I bought Tropic of Capricorn in an airport bookstore because I had drastically underestimated how much reading material to bring for my two-legged journey.
I've been reading and collecting 1st editions of Millers books for 40 years & brisle at the notion that just because Tropic of Cancer his 1st book was banned he's somehow is reduced to just being 'a sex writer' by even supposed well read people. His work involves so much more than that. Lawrence Durrell wouldn't have endorsed Miller's work if that was just the case. You should have started with Tropic of Cancer and after reading the 2nd and third in the trilogy hopped 15 to 20 years to his book 'Big Sur and the Oranges of Hieronymus Bosch'
Or perhaps 'The Air Conditioned Nightmare.' Miller was one of the first writers of his stature to endorse Oatchett something you probably know. As for the Goths back in the day they wouldn't have the intellectual stamina to keep up with Miller's work seen they're all about surface with little depth.
Yeah I would have preferred starting with Cancer, but airport bookstores aren't known for the breadth of their selection. It was this or a single volume trilogy by Clive Barker, another writer I've not read but who I'll get to.
In goths' and pretty much any teenage counterculture group's defense, I think it's an important part of developing your personality as a young person to push against what you perceived to be the social limits of the time -- even if in retrospect you were participating in a different subset of social limits. The differences between subcultures seem to me largely aesthetic, and for goths it was finding romantic sorts of beauty in dark and unpleasant feelings rather than rebellion (punks) or substance abuse (stoners) or anticommercialism (indie and grunge) or Juggaloes or metal heads or skaters whatever. Sure there's a lot of superficiality, but I think the conflicts each subculture has with posers and appearances is part of figuring out what you really mean by what you say and do.
I've been reading and collecting 1st editions of Millers books for 40 years & brisle at the notion that just because Tropic of Cancer his 1st book was banned he's somehow is reduced to just being 'a sex writer' by even supposed well read people. His work involves so much more than that. Lawrence Durrell wouldn't have endorsed Miller's work if that was just the case. You should have started with Tropic of Cancer and after reading the 2nd and third in the trilogy hopped 15 to 20 years to his book 'Big Sur and the Oranges of Hieronymus Bosch'
Or perhaps 'The Air Conditioned Nightmare.' Miller was one of the first writers of his stature to endorse Oatchett something you probably know. As for the Goths back in the day they wouldn't have the intellectual stamina to keep up with Miller's work seen they're all about surface with little depth.
Yeah I would have preferred starting with Cancer, but airport bookstores aren't known for the breadth of their selection. It was this or a single volume trilogy by Clive Barker, another writer I've not read but who I'll get to.
In goths' and pretty much any teenage counterculture group's defense, I think it's an important part of developing your personality as a young person to push against what you perceived to be the social limits of the time -- even if in retrospect you were participating in a different subset of social limits. The differences between subcultures seem to me largely aesthetic, and for goths it was finding romantic sorts of beauty in dark and unpleasant feelings rather than rebellion (punks) or substance abuse (stoners) or anticommercialism (indie and grunge) or Juggaloes or metal heads or skaters whatever. Sure there's a lot of superficiality, but I think the conflicts each subculture has with posers and appearances is part of figuring out what you really mean by what you say and do.