I'm not sure how this particular book managed to find its way onto my list.

However, I must admit that I gave up on it rather quickly.

Mailer's motivation for penning this book appears to be centered around showing us just how cool he is.

But for me, it just didn't click.

I simply couldn't seem to get into the story or connect with the author's supposed coolness.

The writing style might have been interesting to some, but it failed to capture my attention and hold it.

Perhaps if I had given it more time, I might have discovered something redeeming about it.

But as it stands, I'm left feeling rather disappointed and unimpressed.

I guess sometimes you just have to accept that a book isn't for you and move on to something else.

Rereading this work after I wrote a chapter about it in my first book forty-some years ago, it truly felt like exactly what I had remembered.

Mailer was at his cranky, assertive, smart, and egotistical stylistic peak. His writing was so vivid and engaging that it could draw readers in and make them feel as if they were right there in the middle of the story.

The last chapter, in particular, reads chillingly like a vision of what America seems intent on becoming. It's almost prophetic in some ways, as it touches on many of the social and political issues that we are still grappling with today.

Overall, this rereading was a reminder of the power of great literature and the importance of revisiting our favorite works from time to time. It allowed me to see the work in a new light and appreciate it even more than I did the first time around.

I felt that Norman Mailer was overly striving to embody the persona of Hemingway in this work.

He seemed to be刻意表现得强硬且粗鲁，同时试图借此传达一些关于越南战争以及五角大楼附近学生抗议活动的模糊而深刻的信息。他所涵盖的主题非常有趣，然而他却以一种令人讨厌且自我专注的方式来呈现，以至于很难让人充分欣赏。

I say this because Norman Mailer is a really irritating protagonist here. It neatly fit into his persona, which aimed to upset people and thereby gain more fame and attention as America's great writer of that era - something that clearly didn't last. In this book, that persona comes through in full force. He devotes most of the narrative not to constructive discussions on the Vietnam War or the proponents and opponents of it, but rather to his own bold actions that night. For the first part, which占据了大部分篇幅, he romanticizes his bouts of drunken ramblings and stumbling around, sneering at everyone, including rather dull figures like Dwight MacDonald and Robert Lowell, whose stories aren't entertaining to listen to. His decision to refer to himself in the third person further adds to this obnoxiousness, and I felt that his story could have been greatly enhanced if it was a more straightforward reflection on what occurred.

That is not to say that all the events were exaggerated and annoying from the author's perspective. Norman Mailer did have an interesting adventure that night, and his insights can be worthwhile. His account of arguing with a neo-Nazi while being arrested, or his summaries of the people for or against the Vietnam War and their ideologies, were fascinating to read about as they added nuance to a highly contentious period. It's just a pity that we had to hear it from such a loud narrator as him.

History as a Novel

From the very beginning, let us present you with the news of your protagonist. According to an account by TIME, the scruffy Ambassador Theater in Washington, which is usually a venue for psychedelic frolics, witnessed an unscheduled scatological solo last week in support of the peace demonstrations. Its anti-star was author Norman Mailer, who was even less prepared to explain "Why Are We In Vietnam?" This is how Norman Mailer's "The Armies of the Night: History as a Novel, the Novel as History" begins. It is one of the strangest books you could read about the Vietnam War.

The non-fiction novel genre has few to compare with. Truman Capote's "In Cold Blood" and Hunter S. Thompson's "Hell Angels" are among them. Mailer's work definitely opens up a whole new area for the writer. He is able to express himself in the way he wishes he was at times and also give voice to the anger and misgivings that people in the U.S. had about the war.

The March on the Pentagon on October 21, 1967 was one of the first large (approx. 70,000 marchers) anti-war protests. Norman Mailer was there, on the ground, feeling the vibes that the young kids (anti-war activists) were feeling and trying to understand what they were doing about the war. As one of the finest writers of the 20th century, this book is an interesting read with a very diverse format. It truly is history as a novel and a novel as history.

During the run-up to the 2016 election and its aftermath, I often found myself reflecting on the mid-to-late 1960s. By many accounts, this was the last period of great sociopolitical tumult in the U.S. How did we manage to find our way out of it? How did we stay afloat? Just as with any great personal or societal challenge, the answers can often be found in the work of great writers. They are the ones who are adept at creating coherence out of something that is sprawling, overwhelming, traumatizing, and chaotic.

I discovered this in Mailer's book. It offers a coherent artistic rendering of protest, corruption, a polarized public, distorted realities, a fever of violence and insanity. It's like a prescription from the doctor for understanding such complex times.

