FYI. This is not something I thought I’d be doing, but don’t mind in the least. Just forgive me if it seems a little haphazard. I didn't really have time to pen a proper review (as I believe was intended.)For me, the key to tackling this book was the first 150 pages, mainly because I had read them before. In fact, I had read them over three times and then my progress always stalled, the book fell away, and I moved onto other literary pursuits. The same thing tried to happen this time around. However, I forced myself through it and I’m glad I did because, in the end, I really liked Confederacy of Dunces.
It was about a third of the way through that I really began to view the book as a farce. From our friend wikipedia:
A farce is a comedy written for the stage or film which aims to entertain the audience by means of unlikely, extravagant, and improbable situations, disguise and mistaken identity, verbal humour of varying degrees of sophistication, which may include sexual innuendo and word play, and a fast-paced plot whose speed usually increases, culminating in an ending which often involves an elaborate chase scene. Farce is also characterized by physical humour, the use of deliberate absurdity or nonsense, and broadly stylized performances.
While that definition is certainly limiting and not 100% apt, I think it may be a good starting point for discussion, at least in terms of how the story unravels. Anyway, I’m not really sure how this is going to go or how it is supposed to go, but I figure I’d offer a few thoughts and then perhaps a few questions…
…I don’t know if I can think of a more unlikable (yet entertaining) protagonist in a major novel. Perhaps Humbert Humbert? Even so, no-one even close at least in terms of a comic novel. Toole drew Ignatius’s personality so specifically appalling that I couldn’t help but enjoy hating him and the misfortune he brought upon others. Frankly, Ignatius is an asshole and my favorite manifestation of his character was in his yet-to-be-published “working boy” journals.
…Ignatius seems willing to let fate (or “Fortuna”) determine his courses of action, yet also seems greatly spurred by his nemesis Myrna Minkoff. The blatant sexual politics there were interesting, especially how sex/porn really came into play at the end of the novel. In fact, I found it almost surprising. So, does he let Fortuna guide him? Or not really? Or does that even make sense? Anyway, I thought the ending was perfect.
…I’m glad things seemed to work out for the people in the novel who seemed to have generally good intentions (Jones, Mr. Levy, Darlene, Miss Trixie, Mancuso) and the more immoral supporting characters (Lana Lee, Mrs. Levy, etc) got what was coming to them.
…I was initially struck quite a bit about the books attitude/message toward race (and slavery) but found that seemed to wane a bit as the book went on and it seemed to comment more and more on worker/employer politics in general. Whattya think?
…My favorite scene in the book by far? Ignatius showing up at the exhibit of the Ladies Art Guild with his concession cart and a sign that read “Twelve Inches of Paradise.”
Anyway, I’m not sure what happens next and there is still a lot more to this book that I haven't even begun to touch on here. Why let me do all the work though? Let those comments rip, people.
Posts
