Pale fare analysis:
for anyone interested in reading this book, please, do NOT go in blind. Don't make the same mistake as I did
This is for sure one of the most unique books i've read. The book is structured like a poetry book, with a poem called "Pale fire", if you don't know better, you will probably skip the afterword since it looks like it was made by the editorial or something, and probably also the index in the back, you would just read the poem, enjoy it, and move on with your life
thing is, unless you look at wikipedia or have someone really tell you this, you may not know that there is actually more book. After the poem there is a big analysis of the book, you would initially think that this was not needed if you just dont want to read an analysis or think you kinda understood the poem. However it's in that analysis that the actual book is at
the point of pale fire, is that every other element (the afterword, the analysis and the index) are part of a different narrative. This becomes clear when you actually read any of them
you will notice at like the third paragraph of the analysis, that our narrator, (which is NOT the author of the poem) is actually clueless and writting a lot of bullshit. Like, they take a line of the book, kinda does something that could be true, and then 3 paragraphs later they're talking about their morning routine. Going to use an example of the start of the book to not spoil anyone
and that is, because while there is a plot in the things they say about the kingdom of zembla, there is a deeper plot, about their actual relationship to the actual author, who is he exactly, and why he is doing this. Which, to be completely honest, I missed on my read-through
thing is, you must read the book with a word documment or notebook open and then read every word and then stop after every sentence to study what their actual meaning is. And after you have read it once, you got to read it again, because for sure there is going to be stuff recontextualized and things you missed. Which being honest, it's not my favourite thing to do
however, if you were to do that, you would realize that the book is actually a lot more complex and really well written, but yeah. It's just you need a lot of context before going into the book, as the actual book is not the most enjoyable if not, there are so many things descouraging you from actually reading the book critically that I think most readers currently won't really spot this sort of elements
not also that, but the book is also old, it's from 1962, not only that, but the actual author is russian, but this book was written in an entirely different culture, and they do use references to some stuff that while it may be apparent on the era and location it was written. It's really not noticeable by anyone unless you read the wikipedia article for it and then also watch a video analysis
even if I have complained a lot about the book, I do really like what they're trying to do, use a analysis of a book to tell a entirely different plot. I have seen more modern works with similar concepts, and they're really amazing. And this was the earliest example I know of this sort of story-telling, I just wish this book was easier to get into, because if it wasn't been for wikipedia, I would have missed half the book
the actual plot is good, and part of the acutal plot appeal is the feeling of just calling the fictional narrator out on it's bullshit to then discover more plot. Cant really say any specifics of the plot because of that
noy only that, but there isn't really a concensus what the acutal true plot and events of pale fire are. So yeah, good luck trying to read this
----
next: Lackadaisy
also i'm still watching revolutionary girl utena, I just finished chapter 24 and I'm still very much enjoying it
for anyone interested in reading this book, please, do NOT go in blind. Don't make the same mistake as I did
This is for sure one of the most unique books i've read. The book is structured like a poetry book, with a poem called "Pale fire", if you don't know better, you will probably skip the afterword since it looks like it was made by the editorial or something, and probably also the index in the back, you would just read the poem, enjoy it, and move on with your life
thing is, unless you look at wikipedia or have someone really tell you this, you may not know that there is actually more book. After the poem there is a big analysis of the book, you would initially think that this was not needed if you just dont want to read an analysis or think you kinda understood the poem. However it's in that analysis that the actual book is at
the point of pale fire, is that every other element (the afterword, the analysis and the index) are part of a different narrative. This becomes clear when you actually read any of them
you will notice at like the third paragraph of the analysis, that our narrator, (which is NOT the author of the poem) is actually clueless and writting a lot of bullshit. Like, they take a line of the book, kinda does something that could be true, and then 3 paragraphs later they're talking about their morning routine. Going to use an example of the start of the book to not spoil anyone
kinbote wrote: 5d4yo
Lines 1-4: I was the shadow of the waxwing slain, etc.
The image in these opening lines evidently refers to a bird knocking itself out, in full flight, against the outer surface of a glass pane in which a mirrored sky, with its slightly darker tint and slightly slower cloud, presents the illusion of continued space. [...]
and then, deeper into the book, it doesn't just tell stuff about their life, but actually starts telling a different story whatsoever, thing is, if you're reading this as if it was an actual poem analysis, (me, clueless). The fact taht the narrator is incredibly hateable and clearly spreading lies and stuff not relevant to the poem, will make you just kinda skim some sections when they starts their weird ramblings. However, you're not really supposed to do this, as there is a deeper narrative if you actually do engage critically and analyze the last detail out of those ramblingskinbote wrote: 5d4yo
[...] The poem was begun at the dead center of the year, a few minutes after midnight July 1, while I played chess with a young Iranian enrolled in our summer school
and that is, because while there is a plot in the things they say about the kingdom of zembla, there is a deeper plot, about their actual relationship to the actual author, who is he exactly, and why he is doing this. Which, to be completely honest, I missed on my read-through
thing is, you must read the book with a word documment or notebook open and then read every word and then stop after every sentence to study what their actual meaning is. And after you have read it once, you got to read it again, because for sure there is going to be stuff recontextualized and things you missed. Which being honest, it's not my favourite thing to do
however, if you were to do that, you would realize that the book is actually a lot more complex and really well written, but yeah. It's just you need a lot of context before going into the book, as the actual book is not the most enjoyable if not, there are so many things descouraging you from actually reading the book critically that I think most readers currently won't really spot this sort of elements
not also that, but the book is also old, it's from 1962, not only that, but the actual author is russian, but this book was written in an entirely different culture, and they do use references to some stuff that while it may be apparent on the era and location it was written. It's really not noticeable by anyone unless you read the wikipedia article for it and then also watch a video analysis
even if I have complained a lot about the book, I do really like what they're trying to do, use a analysis of a book to tell a entirely different plot. I have seen more modern works with similar concepts, and they're really amazing. And this was the earliest example I know of this sort of story-telling, I just wish this book was easier to get into, because if it wasn't been for wikipedia, I would have missed half the book
the actual plot is good, and part of the acutal plot appeal is the feeling of just calling the fictional narrator out on it's bullshit to then discover more plot. Cant really say any specifics of the plot because of that
noy only that, but there isn't really a concensus what the acutal true plot and events of pale fire are. So yeah, good luck trying to read this
----
next: Lackadaisy
also i'm still watching revolutionary girl utena, I just finished chapter 24 and I'm still very much enjoying it
honestly my favorite cartoon
