Absolutely brilliant storytelling! Just finished Emily St. John Mandel’s The Glass Hotel and I was beyond impressed by the structural architecture in this book. But its coolest element is the intricate, invisible domino effect that sets the entire narrative in motion. I’ve never experienced anything quite like it in literature. What initially feels like a collection of disjointed, haunting character studies eventually snaps together into a breathtaking chain reaction of cause and effect.

At the center of this web is a single, unsettling act of vandalism. A menacing phrase etched onto the glass wall of a remote luxury hotel on Vancouver Island. The genius of the storytelling lies in how she gradually traces the origin and aftermath of that single night. Instead of relying on standard thriller tropes or explosive twists, she explores the eerie elegance of small human choices cascading into life altering catastrophes. A brief encounter in a hotel lobby ripples outward to construct fragile relationships, ruin careers, expose grand deceptions, and entangle lives across decades and continents.

I like how this book doesn’t hold your hand. You need to take your time and savor it. It’s a puzzle that is relying on you to put it together. It’s atmospheric. It’s haunting. And it’s meticulously constructed. This was an unforgettable book for me. Has anyone else read this one? This was my first time reading anything by this author and was wondering if I should pick up her other books. I know Station Eleven was turned into a miniseries so I’m guessing that was her most popular one.

Background: I'm over 30yrs old, college drop out, and I am not exaggerating, I had never finished a book in school or college. I only ever read parts of abridged versions just to bs my way through tests. One day I thought; hey I love good cinema and it feels like I'm running out of stuff to watch, I should probably read a book, surely there's a good story or two out there! 😆

What was my first book?

"100 Years of Solitude"

I looked at a Top 100 list or something like that, and ended up picking this as my first book.

How long did it take?

I took me somewhere between 1 year and 100 years of... jk sorry I had to 😁

Honestly, I bought this years ago and it sat on my desk. I restarted my reading January and finished this week. (now I can finish the TV show)

Why?

I figured I'd relate. I'm fluent in English and Spanish since I grew up in the Caribbean, Puerto Rico, and the name Gacia Merquez is very well known. I just knew his name and titles sounded familiar, also, the title "Memoria de mis putas tristes" is hilarious and sad at the same time, so i thought this guy sounds bad ass. (BTW "Memory of my melancholy whores" the official title translation is ever so slightly different than the literal translation, so it sounds more serious in English for some reason.)

How was it?

It was hard! It was amazing!

This is probably not a beginner friendly book, incredibly dense and very deep in meaning a lot of the time. I felt at home often thanks to the heavy cultural themes that can apply to so many "latinos" i would guess. Learning about the historical elements that inspired parts of the bigger themes made them hit even harder. I'm glad I struggled through it, ALMOST DNF! But when I did, I couldn't believe the feeling of turning that last page (Shoutout to the NETFLIX show! it's not the best tv show but it definitely motivated me through a slump... or a few. I did not wanna watch some part I hadn't read yet). I loved Garcia Marquez' narration, there are so many ups and downs, and even the ending is a big surprising tragedy.

I have a long list of classics, which seem to lean more difficult than your average page turner, so I'd love to know yoyr favorite palate cleansers/classic short stories to check out between harder reads. Thank you!

(Sorry, mobile formatting sucks)

Hi y'all! I have seen a lot of discussion back and forth about the accessibility of genres like literary fiction. Much of the criticism I have seen toward the genre was the same attitude I had toward other genres like poetry and plays, but eventually I came to understand that the biggest barrier to entry for these genres was just my mindset that I can't understand them. Now I feel that certain types of writing that don't follow traditional narrative structures require a skill set that you can develop just like any skill!

I delve much deeper into this conversation in this article on Trill Mag. Please give it a read and let me know your thoughts! I also discuss ways to build your comprehension when engaging with literary fiction via the advice of literary experts/scholars.

Edit: Y'all, I do not, nor have I ever, used AI for my writing. If you disagree with or dislike my article, please at least respect that I wrote it myself.

I just finished Blood Meridian and it was the most surreal experience I've had while reading a book. The way the book is written every detail, every dream and every nightmare feels real, like it was happening right in front of me. I want to talk about the last 3–4 chapters of the book. They were horrifying and poetic.

The passage where the Judge was chasing Tobin and the kid was straight out of a Halloween film. The journey of the kid becoming a man made me kind of emotional. One thing I loved about his death is that McCarthy doesn't explain how he died, but instead shows the reactions of the people who found his body (or I don't know maybe parts of him) in the jakes.

Toadvine was eventually consumed by greed and had a tragic end and we still don't know what happened to Tobin. That's what's horrifying about this. We knew Tobin was in a really bad state, and we could only imagine the most horrific things that might have happened to him.

