This is a hard book to get through! It's nonstop talk about heroin, but occasionally you get to a part thats really good and well written. I was just wondering what other people here think about the book.
When I went through it, it seemed to read like a bunch of unconnected scenes dealing mostly with drug use, sex, and homosexuality. I've read the book, and there's really not much of an overarching plot... At least not one that's apparant from a casual reading. The book was kind of a let-down for me, especially after reading all the hype and good press. If it's got any kind of profound secrets, I haven't been able to discover them. Maybe that's the point.
Did you read the forward to the book? In the copy I have, there is a court transcript, and author's forward, and a note by Jack Kerouac in the beginning. You really have to read these things first before you read the book, because you will appreciate it a lot more. I enjoyed this book. Just don't come into it having any expectations, because it reads differently for everyone.
One of the funniest books I've read, especially the routine about going to the courthouse in some southern town where everyone is a sex fiend or pervert. Burroughs was a Harvard graduate (in anthropolgy and Egyptian Hieroglyphics, of all things), and a genius. He was also a junkie and an alcoholic, though not at the same time. Along with Kerouac, he was a conservative who disliked control of any kind. More libertarian, I guess. His writing was highly erratic, from book to book, from page to page sometimes, reflecting his addictions (he had no qualms writing high) and his cut-up technique of editing. A true American eccentric.
I really want to read this book but haven't yet... It's considered a classic and also a banned book (which makes it even more appealing to me!)
It's a crap book. It was probably banned due to the amount of graphically depicted homosexual sex scenes it contains. It's not a damn sight near his better stuff, in fact it's just tripe imho.
What, then, would you consider his "better stuff", Spacer? His magazine columns? His "cowboy trilogy"? NAKED LUNCH was his best.
it was banned because of the homosexuality it is a weird ass book definently an interesting read, but as it is cut up so much and weirdly, it doesn't make for a very good story I would say Junkie is better
Well, schmucky-ducky, I'm a Pennsylvanian dude, too--near Reading. You're right! I forgot about "Junky" (also "Queer"), his first two novels. Fuck! I own the damn books! "Junky" was actually published in paperback in the early 50's, if I'm not mistaken. "Queer" wasn't published until much later. Yes, they are the easiest to read, but nowhere as good as "Naked Lunch". That, along with Henry Miller's opus, "Tropic of Cancer", is the best "dirty" book published in the last century. Where in the Keystone State do you hail from?
I don't really want to sound like I'm obsessed with Burroughs by making a new thred, so I might just ask it here: What order should one read his trilogy of "The Soft Machine", "The Ticket that Exploded", and "The Nova Express"? That was the order they were published in, but I read the back covers of all three and they made it sound like it should go 1.) Soft Machine 2.) Nova Express 3.) Ticket that Exploded.
All three suck. Unreadable. Gibberish. Every copy should be burnt. Have I made myself clear? HAH? DID YOU HEAR ME? HAH? WHAT?
This was 1972, and I'm approaching terminal vodka overload.Anyhow, New Stanton was on the west(?) side of the Monoghela River, and Bunola (five houses and a gas station) was on the other. I was young, beer was cheap and I had more fun than the law allowed. 1972!
As a published author ("A Haven From Violence", by Burl N. Corbett) I agree in theory. However, as a matter of quality control, these repetitive, homo-erotic-drug-crazed useless fantasys should be shovelled into a bottom-less pit. So, there!
