'Difficult' books

[Petrushka]

Everyone I know who has read War and Peace admits to giving up on the essay on history, so you are not alone in that.

I've read War and Peace twice and want to read it for a third time before I shuffle off. The concluding essay on history is certainly tedious and a misjudgement on Tolstoy's part, but the novel itself poses few problems. Perhaps a good idea is to watch a TV/film adaptation which will help fix the characters in the mind for those who find this difficult.

I tend to avoid books with a 'difficult' reputation - life's too short - but, as one with a keen interest in German history, I found Hitler's Mein Kampf tedious beyond belief and never got beyond the first volume.

[ChandlersFord]

I read it . Compared to the opening chapter of Joseph and His Brothers it’s a walk in the park. Now that is tedious …

Take it from me: once you're past that fearsome opening chapter, Joseph..... is a walk in the park. I read it in a month (in the John Woods translation, which I would recommend - you'd be better off not reading it than going with Lowe-Porter) and thoroughly enjoyed it. The chapters concerned Potiphar are among the best things Mann ever wrote.

[ChandlersFord]

Everyone I know who has read War and Peace admits to giving up on the essay on history, so you are not alone in that.

I read it to the end. There are much worse digressions 'great literature' - Les Miserables, for one - but I found W&P strangely unmemorable and not at all deserving of its reputation. Most people (including me) seem to prefer Anna Karenina.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Take it from me: once you're past that fearsome opening chapter, Joseph..... is a walk in the park. I read it in a month (in the John Woods translation, which I would recommend - you'd be better off not reading it than going with Lowe-Porter) and thoroughly enjoyed it. The chapters concerned Potiphar are among the best things Mann ever wrote.

Oh I got through it in the Woods . Even Woods advises you to read it last. But I’m stuck at the end of volume 3. Just one to go I guess…
Strangely although Lowe Porter is much criticised I preferred her Magic Mountain to Woods’s .
I’ve read Faustus in HTLP but only got the Woods last year - still on the shelf.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I read it to the end. There are much worse digressions 'great literature' - Les Miserables, for one - but I found W&P strangely unmemorable and not at all deserving of its reputation. Most people (including me) seem to prefer Anna Karenina.

I like the Waterloo and sewage digressions in Les Mis. Less sure about the decaying corpse and state of Russian monasteries in Brother’s K though.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Some lovely replies so far. Keep'em coming, folks.

We could try 'poems' next

I would say that the most “difficult “ works of fiction I’ve read are

First three vols of In Search Of Lost Time
Dr Faustus
Ulysses

Also confusing are : At Swim Two Birds, Confederacy Of Dunces and Gravity’s Rainbow


But the most difficult to follow , largely because they are designed to confuse (or the product of a senile brain if you believe F.R. Leavis) , are The Wings Of A Dove and The Golden Bowl. I’ve read both four times and there are whole sentences that just don’t make sense.

[ChandlersFord]

I like the Waterloo and sewage digressions in Les Mis. Less sure about the decaying corpse and state of Russian monasteries in Brother’s K though.

The digressions are interesting in themselves, they just don't (I feel) belong in the novel and, unlike Tolstoy, VH doesn't allows them to hold up the narrative. There's also the fact that Hugo comes across as the most pompous man who ever lived, which he may well have been.

[Belgrove]

I’ve tried Ulysses several times and failed. The last was during lockdown, with the crutch of the 1990’s Radio 4 adaptation playing alongside, but still hit the buffers. I think RichardB got it one with the ‘self-indulgent’ description. Ultimately, I wasn’t interested in any of the characters or in the events they experience, so gave up (and I have read, and enjoyed the Odyssey in Fagles’ translation).

Under the Volcano is another where I’ve faltered several times - but unlike Ulysses, it’s actually rather interesting despite its structural complexity, so I’ll give it another go sometime (and it made a good film by John Huston with an amazing performance by Albert Finney as the alcoholic Fermin).

A Brief History of Time is rather badly written, and unnecessarily complicated (sic). A better book on its, and wider themes, that is also more up-to-date and mind bending is Leonard Susskind’s ‘The Black-Hole War: My Battle with Stephen Hawking to Make the World Safe for Quantum Mechanics’ (no spoilers - Susskind won, but what a journey).