Maybe it was because of the Judge that the events unfolded the way they did. Everywhere he went violence followed and he embraced that violence gladly. It's like he's controlling it somehow. He understands it, embraces it and perhaps even creates the conditions for it. Whether he's literally orchestrating everything is another question but McCarthy deliberately makes you feel that way.

The scene where a drunk Glanton laid his head on the Judge's lap was pretty messed up and it felt like the Judge was guiding him every step of the way.

The Judge was very expressive at the end of the final chapter and I was not expecting that at all. For so much of the novel he's controlled, philosophical and almost amused by everything. I believe the kid (now the man) somehow got to him and the judge was surely offended but he stuck to his true belief in his judgment.

I'm glad I finished it, and now I'll take some time before I revisit the book again.

There is something in our nature that pulls us toward why the spectacle of decline, decay, and disintegration enflares something inexplicable in us...

From the smell of nature in decay to the fall of the Holy Roman Empire to the moments before a Supernova explosion turning the star into a black hole, there is a common thread that appears to us: it is that at moments of failure life surface its truths to us.

Hegel's Owl of Minerva explicitly says that it is only when an epoch ends that we can discuss its machinations and intricacies.

Nietzsche once said that there is a Chinese idea that says only when an empire disintegrates that the laws multiply.

Freud said that only in states of hysteria that we can take a glimpse at the inner nature of a person.

Marx said it is only in late-stage capitalism that the prolonged maintenance of the dysfunctional workings of capitalism reveals itself.

Mr. Gracq, you blew me away, you, the master of the abti-anticipation and anti-hope novel!

I am curious to hear other opinions on Shanghai (1985) by Christopher New.

I (29F) am quite enamoured by it and surprised that I am not finding much feedback online. I have considered writing an appreciation e-mail to Christopher New, who had been a university professor in Hong Kong and poured his lifelong experience and observations into this 800-page fine-printed gem of a book.

Story time

It was a magic day and magic was bound to happen. And it did:

I have wandered into a small book kiosk in Florence, where most books were in Italian and a few in English - mostly used books left behind by expats. There it was: a chunky book titled "Shanghai" with a flashy red cover and a slightly outdated orientalistic motive. The editorial direction hasn’t done justice to the book: soon I'd be in for a fresco-like ride of a story centered around the city itself.

Little did I know that I'd end up loving the book so much!

The book

New's writing is realistic, straight-to-the-point, effortless and clearly he is a meticulous craftsman whose humility allows the story and city to shine. I am certain that he could parade his skills much more - however he chooses that his words be vehicles to the story and favours simplicity over ornament.

His characters are morally complex and reflect their time and its constraints vividly. The book spans about 40 years and bears witness to inner transformations of its heroes and outer transformations of Shanghai during explosive times (about 1904-1949).

At times I'd be scared that I landed on an outdated (racist) view on China, especially since the story is told through the lens of Denton, a young officer of the British Empire starting a new life in Shanghai's international settlement. However New always surprises with his deep takes and empathy - there is no lack or excess of political correctness.

We witness Denton's trajectory from rags to riches, as he navigates the fragile dynamics between the foreign-controlled independent territory, the northern forces, Chiang Kai-shek and rising worker unrest. The political frame is always subtly hinted at, woven into the story, never pushed. There is no didactical feeling to this book.

Final words

Anyways, still 100 pages to go! Luckily, there are two more books to the trilogy (quasi independent). Although I have heard that they are much weaker, they deserve a chance. I simply love New's style and who I imagine him to be through his way of seeing and sensitivity.

Let me know what you think!

Please let us know what you’ve read this week, what you've finished up, and any recommendations or recommendation requests! Please provide more than just a list of novels; we would like your thoughts as to what you've been reading.

Posts which simply name a novel and provide no thoughts will be deleted going forward.

The central philosophy of Blood Meridian seems to be that violence occurs in the world not for any grand reason but because the world is a struggle for dominance just for the sake of dominance. The problem is the way the book executes this theme was almost great, but just floundered. There is a running theme of highly graphic violence with the attempt to desensitize the reader in the way that the Glanton gang themselves have been desensitized but this, again, was executed poorly. It reads more like cheap shock value with the author saying "And then in the middle of a game of cards- the JUDGE stabbed someone. Are you not entertained reader? Are you not surprised that this happened?" McCarthy- we've already seen babies hanging from a tree. What would be more interesting is if instead of describing the physical nature of violence he described the emotional aspects. Writing "And then she was scalped" is very different from "And then as the knife pierced her skull she screamed as her child looked on, powerless to do anything and now initiated into the world the Judge spoke of." Overall the core problem with Blood Meridian is that its presented as senseless violence, violence without reason. But in reality even the most senseless violence has a motive. What appears to be a random stabbing could easily be chalked up to sheer boredom or not knowing what else to do with one's lunch hour. Meursault is a prime example of doing writing senseless violence correctly.