Most accounts of political foment lack this art and coherence. They are either of the moment (like the news), designed with persuasion as the goal (such as many documentaries, histories, and pop political science books), or are an attempt at chronicling human events as if from a great distance (say, 1,000 years in the future). While all perspectives on political upheaval have their place, right now I feel suffocated by the unified, hectoring voice of blogs and news editorials that circulate through social media. Mailer provides a refreshing alternative.

The vantage point in his work is that of someone attempting to write both a novel and a history of something that had just occurred - the 1967 march on the Pentagon. I'm not entirely sure that The Armies of the Night truly succeeds as either a novel or a history. Instead, it feels more like a blend of personal history and an extended essay, which became the hallmark of New Journalism. Whatever you choose to call it, its main strength lies in the personal voice. Mailer's voice is more traditionally masculine - earthier, more aggressive, and drunker - than that of the rest of his New Journalism cohort (perhaps closer to Hemingway or Bellow). He may not be to everyone's taste. But even if you wouldn't want to spend time with the guy, there's no denying his way with words.

Reading an attempt to historicize the present is also instructive because it shows how difficult it is to predict how the subject will ultimately be remembered in cultural memory. Before reading this book, pretty much the only things I knew about the march on the Pentagon were that hippies stuffed flowers into soldiers' gun barrels (which is briefly mentioned in the book) and that Abbie Hoffman actually believed that protesters could make the Pentagon levitate with concentrated psychic energy. Mailer's account makes the event seem more ragged, disorderly, and real, as if it could happen next month.

There's also a humorous little cameo by Noam Chomsky. At the time the book was written, he wasn't the relatively well-known public intellectual he would later become. It's hard not to speculate about who the emerging public intellectuals of today's political movements might be. However, it's best to set such speculation aside while reading this book and simply appreciate it for what it is: an insider's attempt to process an event that could have been just another protest, a comic failure, or the start of a political revolution as it is unfolding, without knowing the outcome.

The brief journey of an egomaniac is truly a spectacle. Here, he simply flaunts his rather lame-o remonstrance role, which he himself derides throughout in a creative manner.

After he gets carted off to jail, the second half of the book takes an unexpected turn. It really makes you miss the ass's cocky, albeit lively, presence. The style suddenly gets dry, and you find yourself thinking, "Awww, where's Norman??" Even though there were many points when he was around that you wanted to hate him. He gives you all or nothing, which is kind of manipulative in that way.

Interestingly, you don't care about Vietnam half as much as about Mailer. It's a strange yet captivating aspect of the book. It's glaringly evident that it's a far better commentary on a high point of a signature Mailer than on a low point in politics. This unique dynamic keeps the reader engaged and intrigued, constantly wondering what will happen next in this strange and fascinating narrative.

This book truly made me loathe Norman Mailer. Seriously. After reading it, I actually wished he were dead. And this was after I had read and fallen deeply in love with his book "Executioner's Song".

This particular book is nothing but pure and simple narcissism. The fact that it won the National Book Award makes me seriously question the validity of that award.

After reading this book, I picked up the memoir written by Mailer's second wife Adele, the one he stabbed. (Yes, did you know that Mailer actually stabbed one of his wives? One gets the impression that he wanted to emulate Gary Gilmore, but while Gary was willing to accept death for his crimes, old Norman was getting weepy at the thought of spending a week in jail.)

This book is filled with references to people from the late 60s that the current generation simply won't be able to relate to. It's a book that is very much of its time and just doesn't hold up well today. It seems to be a relic of a bygone era, unable to connect with the sensibilities and experiences of the modern reader.

Digressive as hell, but it had its moments. Just not enough of them. There were a few good insights that managed to shine through the meandering narrative. The author seemed to have some interesting ideas, but they were often lost in the excessive digressions.

The writing was not unhorrible. It had its flaws, but it also had some redeeming qualities. The prose was not overly complex, which made it accessible to a wide range of readers. However, it lacked the polish and finesse that would have made it truly engaging.

Overall, the article was a bit of a mixed bag. It had its moments of brilliance, but they were too few and far between. The digressions detracted from the overall flow and made it difficult to stay focused on the main points. With a bit more editing and refinement, it could have been a much stronger piece.

Why did it take me such a long time to "discover" this book? Norman Mailer, though he openly claimed to be cynical, actually honored his country by engaging in civil disobedience to protest against the war in Vietnam.

He had great admiration for the tenacity of those young people who marched on the Pentagon, endured a 48-hour stay, and were brutally beaten until they bled.

Yes, I'm aware that he comically looks down upon the left and all its dull propaganda, as well as the spoiled middle-class kids and the angry black militants.

However, if we set aside his brilliant yet sometimes overly elaborate prose, we can see that he was deeply concerned with justice.

I understand that others may interpret his somewhat jaundiced and meandering thoughts differently than I did, but he truly struck an emotional chord within me.

