Re: Re: Tropic of Confusion

I have to agree that at first this book was a challenge to follow. It sort of goes along with what Miranda was saying in class the other day- the whole stream of consciousness writing style gets me going on my own stream of consciousness and two pages later I stop and realize that I just absorbed nothing I just read. However, I think this writing style serves an important purpose, which was mentioned at the very beginning of the novel: the author isn't writing, he is singing. Often the narrator mentions his annoyance with constant talking, he does not seem to give much merit to his conversations with others. He seems to always be quelling the women that he associates with, be it Mona or Ilsa. Similarly, Moldorf speaks very highly of his wife Fanny who "listens intelligently" and "writes in a language that even [his young son] could understand." I suppose this serves to illustrate that both the narrator and the author value human emotion over eloquent language, hence the writing style. Once I came to understand this, the book seemed to make more sense, and reading became easier. 

On a totally different note, this story seems to be full of little symbols that occur only once, and I can never tell what purpose they serve. For example, the narrator talks simultaneously about a beautiful American woman and a bird sitting on his windowsill. "Amazing how easily the sparrow is provided for," he says. "It is raining a bit and the drops are very big. I used to think a bird couldn't fly if its wings got wet." 

Are these tidbits of insight, or mere observations? 

Also, someone in class mentioned their dislike for the narrator, and that it was strange because usually we are biased towards their prospective. However, despite his selfish acts and foul language, I still find it difficult to dislike him for some reason. Does anyone else feel this way?