Comments on: Jeffrey Eugenides, Middlesex http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/jeffrey-eugenides-middlesex/ falling indelibly into the past Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:02:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Academic Coach http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/jeffrey-eugenides-middlesex/#comment-1560 Academic Coach Wed, 24 Aug 2005 02:43:35 +0000 http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=706#comment-1560 <p>Screen adaptation?  Awesome. Hope its good because it won’t be easy to film. <br /> In addition to a fun plot (even if “ripped off") and great characters, I really liked the history, the Detroit, the cars, and the writing. </p> <p> I was very disappointed, however, when I tried to read Virgin Suicides. </p> Screen adaptation?  Awesome. Hope its good because it won’t be easy to film.

In addition to a fun plot (even if “ripped off”) and great characters, I really liked the history, the Detroit, the cars, and the writing.

I was very disappointed, however, when I tried to read Virgin Suicides.

]]> By: Paul Graham http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/jeffrey-eugenides-middlesex/#comment-1559 Paul Graham Fri, 07 Jan 2005 20:45:04 +0000 http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=706#comment-1559 <p>yes and of course Sterne is deeply indebted to Cervantes, to whom he gives fullsome praise within his book, and openly acknowledges his debt to the dear Don (unlike some… the opening chapeter of Middlesex owes an obscene amount to Shandy) </p> <p> too much happens in Smolett’s R.R. for it to be such a great comparison - that is Bildungsroman for sure, Sterne kind of just meanders in his own little patch, with utter brilliance. </p> <p> it fits more in with the meta-text genre, and in many ways shows a clean pair of heels to all those contemporary novelists who thinks they are being clever with their witty narrative loops and pagination tricks (leaving a blank page so that the reader can describe the beauty of their loved one, for example) </p> <p> I hear a screen adaptation is on the way <br /> though its long overdue </p> yes and of course Sterne is deeply indebted to Cervantes, to whom he gives fullsome praise within his book, and openly acknowledges his debt to the dear Don (unlike some… the opening chapeter of Middlesex owes an obscene amount to Shandy)

too much happens in Smolett’s R.R. for it to be such a great comparison - that is Bildungsroman for sure, Sterne kind of just meanders in his own little patch, with utter brilliance.

it fits more in with the meta-text genre, and in many ways shows a clean pair of heels to all those contemporary novelists who thinks they are being clever with their witty narrative loops and pagination tricks (leaving a blank page so that the reader can describe the beauty of their loved one, for example)

I hear a screen adaptation is on the way

though its long overdue

]]> By: jake fuchs http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/jeffrey-eugenides-middlesex/#comment-1558 jake fuchs Fri, 07 Jan 2005 20:17:05 +0000 http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=706#comment-1558 <p>KF may well be right about the existence of a class of novels that owe something to TS.  But Sterne’s book may derive from something else (what’s completely original, anyway?), and perhaps it’s most reasonable simply to posit the existence of such a class, Bildungsroman-with-twist.  Maybe it had a particular flowering in the 18th century: check out the beginning of Smollett’s ‘Roderick Random,’ which appeared before TS. </p> <p> ‘Middlesex’ is not written like TS, which is heavily fragmented and presents a texture of rifts.  Callie simply tells her story in a relatively conventional way. While it’s interesting to compare the two novels, the differences seem to me to outweigh the similarities by a considerable margin. </p> <p> This dialogue we’re having is a lot of fun.  Thanks to everyone. </p> KF may well be right about the existence of a class of novels that owe something to TS.  But Sterne’s book may derive from something else (what’s completely original, anyway?), and perhaps it’s most reasonable simply to posit the existence of such a class, Bildungsroman-with-twist.  Maybe it had a particular flowering in the 18th century: check out the beginning of Smollett’s ‘Roderick Random,’ which appeared before TS.

‘Middlesex’ is not written like TS, which is heavily fragmented and presents a texture of rifts.  Callie simply tells her story in a relatively conventional way. While it’s interesting to compare the two novels, the differences seem to me to outweigh the similarities by a considerable margin.

This dialogue we’re having is a lot of fun.  Thanks to everyone.

