Quote Porn
Slaughterhouse Five
" 'You know what I say to people when I hear they're writing anti-war books?'
'No. What do you say, Harrison Starr?'
'I say Why don't you write an anti-glacier book instead?' "
"Like so many Americans, she was trying to construct a life that made sense from things she found in gift shops."
"He concluded that at least part of the trouble was slipshod storytelling in the New Testament. He supposed that the intent of the Gospels was to teach people, among other things, to be merciful, even to the lowest of the low. But the Gospels actually taught this: before you kill somebody, make absolutely sure he isn't well connected. So it goes."
Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas
"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride... and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well... maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
"Good people drink good beer."
"In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity."
A Few Thoughts
Again today, the bracket pits two master-of-phrase wordsmiths against each other. And what's more: these books happened, more or less.
(Note: Forgive me for spending so much of this passage equating and comparing the book and the movie; I really think they're inseparable and both just deadly. Also, forgive me for forgetting the movie Where the Buffalo Roam because, although I love Bill Murray as much as the next guy... c'monnn. Not even close.)
If there was an award for "best book to screen transition ever ever", and it was given at my discretion somehow, I would give it to Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas—even though it wasn't even nominated for best adapted screenplay at the Oscars, which is kind of the same thing.
Like Fight Club that I detailed a couple weeks ago, this is a case where I saw the movie and was movied to read the book. Johnny Depp's doppelganging aside, the movie did a wonderful job of catching the spirit of the book. The sense of reckless adventure permeated throughout the movie; some of the best quotes were pulled verbatim (see: that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back, and preceding sentiments); it wasn't heavily whitewashed of drugs or censored for the screen; everything was just right like the San Franciscan nights that Thompson describes.
So, then, one may ask what the book has to offer. And, to be honest, depending on the strength of one's imagination vs one's appreciation for filmography, the answer may range from Not so much to Pretty much everything. Despite the lifting of so many now-classic quotes, there are still so many descriptions and interactions that are written by Thompson in a way that a screen can never truly capture. The honest descriptions of drug habits and of the twisted highs really have an art to them on the page, as I see it. Even though Depp plays a masterful Hunter S, the movie is frank in its admission that there's no way the pictorial representation can transcend the words laid to paper decades ago—shown by the number of voice-overs with direct text quotations.
Perhaps, then, it's a test for preference in the case of books v movies. Really, with so much in common from each version of Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas, and with both mediums harnessed so effectively, the preference between this book and this movie could be a litmus test for books vs movies in general.
Or, perhaps Johnny Depp in a safari hat is just incomparable. Either or.
Slaughterhouse Five is quite the bizarre trek through the firebombing of Dresden. It's sort of unique in its presentation: the war scenes are either inspired by, or straight up recalled by Vonnegut from his time serving during the second great war... and then, when the grip of autobiographical + historical fiction is just setting in, it's like surprise! Time travel & aliens! I wouldn't term this a strategy of mass appeal, but it adds flavor and removes gravity—it's easy to enjoy the twists and turns of Vonnegut's time in 1940s Germany when it's sorta-ridiculous-sorta-real rather than concentration-camp-roundtable-discussion-hour.
What's also impressive is that, beyond a history narrative and sci-fi elements, Vonnegut managed to squeak so many of his staple attractions into the book. There's plenty of atheist-biased reflection on spirituality (if that's your dig); Vonnegut's bleak humour shines against a torrid backdrop of war horror; there's a novel take on time travel; there's a peaceful take on death... just so much atmosphere and so much philosophy are served up in Slaughterhouse Five.
Perhaps my favorite aspect of the novel is the refrain that has come to be its call sign: so it goes. It's really hard to represent the effect of the phrase without explaining so many situations where it arises and without spoiling/explaining half the book. It's one of those phrases like Houston, we have a problem or so, so many others that will seep into everyday conversation. It pervades the book itself, too, and kind of becomes a Zen mantra all its own. It's another great feature in a rock-solid book by a weighty author.
(Note: Forgive me for spending so much of this passage equating and comparing the book and the movie; I really think they're inseparable and both just deadly. Also, forgive me for forgetting the movie Where the Buffalo Roam because, although I love Bill Murray as much as the next guy... c'monnn. Not even close.)
If there was an award for "best book to screen transition ever ever", and it was given at my discretion somehow, I would give it to Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas—even though it wasn't even nominated for best adapted screenplay at the Oscars, which is kind of the same thing.
