House of Leaves: The Remastered Full-Color Edition

Crazy book that will stay with you for a long time

It’s a mystery book that’s a mystery book.

出版直後に読んでから既に3年になるが､未だに時にふっと、頭の中にイメージの一片が浮かんでくることがある。複雑な構成を持った本だが、コアとなる物語はシンプルで、しかし強い。横書きを縦書きにするだけでも大変と思われる翻訳が出ているので見ていただけると一目瞭然だが、大量の注釈があるだけでなく、文字の配列が文章の内容を補強するように作られている。David Foster WallaceのInfinite Jestにも大量の注釈が施されているが、多分に無意味と思われる、大多数が偽者の引用は眩暈がするほどである。凝ったtypographyはメインのストーリーの緊迫感を高める効果をもっているので、むしろストレートな使用法とも考えられるが､大量の注釈、本全体の構成は、シンプルなストーリーラインに対してどのような位置付けを持つものか、多分これからも様々な解釈が提示されてくるのだろうと思われる。一つはっきりしているのは、無学の老人が学術論文を模して書いた、ある映画に対する評論という形式が、コアとなるストーリーの提示法として的確に見えることである。つまり、最初にストーリーが助走しているときには、素人くさい様々な論考が何度も挿入されるが、最終的にはストーリーのダイナミックスが全てを飲み!込んでいってしまう。物語を評論することが拒否され、物語を物語ることのリズムに本全体が脈動するようになってしまう。最初に書いたように、この物語自体は一歩間違えるとハリウッド映画のようでもあるため、ただ普通に物語られただけでは、何の印象も残さないものになったかもしれない。それが、これだけ強烈な印象を引きずるものになったのは、凝った構成によるものなのだろうか?我々は、印刷された本においては、このような形式を用いないと、物語が物語れない地点にいるのだろうか?それはハイパーリンクやコラージュなどの表面的な問題ではないような気がする。何れにしろ、メインのストーリーを取り巻く周辺の物語、あるいは人物に方向性がなく、時にうざったく感じることを除けば、心に残る物語である。

Its a bit complex to read at first, but It was worth the hassle, it was a pleasant read.

A mirror to the reader that presents the simulacrum of multiple stories, House of Leaves is probably the most subjective book I've ever read. I loved the experience of reading this book. And make no mistake: you must choose how to read it. More questions than answers or perhaps even a narrative, the book presents a multilayered facsimile of a few different kinds of fiction. So my review is as the book intends. Merely my own reading and far more reflective of what I saw of myself while consuming it, than of anything else. This book makes space for a plethora of different kinds of readings. And I studied the text as much as I was able, tabbing and underlining and making marginalia to see if it does support my reading. And it does, I think. I'm going to be brief because I'm doing a video review on my Youtube that will be much more in-depth. Borgesque in its "main" narrative, The Navidson Tapes presents itself as academic criticism of a cult film that does not exist. In its granularity, this reader found that there was a very meaningful difference between consuming a film and reading the piece about the film that retreads every shot composition and feeling, every visual perception, endowing it with something beyond the film could hope to convey in a viewing. As a visual thinker, the film was even richer and textured and my comprehension of it so augmented, that I think it's a far superior experience. If watching it even were such an option. We follow the Navidson's, Will and Karen, children: Chad and Daisy, put down "roots" in Virginia. Only their colonization of the property is inverted, and the house colonizers Will, the patriarch and famous war-time photographer that sets aside his exploration to be with his family. Only, after the family is settled, the house changes, given new space--altering its dimensions in a literal sense--growing to accommodate Will's primordial self. His maze. Or labyrinth. The journey is literalized just as he believes he's completed every journey and there is nothing left but to conquer being a father. The family finds a door to a hallway to a great foyer to a spiral staircase to a maze. This causes a rift in the couple Karen, who has claustrophobia and is too afraid to enter it, and Will, who sees the next adventure and finds it irresistible. What follows is the horror of a space reflective of the people traversing it, ostensibly, but I believe more of Will's internal selfhood, and by extension humanity. And from the wreckage of the horror of trying to navigate this maze, a movie is (fictitiously) created. The movie's critical evaluation is done by a man named Zampano, who dies at an old age after becoming obsessed with the film. Researching every thematic linkage and creating his own reading. Another horror that reflects himself, driving him literally mad, or so it would seem. Because the actual person who compiled Zampano's work is Johnny Truant. A fake name, fake person, steeped in fiction that obfuscates his own trauma hidden in the footnotes in the critical analysis Zampano had written. Literally interrupting and resisting the spiral of Navidson's narrative into the maze, as well as Zampano's dark and turbulent thoughts that similarly spiraled. Johnny's story is mostly of self-aggrandizement and sexual exploits and chemical debauchery. Generally interceding when we reach points in the Navidson narrative that trigger his trauma, though he is only aware of the metaphor he has created which haunts and dogs him, as he becomes more like Zampano. Reclusive and colonized by the reading of the Navidson story. Rather than process their trauma, see only darkness and are ultimately consumed by it. Depending on what you believe "actually" happens in the narrative, anyway. I think the key themes in the book are trauma and colonization. They're hit on the head the most, in every prose craft fashion. Metaphor, allegory, symbolism. Everything seems to me, to point to the idea of patterns colonizing minds doomed to trace the same doomed lines on every layer of the fiction, regardless of whoever and however they consumed them. Everyone needs other people to feed them information outside of their own darkroom to truly see themselves. And without outside intercession, I think we all wander our own internal maze, whether we are aware of it or not. More so for people who carry trauma, who seem to have more darkness and less light to navigate the labyrinth.

An absolute masterpiece

En iyi versiyonu amazon ile en iyi fiyata

It was scratched all around , clearly used before and I found a page with something spilled in it ,ew