comedy - though comedy it is - because that implies simply a funny book, and this novel is a great deal more than that. A great rumbling farce of Falstaffian dimensionswould better describe it; commedia would be closer to it."

It's even got a great opening quote (or whatever the term of art is for the quotation often found before the novel begins):
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
- Jonathan Swift

I'd write more, but my pyloric valve has snapped shut due to a lack of a proper geometry and theology in this modern world.

 

[kupcho1]

FYI, we've got one more tie remaining, this one at #9.
So, should I release both on Monday, or release one Monday and one Tuesday (the one with 1 more nomination)?

 

[KarmaPolice]

FYI, we've got one more tie remaining, this one at #9.
So, should I release both on Monday, or release one Monday and one Tuesday (the one with 1 more nomination)?

I like the one a day pace myself.

 

[rockaction]

I can’t believe I dinged Confederacy down to only number ten. I read that book in 1998, and I couldn’t believe Toole wrote it before 1965. Huh?

Don’t forget, the book was finished in ‘63. I don’t think the public had any inkling of the upheavals to come in America. You maybe had the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley, but that wasn’t until ‘64. Our tragic author already had its internal contradictions fleshed out, skewering hippie hypocrisies and apostasies before the big coalescences had happened. They hadn’t formed, never mind undergoing all their mutations and syntheses. That is either New Orleans being ten years ahead of its time or a truly insightful person that beggars belief. It’s almost assuredly the latter.

How do you predict not just a movement, but its sub-movements, its individual archetypes (or just “types”), its internal contradictions, its societal pull and the arc of its interactions w/society, its bloat and then assimilation followed by its eventual hypocrisies and death by ridicule?

And that’s only part of the book. Ten might be very low.

But you know what also? I won’t go brutalist emo, but the book’s backdrop, once you fill everything in, makes it tremendously sad. I don’t know. The thought of his mother assembling a pad of writing (and I won’t presume anything; although I’m almost damn sure I can give an educated guess about its condition and the condition under which it was created) to bring to a local professor has no happy ending. In hope of what? Her gesture and act is its own end. And I just never dug how that must have been.

 

[kupcho1]

I can’t believe I dinged Confederacy down to only number ten.

Had you placed it 6th or higher on your list, it would have been a top 10 book.

 

[rockaction]

I can’t believe I dinged Confederacy down to only number ten.

Had you placed it 6th or higher on your list, it would have been a top 10 book.

I’ll think about it with a little more dispassionate clarity next time and try not to blubber so much over his mum.

But that really does get me every time.

 

[shuke]

I know I'm in the minority here, but ACOD really didn't do much for me. I didn't find it nearly as funny as it was lauded to be. Possibly knowing what happened to the author put me in the wrong mind set, because I found Ignatius to be depressing.

 

[Frostillicus]

I know I'm in the minority here, but ACOD really didn't do much for me. I didn't find it nearly as funny as it was lauded to be. Possibly knowing what happened to the author put me in the wrong mind set, because I found Ignatius to be depressing.

I'm with this guy. Maybe it was too hyped up and my expectations were too high but I thought it was a good book. Not a great book.

 

[Don Quixote]

I know I'm in the minority here, but ACOD really didn't do much for me. I didn't find it nearly as funny as it was lauded to be. Possibly knowing what happened to the author put me in the wrong mind set, because I found Ignatius to be depressing.

I'm with this guy. Maybe it was too hyped up and my expectations were too high but I thought it was a good book. Not a great book.

I think expectations were part of my issue. It missed my 70, but I think it would have made it if I went to 100. I think it may have been the comparisons of it to a modern day Don Quixote that impacted my mindset. I obviously love DQ, and, sure, some things in common, but I thought DQ was a lot more likeable with noble, although misguided, intentions; I did not really get that out of Ignatius. Maybe if I read it without that prejudicing me, I would have liked it more.

 

[Mrs.Marco]

I put Confederacy of Dunces at #21--I might have read it before I ever got spend time in New Orleans, a city I find as unique and captivating as this novel. I also want to say that this book is a good example for why people who have that tickling urge to write a novel should definitely write that novel. You never know what will happen to a story once it's written. And I'm certainly glad to have Confederacy of Dunces in the world!

 

[Mrs.Marco]

It might just not be a book that makes sense at such a young age maybe. Perhaps its themes just don’t quite resonate with teens. Age is so important for when a book works best.

I agree that high school students get stuck reading way too many books that they're not ready to read, and that makes people think that they hate reading.

I think it is a combo of not ready for some themes and not meeting students 1/2 way on books to read. It doesn't ALL have to be Shakespeare and classic lit, does it?

I feel like schools do better now about that. Just off the top of my head, I’ve been at 2 different HS and these modern books were pretty widely read

Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson- story of a HS freshman dealing with trauma, lack of friends, poor family relationship.

The Glass Castle by Jeanette Walls- true story of a girl growing up with poor, eclectic and neglectful parents

Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer- true story of a very intelligent but unprepared young man who heads out into the Alaska wilderness on his own and dies.

Monster by Walter Dean Myers- the story of a 16 year old Black boy awaiting trial for murder written as a series of letters and a movie script by the fictional boy himself

They almost always go over quite well with the kids.

