[net.sf-lovers] Samuel Delaney's Dhalgren

rls@ihu1g.UUCP (r.l. schieve) (07/26/85)

Dhalgren was mentioned in another posting.  It is one of the
few Sci-Fi books I gave up half way through in discust.  Has
anyone read it all the way through?  Is the ending any better?
Or does it just keep rambling on and on.....

				Rick Schieve
				...ihnp4!ihu1g!rls
				

phil@nte-scg.UUCP (Phil Trubey) (07/31/85)

> Dhalgren was mentioned in another posting.  It is one of the
> few Sci-Fi books I gave up half way through in discust.  Has
> anyone read it all the way through?  Is the ending any better?
> Or does it just keep rambling on and on.....

I actually did read it all the way through ... mostly because I kept
hoping that I would figure it all out sooner or later.  I didn't.

Has anybody out there read any Delany and figured even some of it out?
Recently I finished _The Einstein Intersection_  and decided that 
at least there was hope for this book ... but it may take another
reading...

				

-- 
		         Phil Trubey

			 Northern Telecom Electronics Ltd.
			 Ottawa, Ontario

Mail path: ...decvax!utcs!bnr-vpa!nte-scg!phil            

oliver@unc.UUCP (Bill Oliver) (08/01/85)

In article <662@ihu1g.UUCP> rls@ihu1g.UUCP (r.l. schieve) writes:
>Dhalgren was mentioned in another posting.  It is one of the
>few Sci-Fi books I gave up half way through in discust.  Has
>anyone read it all the way through?  Is the ending any better?
>Or does it just keep rambling on and on.....
>
>				Rick Schieve
>				...ihnp4!ihu1g!rls
>				

Yes! I finished the thing, and it becomes more flaky the further
you go.  If you can abandon yourself to the book, and try to
completely inhibit any critical faculties you have, the obsessional
nature of the imagery can be compelling.

I read Dhalgren a second time during my Psychiatry rotations
while in med school, and discussed it with my attending physician
(who was also an avid SF reader).  We basically came to the
decision that the organization and the imagery of the novel
is a great simulation of the reality and imagery experienced by a 
schizophrenic, though a really hard core symptomatic schizophrenic
couldn't stay cohesive enough to write the thing.

Any psychiatrists on the net?

Bill Oliver

jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) (08/07/85)

[...]

Dhalgren is a lot easier to understand and appreciate once you
know about a few of Delany's learning disabilities.  First, Delany
is an epileptic who is prone to petit mal fits that wipe out his
memories of the past short while.  Second, Delany has a learning
disability that makes it difficult for him to remember the temporal
order of his experiences: in other words, he often can't remember
what came first in a sequence of events.  Third, he has a form of
dyslexia that slows his reading considerably.  Fourth, he has a
poor spatial memory, which means that he often can't remember
exactly where things were.

Dhalgren is his attempt to convey his experiences to the reader.
The hero has significant memory problems.  For example, he constantly
finds material in his notebook that he can't remember writing.
He occasionally thinks the buildings have moved closer or further
away from the river.  The order of events is constantly confused.
The hero frequently has a good deal of difficulty reading.

Many people feel that Dhalgren goes on too long without clarifying
anything.  On the other hand, if you see it as an attempt to give
the reader an experience of the author's world, you _have_ to take
a fair amount of time so you can adjust and begin to feel at home.
By the end of Dhalgren, I more or less understood what had happened
and the order in which it happened.  If you can accept the total
mental disorientation, I think the vividness of the imagery is well
worth the read.  One warning though: it is hard to say that Dhalgren
has a story as such.  A general requirement of a "story" is that a
sequence of events changes a character or set of characters in some
way.  I'm not sure that anyone is changed by the events in Dhalgren
(which may be Delany's point).  Therefore you get the feeling that
nothing has been accomplished.  A better way to approach the book is
to regard it as a form of poetry (odd concept though that is).

Most people don't find Dhalgren their cup of tea, and I can certainly
understand that.  However, Delany can write the socks off practically
any other modern writer, even when you hate his material.  It's well
worth anyone's while to go to the library and take out Dhalgren to
see if you like it.

				Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo

randy@bcsaic.UUCP (randy groves) (08/14/85)

In article <16089@watmath.UUCP> jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) writes:
>[...]
>
>Most people don't find Dhalgren their cup of tea, and I can certainly
>understand that.  However, Delany can write the socks off practically
>any other modern writer, even when you hate his material.  It's well
>worth anyone's while to go to the library and take out Dhalgren to
>see if you like it.
>

I heartily agree.  It's been some time since I read Dhalgren or any Delaney,
but I can remember being involved and taken to a place that I did not fully
understand, but could identify with at some gut level that was very striking.
Some of the scenes and occurrences in Dhalgren also correspond to a mind 
operating in an expanded, altered state.

-- 
===========================================================================
... only a hollygram, but one more is gone.
===========================================================================
randy groves
...!uw-beaver!uw-june!bcsaic!randy