Today, we need the same kind of courage that others showed 49 years ago to oppose an unjust war.

Once again, our democracy is in jeopardy as racism, xenophobia, and general hatred are on the rise, being encouraged by an enfant terrible who is masquerading as a national leader.

We must not remain silent in the face of such challenges but rather take a stand and fight for what is right.

Allegedly, he is one of the best US journalists and novelists.

Clearly, this guy is extremely talented. He is very smart to reflect on the meanders of his thought and the qualms that he has.

However, gee, I've always thought that the golden rule in literature (and a fortiori in journalism) was to get rid of the unessential elements.

This book evokes only one word in my mind: long.

It is so long, long, long, long, long, long, long.

I just couldn't keep up with it or rather I stalled while reading it. Maybe it's my fault.

But the excessive length of the book really made it a bit of a struggle for me to get through.

Perhaps if some of the unnecessary details had been trimmed, it would have been a more engaging read.

Nevertheless, I still respect the author's talent and his ability to reflect deeply, but the length of this particular work was just a bit too much for me.

In October 1967, during the height of the Vietnam War, a significant march on the Pentagon took place.

This was meant to serve as a notice to LBJ and the military that America was not in full support of the war.

Surprisingly, it is scarcely remembered in American history. However, the "Battle of the Pentagon" was indeed a crucial flashpoint in the domestic unrest caused by the escalation of a conflict that was ripping the country apart.

Norman Mailer, a novelist from the Hemingway school, was not only a participant but also documented the march in his own grandiose style.

The book he wrote, "The Armies of the Night," is truly a masterpiece, albeit perhaps not for the reasons he initially intended.

The book documents the weekend of October 20 - 22, with the march on the 21st being the centerpiece.

Mailer writes from a third-person perspective, referring to himself by name as "Mailer" or "the novelist."

If one is not familiar with his style or subject matter, it can be quite a shock.

As I mentioned earlier, Mailer is of the Hemingway school of writing, and this is evident in his faux-machismo, a sort of bruising bully-boy stance in his prose that only someone overly sensitive to being called "sensitive" could adopt.

It's important to note that Mailer's views on women and non-white people participating in the march are very much a product of his time.

As a WW2 veteran and a self-proclaimed "Left conservative," he writes about women in a rather condescending way, as if he is God's gift to them and they should be grateful.

The only other Mailer work I've read is "The Executioner's Song," which is another blend of fact and fiction, though less self-involved as it focuses on the trial and execution of Gary Gilmore.

"The Armies of the Night," however, stands as a worthy example of narrative non-fiction.

It's a performance piece that showcases Mailer's ego and pride in ways few other writers could manage.

He is pompous, self-important, and often difficult towards those around him.

But there's no denying that he writes with great intensity when describing the events of that weekend.

It's a masterclass in reportage that, while sometimes overly self-absorbed in discussing the events, does capture the spirit of the protest.

The hopes that were dashed against the steps of the Pentagon and Mailer's own observations about the nature of America at its worst are all vividly portrayed.

This book is bold, incisive, playful, mischievous, and at times infuriating, but it's still great even when it rubs you the wrong way.

Norman Mailer was a complex figure, but there's no doubt that he could write extremely well, even if his understanding of women and minorities left much to be desired.

"The Armies of the Night" is a testament to his writing skills and the significance of that moment in American history.

4.5 and not a 5 because the beginning was a little weak.

It took some time for the story to really gain momentum. However, the closing third was masterful.

It was like a crescendo that left the reader in awe. I'm a Norman Mailer fan, and like him, I view myself as a left-conservative of sorts.

This means I'll have very few fellow travelers. But that's okay.

The two things I loved most about this book, other than his brilliant capturing of a pivotal moment in American cultural history, are the facts that Mailer never feels a need to hide his abundant narcissism or to blurt out the most unconventional takes and descriptions.

Writers, and all artists, had a lot more freedom in that era.

This produced greatness, trash, and the weird.

Nowadays, writers who go through agents and publishers living in the same gentrified Brooklyn neighborhoods are so confined ideologically, intellectually, and artistically.

They are afraid to cause controversy or veer off the agreed-upon correct opinions.

You can almost predict what they're going to write before you even read the book, especially in nonfiction.

MFA programs seem to be producing a monolithic crop of uninteresting writers who just pat each other on the back.

Mailer, on the other hand, writes some truly outlandish things in this book.

All of which would get him canceled today, but I thoroughly enjoyed all of them.

In the age of Instagram and cable TV mental-health specialists, even a great or popular writer like Franzen is forced to put on an act of being well-adjusted, modest, and humble.

Mailer made no such pretensions.

There was nothing he liked to talk about more than himself, and fans loved this aspect of his oversized and "problematic" personality.