[ChandlersFord]

I would say that the most “difficult “ works of fiction I’ve read are

First three vols of In Search Of Lost Time
Dr Faustus
Ulysses

Also confusing are : At Swim Two Birds, Confederacy Of Dunces and Gravity’s Rainbow


But the most difficult to follow , largely because they are designed to confuse (or the product of a senile brain if you believe F.R. Leavis) , are The Wings Of A Dove and The Golden Bowl. I’ve read both four times and there are whole sentences that just don’t make sense.

You've reminded me: I tried Gravity's Rainbow about ten years ago, and didn't get very far. On the basis of that, I concluded that Pynchon wasn't for me.

I prefer early/mid-period Henry James to the later stuff. I think most people do, a notable exception having been James himself. I've read both ...Bowl and Wings....and once was enough. Isn't it punishment to read them FOUR times?!?

There is an excellent BBC adaptation of The Golden Bowl (Jack Pulman wrote the script), which is actually much better than the novel itself (imo).

[ChandlersFord]

I’ve tried Ulysses several times and failed. The last was during lockdown, with the crutch of the 1990’s Radio 4 adaptation playing alongside, but still hit the buffers. I think RichardB got it one with the ‘self-indulgent’ description. Ultimately, I wasn’t interested in any of the characters or in the events they experience, so gave up (and I have read, and enjoyed the Odyssey in Fagles’ translation).

Under the Volcano is another where I’ve faltered several times - but unlike Ulysses, it’s actually rather interesting despite its structural complexity, so I’ll give it another go sometime (and it made a good film by John Huston with an amazing performance by Albert Finney as the alcoholic Fermin).

A Brief History of Time is rather badly written, and unnecessarily complicated (sic). A better book on its, and wider themes, that is also more up-to-date and mind bending is Leonard Susskind’s ‘The Black-Hole War: My Battle with Stephen Hawking to Make the World Safe for Quantum Mechanics’ (no spoilers - Susskind won, but what a journey).

I read this last year and absolutely hated it. Don't understand its reputation as a 'masterpiece.'

[Barbirollians]

Middlemarch - George Eliot: OK, I know this isn't supposed to be a 'difficult book', but there's something about the author's personality, as expressed in her prose, that I find deeply off-putting. I can't help perceiving her as the Victorian equivalent of one of those dreadful female hacks who write for today's Guardian.

Breathtakingly sexist and unreasoned . Perhaps you prefer hard right hacks that write for the Telegraph like Allison Pearson .

[french frank]

Under the Volcano is another where I’ve faltered several times

I have it but don't think I've read it all through. I seem to remember getting annoyed at the number of words I'd never heard of and had to look up. I thought: "He's doing this on purpose."

[ChandlersFord]

Has anyone read Robert Musil's The Man Without Qualities?

[Ein Heldenleben]

You've reminded me: I tried Gravity's Rainbow about ten years ago, and didn't get very far. On the basis of that, I concluded that Pynchon wasn't for me.

I prefer early/mid-period Henry James to the later stuff. I think most people do, a notable exception having been James himself. I've read both ...Bowl and Wings....and once was enough for both. Isn't it punishment to read them FOUR times?!?

There is an excellent BBC adaptation of The Golden Bowl (Jack Pulman wrote the script), which is actually much better than the novel itself (imo).

Not at all . They are , along with The Ambassadors, just about my favourite books. I’ll read them again pretty soon. I don’t think I’ll read Daniel Deronda again though I disagree with you about Eliot . Unlike most Guardian columnists she was a towering intellectual and literary figure - precisely the sort that doesn’t exist these days sadly.

[ChandlersFord]

Breathtakingly sexist and unreasoned . Perhaps you prefer hard right hacks that write for the Telegraph like Allison Pearson .

No, I would not. 'Allison' Pearson (and how pretentious do you have to be to spell that name with two 'ls'?) is the modern equivalent of someone like Marie Corelli or Mrs. Henry Wood. Both dreadful, but MC had the virtue of being unintentionally funny.

PS. Your talent for extrapolation has been noted!