]]> By: KF http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/jeffrey-eugenides-middlesex/#comment-1557 KF Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:05:09 +0000 http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=706#comment-1557 <p>I’m standing by my disagreement.  Middlesex is not the best thing I’ve ever read.  I’m not defending its Pulitzer.  But “homage” is not a code word for rip-off.  All writers borrow, to greater and lesser extents.  Good writers do something inventive with the borrowing.  And I’d argue that Eugenides does so.  You’d argue that he doesn’t.  Whatever: we disagree.  But “disgraceful” and “steal” and “rip-off” strike me as far too harsh for descriptions of a process little different from that of any number of other authors.  Originality, per se, is precious hard to come by, and, I think, really beside the point. </p> I’m standing by my disagreement.  Middlesex is not the best thing I’ve ever read.  I’m not defending its Pulitzer.  But “homage” is not a code word for rip-off.  All writers borrow, to greater and lesser extents.  Good writers do something inventive with the borrowing.  And I’d argue that Eugenides does so.  You’d argue that he doesn’t.  Whatever: we disagree.  But “disgraceful” and “steal” and “rip-off” strike me as far too harsh for descriptions of a process little different from that of any number of other authors.  Originality, per se, is precious hard to come by, and, I think, really beside the point.

]]> By: Paul Graham http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/jeffrey-eugenides-middlesex/#comment-1556 Paul Graham Fri, 07 Jan 2005 14:49:16 +0000 http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=706#comment-1556 <p>come on guys, get on message here. <br /> it’s not just the Bildungsroman thang - I threw the book on the floor in disgust after 6 pages, it was such an obvious steal.. </p> <p> narrator speaks from birth in opening chapter - check <br /> family buzzes around with weird superstitious notions over divining childs future - check <br /> our little “homonculus” is fragile - check <br /> uncle/aunt present with antiquated ideas -check <br /> THEN cut away to tell long back story for half of book and don’t actually get born properly till half way through - check <br /> I could go on… </p> <p> it’s Shandy all the way guys <br /> even the NY Times reviewer mentioned its ‘homage’ to Sterne, and well, we all know what the code word for rip-off is, don’t we? </p> <p> I don’t mind homages works, but it’s disgraceful that he won the pulitzer for this. </p> come on guys, get on message here.

it’s not just the Bildungsroman thang - I threw the book on the floor in disgust after 6 pages, it was such an obvious steal..

narrator speaks from birth in opening chapter - check

family buzzes around with weird superstitious notions over divining childs future - check

our little “homonculus” is fragile - check

uncle/aunt present with antiquated ideas -check

THEN cut away to tell long back story for half of book and don’t actually get born properly till half way through - check

I could go on…

it’s Shandy all the way guys

even the NY Times reviewer mentioned its ‘homage’ to Sterne, and well, we all know what the code word for rip-off is, don’t we?

I don’t mind homages works, but it’s disgraceful that he won the pulitzer for this.

]]> By: KF http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/jeffrey-eugenides-middlesex/#comment-1555 KF Fri, 07 Jan 2005 14:00:51 +0000 http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=706#comment-1555 <p>Thanks, Jake.  I let that comment hang there hoping somebody other than me would respond.  Because I can’t help but wonder if, in some sense at least, ALL Bildungsroman-with-twist type novels are indebted to Tristram Shandy.  In which case, does saying that Sterne wrote the “original” really tell you anything of value? </p> Thanks, Jake.  I let that comment hang there hoping somebody other than me would respond.  Because I can’t help but wonder if, in some sense at least, ALL Bildungsroman-with-twist type novels are indebted to Tristram Shandy.  In which case, does saying that Sterne wrote the “original” really tell you anything of value?

]]> By: Jake Fuchs http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/jeffrey-eugenides-middlesex/#comment-1554 Jake Fuchs Fri, 07 Jan 2005 02:27:06 +0000 http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=706#comment-1554 <p>TS is the most complex and sustained dialogue between author and reader ever constructed.  M is good, a good read, but Eugenides is no Sterne.  What I don’t understand, though, is why anyone says M resembles TS, whether to its credit or not.  I see no likenesses.  What am I missing? </p> TS is the most complex and sustained dialogue between author and reader ever constructed.  M is good, a good read, but Eugenides is no Sterne.  What I don’t understand, though, is why anyone says M resembles TS, whether to its credit or not.  I see no likenesses.  What am I missing?

]]> By: paul graham http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/jeffrey-eugenides-middlesex/#comment-1553 paul graham Wed, 03 Nov 2004 22:56:09 +0000 http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=706#comment-1553 <p>Middlesex is a rip off from Tristram Shandy (Sterne, 1760) </p> <p> read the original <br /> and heap shame on Mr Eugenides </p> Middlesex is a rip off from Tristram Shandy (Sterne, 1760)

read the original

and heap shame on Mr Eugenides

]]>