Like Fight Club that I detailed a couple weeks ago, this is a case where I saw the movie and was movied to read the book. Johnny Depp's doppelganging aside, the movie did a wonderful job of catching the spirit of the book. The sense of reckless adventure permeated throughout the movie; some of the best quotes were pulled verbatim (see: that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back, and preceding sentiments); it wasn't heavily whitewashed of drugs or censored for the screen; everything was just right like the San Franciscan nights that Thompson describes.
So, then, one may ask what the book has to offer. And, to be honest, depending on the strength of one's imagination vs one's appreciation for filmography, the answer may range from Not so much to Pretty much everything. Despite the lifting of so many now-classic quotes, there are still so many descriptions and interactions that are written by Thompson in a way that a screen can never truly capture. The honest descriptions of drug habits and of the twisted highs really have an art to them on the page, as I see it. Even though Depp plays a masterful Hunter S, the movie is frank in its admission that there's no way the pictorial representation can transcend the words laid to paper decades ago—shown by the number of voice-overs with direct text quotations.
Perhaps, then, it's a test for preference in the case of books v movies. Really, with so much in common from each version of Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas, and with both mediums harnessed so effectively, the preference between this book and this movie could be a litmus test for books vs movies in general.
Or, perhaps Johnny Depp in a safari hat is just incomparable. Either or.
Slaughterhouse Five is quite the bizarre trek through the firebombing of Dresden. It's sort of unique in its presentation: the war scenes are either inspired by, or straight up recalled by Vonnegut from his time serving during the second great war... and then, when the grip of autobiographical + historical fiction is just setting in, it's like surprise! Time travel & aliens! I wouldn't term this a strategy of mass appeal, but it adds flavor and removes gravity—it's easy to enjoy the twists and turns of Vonnegut's time in 1940s Germany when it's sorta-ridiculous-sorta-real rather than concentration-camp-roundtable-discussion-hour.
What's also impressive is that, beyond a history narrative and sci-fi elements, Vonnegut managed to squeak so many of his staple attractions into the book. There's plenty of atheist-biased reflection on spirituality (if that's your dig); Vonnegut's bleak humour shines against a torrid backdrop of war horror; there's a novel take on time travel; there's a peaceful take on death... just so much atmosphere and so much philosophy are served up in Slaughterhouse Five.
Perhaps my favorite aspect of the novel is the refrain that has come to be its call sign: so it goes. It's really hard to represent the effect of the phrase without explaining so many situations where it arises and without spoiling/explaining half the book. It's one of those phrases like Houston, we have a problem or so, so many others that will seep into everyday conversation. It pervades the book itself, too, and kind of becomes a Zen mantra all its own. It's another great feature in a rock-solid book by a weighty author.
Head-to-Head
Characters: Billy Pilgrim is really the only memorable face in Slaughterhouse Five to me. Fear & Loathing also has one central memorable face, but the addition of that face's attorney is enough to tip the scales.
Advantage: Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas.
Plot: Hunter S Thompson's adventures, much like Bukowski's forever 21 lifestyle in Women, represent living the dream in book form. It's so compelling to me.
Advantage: Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas.
Ending: Fear & Loathing kind of works as a snapshot: the story doesn't end so much as the book ends. Meanwhile, Slaughterhouse Five's book-ending is solid, but Billy Pilgrim's ending is solemn and thought-provoking.
Advantage: Slaughterhouse Five.
Language/Writing: I feel like the last few blogs have had really hard decisions here because the language/writing is the highlight of so many books I enjoyed enough to consider for this tournament. I'm just flat copping out of this because I love the style of both of these books far too much to pick one.
Advantage: Push.
Philosophy: Oh man. Thompson is actually pretty deep when you consider his commentaries on what it means to really live—but Vonnegut answers with some really sobering thoughts about mortality, morality, war and religion. Heavy hitters both.
Advantage: Slaughterhouse Five. So it goes.
Winner Winner Turkey Supper
Today features another love-'em-in-the-same-way, might-as-well-flip-a-coin decision. In the end, both were spectacular, funny and thought-provoking, but Slaughterhouse Five I would describe as insightful, where Fear & Loathing is pensive without advocating too many answers to the significant questions it implies.
Slaughterhouse Five wins, only because I have to pick one.
No comments:
Post a Comment