All of those books are such great reads--I like the combo of YA books (now in a golden age) and books that make teen readers stretch a bit more like the two memoirs.

Yep and obviously trying to get more female storytellers, people of color, people coming from difficult but relatable backgrounds. Into the Wild is fun because it can be posed as a bit of a mystery and there’s some very differing opinions one can walk away with when it comes to McCandles. Plus theres even info after the book was made about some of its validity. Speak is great too because it has the big shock as kids slowly realize what happened but I do struggle sometimes because it might not too close for some kids. To trigger warning or to leave her surprise? A debate I always have but so far I think I’ve managed to balance it.

I am so glad to know that these books are reaching teens in the classroom--my own daughters got stuck with old duds (for people their age) like The Scarlett Letter. I do believe representation through reading is key to understanding each other as humans in the modern world. Thank you for doing your part!!!!

 

[krista4]

I haven't read A Confederacy of Dunces. I just asked OH about it, and he said that, together with "Geek Love" by Katherine Dunn (#53 on his list), he believes it's one of the two best "one-offs" in the history of novels.

I did have Walker Percy's "The Moviegoer" on my list at #55, so I'm at least John Kennedy Toole-adjacent.

 

[Oliver Humanzee]

Font showed up normal again today. So, eraser worked.

Moby **** was a DNF for me ~20 years ago. Melville’s writing style was not working for me. It may be one of those should try again, as have sometimes gone back to books a second time and they have resonated better.

Can't think of a worse book to assign to children who have, at that point in their lives, read maybe a half-dozen grown up books, none of which were Milton or apocryphal Gospels.

Melville had such an agile, absorbing mind that he could effortlessly slip in and out of biblical allusion and a quasi-religious voice without the reader realizing it. No high-schooler with a few Stephen Kings under their belt is going parse the humor in a Lot's Wife/Salty Sea type joke.

In fact, I'd wager that few non-scholars are going to wrest everything they can from this, The Greatest American Novel.

I once had a conversation with an actual philosopher wherein I sheepishly confessed my difficulty with reading Kant. He was incredulous. "You are reading KANT? On your OWN? For FUN?" He likened it to deciding to take up mountain climbing then immediately flying to Nepal to see whats up with those Himalayas. There's a reason that most 101 level philosophy courses dont have students read more that brief excerpts of primary texts--it takes a lot of practice and a little
professional guidance to parse that stuff.

I think Moby **** is like that. Just raw-dogging an unannotated text is setting yourself up for all kinds of failure.

I recommend the Norton Critical Edition and/or http://www.powermobydick.com/. You might be able to find some excellent lectures on youtube as well.

 

[Psychopav]

Font showed up normal again today. So, eraser worked.

Moby **** was a DNF for me ~20 years ago. Melville’s writing style was not working for me. It may be one of those should try again, as have sometimes gone back to books a second time and they have resonated better.

Can't think of a worse book to assign to children who have, at that point in their lives, read maybe a half-dozen grown up books, none of which were Milton or apocryphal Gospels.

Melville had such an agile, absorbing mind that he could effortlessly slip in and out of biblical allusion and a quasi-religious voice without the reader realizing it. No high-schooler with a few Stephen Kings under their belt is going parse the humor in a Lot's Wife/Salty Sea type joke.

In fact, I'd wager that few non-scholars are going to wrest everything they can from this, The Greatest American Novel.

I once had a conversation with an actual philosopher wherein I sheepishly confessed my difficulty with reading Kant. He was incredulous. "You are reading KANT? On your OWN? For FUN?" He likened it to deciding to take up mountain climbing then immediately flying to Nepal to see whats up with those Himalayas. There's a reason that most 101 level philosophy courses dont have students read more that brief excerpts of primary texts--it takes a lot of practice and a little
professional guidance to parse that stuff.

I think Moby **** is like that. Just raw-dogging an unannotated text is setting yourself up for all kinds of failure.

I recommend the Norton Critical Edition and/or http://www.powermobydick.com/. You might be able to find some excellent lectures on youtube as well.

Like, no social media whatsoever? Not even Snapchat?

 

[Ilov80s]

I had no idea the story of Dunces, its author, how it got published, etc. Pretty fascinating.

 

[shuke]

together with "Geek Love" by Katherine Dunn (#53 on his list),

#46 on mine

 

[rockaction]

I found Ignatius to be depressing.

I thought DQ was a lot more likeable with noble, although misguided, intentions; I did not really get that out of Ignatius.

Count me among those who did not like Ignatius. I never did understand why all the actors wanted to play him nor why people seemed to lionize him. I still loved the book. I thought about him in a few ways that allowed me to be okay with him as the main character in the novel. The way I thought about Ignatius most of the time was that I simultaneously disliked him yet thought of his character as having an important verisimilitude through which the author would try to tell the most completely full story about humanity that his talents allowed.* Another way I would think about Ignatius is recognizing (a few years after I first read the novel) that my life and its circumstances were such that the book had become incredibly illuminating and relevant in profound ways, and while I've never particularly liked him, the story and its import made it easier to bear with him. So that's an entirely personal reason that probably wouldn't help too many other readers.

* I've now worked on this way, way too long and too exactingly. I've been trying to also convey is this sentence how important the author's (and the novel's) time period and setting are, but I can't seem to. They're incredibly unique and difficult to overstate.