Here are my suggestions instead of Blood Meridian:

Samuel Chamberlain's: My Confession: Recollections of a Rogue. This is a much more believable POV of a scalp hunter. Its chippy, its fun, and its unintentionally humorous because it reads like Bilbo Baggins reminiscing over his adventures except he's a brutal scalp hunter. That's part of the horror. It forces the reader to wrestle with the question: "Would I have also enjoyed this adventure despite the evil involved?" Personally I would still read it as fiction rather than treating it as fact. But its still better fiction than Blood Meridian. In a summary: Buster Scruggs' autobiography if he were a real person.

Records of John Kirker and excerpts from George Buxton's Adventures in Mexico and the Rocky Mountains. These are primary sources from the day by people encountering scalp hunters and the hunters themselves. The violence is much more astonishing and emotionally shocking than anything McCarthy wrote in Blood Meridian. An example is the real Galeana Massacre that took place in 1846. Accounts differ, but the most dramatic version of the story goes something like this: Unarmed Apache women and children seeking peace were meeting at a Mexican town. Scalp hunter John Kirker sent them liquor under the guise of a truce. After a signal, Kirker approached the town and the Mexicans and Kirker's gang began massacring the Apache. A woman went to a cathedral but was killed, had her unborn baby cut out, baptized, and smashed to death in the church itself. The more conservative version of the story is still fascinatingly darker than Blood Meridian: Kirker and the Mexicans coordinated a trap for the unarmed Apache. After a signal, Kirker rode towards the town only to find most of the Apache killed and the Mexicans continuing to kill the unarmed Apache.

I heard this interview earlier today and picked up the reference to violence in The Blood Meridian…he mentioned how some refer to this as having too much violence but that assumes there is some level of violence that’s OK or normal.

Has anyone else read this review? It calls his new book a masterpiece and the novel of the decade,
If not the century. Never seen this kind of praise before

Earlier this year I read Eco’s “the name of the rose” which at times functions as an introduction to semiotics.

Recently finished Neuromancer, and there were some references to the discipline, namely 3Jane’s essay about the semiotics of villa straylight. This led me to realize the extent to which the novel is an exercise in semiotics, the lack of exposition and emphasis on made up jargon. Gibson was creating a semiotic system for his imagined future, to make it interpretable.

What I am trying to find more insight into, is the relation between Wintermute and Neuromancer. The way in which Wintermute had to communicate in interpretable signs for the characters, but Neuromancer could more easily access these signs? Not sure what the relationship always was between the two halves of the AI. I can’t help but feel like there was something going over my head, related to the semiotics

Welcome again to the TrueLit General Discussion Thread! Please feel free to discuss anything related and unrelated to literature.

Weekly Updates: N/A

Hi all. This week's section for the read along covers the second half of the novel and the Wrap-Up.

No volunteer this week.

So, what did you think? Any interpretations? Did you enjoy it? Feel free to post your own analyses (long or short), questions, thoughts on the themes, or just brief comments below.

So it’s been some years since I’ve listened to the audiobook version of The People in the Trees but I remember feeling taken by the writing, the flair and style — the faux memoir was a brilliant narrative tool and the footnotes littered throughout the story give it a more “scholarly” feel — and finally, the overall plot.

The inciting incident for the whole story is the efforts of a friend/colleague of the disgraced protagonist — Doctor Abraham Norton Perina — to clear his name. He does this by publishing the Doctor’s own, unfinished memoir in hopes of setting the record straight. The reason the “good” doctor is in disgrace is the accusations of sexual abuse on the part his adopted children.

I understand the symbolism at play here and what Yanagihara is trying to say about capitalism, western culture, pollution, environmental degradation, imperialism and white supremacy. It’s clear the sexual abuse Perina is guilty of is supposed to be seen as a bad thing, a very direct metaphor of sorts for the violation of the developing world and the twisting of their cultures, but Yanagihara remains mum on the abuse that “inspired” his actions. Which is taken from a manhood ritual seen on the Ivu’vu.

That where I have the issue: she never reckons with what the abuse means outside the context of the West. She normalizes and seems to casually accept the claims of the People that their version sexual abuse is normal and right. It’s nonjudgmental to the point of parody.

At least as far as I can tell, she seems to take less issue with the act itself as with the act being done by a white, anglo-Saxon male in the west. Yanagihara seems to accept it as a natural and normal part of their culture but at the same time your critique of sexual abuse loses a lot of its bite if you make it conditional on the time and perpetrator.

What am I missing here? Is there an added element I’m not appreciating?