I thought you were just pointing at the cops.

Sorry, I don't share your penchant for communicating with pitchers.

It's my only vice, EXCUSE ME.

I rarely dole out pardons.

Unless you get the highlights.

i highly suggest doing that... get in the habit of reading with stuff you really enjoy, then start to check out some stuff you're not sure about... i personally think catcher in the rye is the worst thing salinger ever wrote... and it's a damn fine book. it's just i think his writing style works better with short stories...

I tried highlights when I was 16. My mom did it, and I looked like a calico cat.

I started on that book "The Unbinding" and it is actually really good.

Not to stray from the topic of this thread, but I'm about to stray from the topic of this thread. For the record, I believe that highlights are very very difficult to accomplish without losing ones sense of dignity. Basically, highlights are not working most times I see them. Not that I care and not that I am a specialist ont he topic, its just an observation.

That's ok, it's a sub-topic of the thread anyways, so you didn't stray much. And I agree, highlights are hard to pull off.

grab CAT'S CRADLE or GALAPAGOS by Kurt Vonnegut

or

HAM ON RYE by Charles Bukowski

I actually saw Ham On Rye last night, but I grabbed Tropic of Cancer instead. Bad move?

I find henry Miller a tedious bore. but that's me. ham on rye os about charles bukowski's growing up, like you said, kind of coming of age story, although a hundred times harsher than anything in bullshit catcher on the rye.

Ham on Rye is a fantastic book.

That's cool, cause while I liked Catcher on the Rye, it was a little slow.

tropic f cancer is one of my favorite books.
good choice.
if you like coming of age kind of things
maybe check out
f scott fitzgerald-this sid of paradise (guys in his early 20s)
not coming of age but still a damn fine boook is
john fante-ask the dust

Tropics of Cancer, is that the one that features the word Cunt a bunch of times?

yup

I don't think you should run for classics without treating them the way you'd treat an anonymous writer.

I have no idea who Kirn and Starr are, but you mentioned Bukowski and Miller. I can only guess for Bukowski, but I've read some Miller stuff and what you seem to look for is personal voices, variety in rhythm and flow.

The test would be to read books out loud. When sentences are side by side and don't connect at all, when you can't grasp the writer's rhythm, or bump every here and there, it's over. Among other reasons.

The thing would be to whisper for yourself a whole page of a novel in a noisy bookstore to make your mind up. Had I done that that I wouldn't have bought that horror...

If you're sick of trying and finding nothing, I'd recommend Leonid Andreiev's short stories (if luck has it that they've been translated and made available) - Miller thought he was good (and it was hard for him to pay another writer a compliment).
His stories are dark, short, sharp. The Lie, The Silence, The Red Laugh are the ones I enjoyed the most.

After that, mister fact, it's up to you; I dig Joyce but he's said to be hard to read, with never ending sentences, Woolf, same and she's for sissies, Malcolm Lowry but noone ever finished the book I gave them, Louis-Ferdinand Céline but most people drop the book as it's exhausting (even when you read it out loud, it's extremely challenging and breath taking - it's a beauty), and Toby Litt's Deadkidsongs but the ones I lent it to thought it was too frightening to finish it...

Thanks, that should help too. I've never even touched Joyce, cause I always thought that would be very cliche, but that's probably stupid and I should just read it already.

post office is GREAT! it is the first novel bukowski wrote after leaving work at the post office. it is the best american novel bout the humiliation and degradation of working a 9-5. I love it.