Sunday, April 11, 2010

On The Road : Reading 2

For some reason, this book is particularly hard to blog about. The authors writing style makes it extremely difficult to make a prediction about what is going to occur within the novel, due to his lack of a strong plot. The author is just explaining a series of events that take place, rather than having a conflict or a long term goal for the protagonist. It is a unique way of writing, but in my opinion, it does not add to the book. It's lack of conflict makes it so that the reader has no character to side with. It weakens the potential connections that can be made with the characters. Because there is no real bad guy, there is nothing that can make me want to be on the characters side. Author Kurt Vonnegut wrote that "good societies can be built only by pitting good against evil" and in my opinion the same rule can be applied to books. With that in mind, how can the average reader be captivated by such a book? If the reader doesn't care about what will happen to the character, what is their incentive to continue reading the book? It seems to me that the authors forget that one of the main goals of a book is to interest readers.

I've noticed that this style of writing seemed to be fairly popular with the writers of that time period. One in particular that I'm thinking of is Hubert Selby Jr. He wrote in a similar manner, which was very interesting and powerful, yet failed to prompt the reader to continue reading. I understand that it was the literary movement of the time, and it takes a whole new approach to writing novels, but for me it just gets old fast. It also doesn't leave much to talk about. There seems to be little or no symbolism within this sort of novel, no strong underlying themes or messages, and fairly basic word choice. There is no imagery that stands out like in Thousand Cranes or Grapes of Wrath. It is fairly plain.

With all that negative talk, it would seem as though I really hate this book, which is certainly not the case. So far I have greatly enjoyed reading it, and find it very entertaining. It has a lot of interesting quotes, which is something that I tend to look for in a book. It is intriguing to see the adventures that Sal goes on, in his semi-vagrant lifestyle. It's a decently fun read. One thing that I've noticed is that the characters created by Kerouac don't seem to be of very great importance to the story. Something about them seems almost as if they're disposable. Although, I suppose it adds to the idea about how Sal is constantly moving from one place to the other. Other than that, I haven't got much else to say about the book. It is unusual, and even though I've got a lot of complaints about it, I'm still enjoying it, and am looking forward to continuing on with it.

2 comments:

  1. I agree with a lot of what you've said. My husband can sit down and devour multiple Kerouac books, where I can appreciate his literary divergence, but it isn't my favorite style. My real goal here is to expose the class to a literary movement that changed the status quo rather than just continue reading single books that were impactful.

    Based on your blog, I am wondering what quotes you enjoyed and why. Also, consider... does Sal have an inner conflict that drives his restless journey? Is Sal a reliable narrator? Do you think he's a wallflower (just following people around and watching them and recording his observations) or an active participant in the cross country trip and the Beat movement? What themes about Americans and America are developing?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anthony made a comment on his blog about how this book was similar to Siddhartha. Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete