Rambling. Whiny. Rather a disappointment.

I truly believe this guy writes merely to listen to himself speak. Only around 20% of this book has any connection to "Being Alone" or reading. So, the lack of relevancy is quite irritating. I have no interest in the details of a Chicago Post Office in the 1960s or prisons in the 1990s - not unless the author can actually develop a poignant and applicable idea that is relevant to my own life, which Franzen fails to do. Moreover, the author's whiny liberal attitude becomes really tiresome after a while. He presents his views as if everyone else should naturally agree with him and those who don't are idiots.

However, the really long essay titled "Why Bother?" or, "The Harper's Essay" was the best. It's pretty much the only redeeming aspect of this book. This essay contains some really excellent insights into the reading habits in America today. But I would recommend that someone check it out just for that essay and then return it to the library shelf.

He is a rather pompous writer.

I begin with this because it is crucial to understand the tone from which you will be bombarded with page after page of advice on how to be a "proper" reader in today's society.

This book consists of a series of essays written by Jonathan Franzen recently, as well as some revisited essays from his past.

He mourns the decline of the novelist, the excessive emphasis on privacy, the lack of care for the public, and the deteriorating postal systems. (To be honest, I didn't finish this essay as it just dragged on and on, and I simply moved on.)

He presents substantial viewpoints on modern civilization and the things that fritter away our days and steal time from more noble forms of leisure. He also contends that there may be nothing that can be done about the fall of society.

Each essay does contain some great ideas that I may reread from time to time, and he is a very good writer in that he states his point clearly and with purpose.

In conclusion, it's a decent book of semi-interesting essays. If I could go back in time, I wouldn't buy it again, but I might borrow it.

It's truly a rare occurrence when I find myself in agreement with the New York Times, the Boston Globe, and the Chicago Tribune. However, their characterizations of Jonathan Franzen as a "pompous prick," an "ego-blinded snob," and a "spoiled, whiny little brat" are, in my view, completely accurate.

His writing style, which is known for its complexity and floridity in his novels, is also present in these essays. But what they reveal about the man behind the typewriter is far from flattering.

It seems that Franzen's ego has gotten the better of him, and his public persona is not one that endears him to many. While his literary works may have their merits, his personal traits as described by these respected newspapers are hard to ignore.

Perhaps it's time for Franzen to take a step back and reevaluate himself. Maybe he should focus on his writing and leave his ego at the door. Otherwise, he risks alienating even more readers and critics alike.

I read these essays nearly 20 years after they were first published.

At times, the subjects and conclusions seemed almost quaint.

However, Franzen is a superb essayist.

He is a keen observer not only of other people but also of himself.

This helps these of-the-moment think pieces transcend their era.

After all, humans only change so much.

Despite the passage of time, the essence of human nature remains relatively constant.

Franzen's insights into the human condition, both in others and within himself, give his essays a timeless quality.

Even though the specific topics may seem dated, the underlying themes and ideas still resonate with readers today.

His ability to capture the nuances of human behavior and emotions makes these essays a valuable read, regardless of when they were written.

Franzen's work serves as a reminder that while the world may change, our fundamental nature as humans endures.

I am truly sorry to have to say this, but this particular collection of essays has unfortunately turned out to be completely and utterly boring.

Out of all the essays in this collection, only two of them manage to hold any interest whatsoever. The first one is titled "Why Bother?" which is a truly marvelous musing by Franzen on the significance of the novel and reading in general, as well as the rather lesser interest that exists towards literature in the modern world.

The second interesting essay is "Meet Me at Saint Louis". In this one, you will get to learn the fascinating story of Franzen and Oprah's dispute. It details how he was initially invited to be a part of her book club with his work "The Corrections", but then was unceremoniously uninvited because he was not saying the appropriate things in public.

To be honest, you can simply read these two essays and consider yourself done with this book. There is not much else in it that is likely to capture your attention or provide any real value.

It's extremely difficult to rate this. On one hand, I have a genuine admiration for his writing style. Although I've never been fond of his characters, his writing always has a certain allure.

He expounds on the idea that reading should be effortless yet simultaneously fulfilling. However, he also concedes that he is inaccessible to the majority of readers. In fact, he deliberately chooses to utilize an excessive number of long and intricate words to convey his point.

There are some quotes that I really like. For instance, "When I lie on the floor and relax by listening to my breathing, I can hear the slower respirations of the city itself, a sound like the rumble of a surf: subway trains crowded with people who are teaching themselves how to be here." This quote creates a vivid and immersive image.

Another quote that catches my attention is "But the first lesson reading teaches is how to be alone." It offers a profound insight into the essence of reading and its impact on our inner selves.

Overall, while his writing has its merits, the inaccessibility issue and the overuse of complex words do pose some challenges for the average reader.

“But the first lesson reading teaches is how to be alone.” This profound statement sets the tone for Jonathan Franzen's collection of essays, How To Be Alone.

While Franzen is renowned for his novels like The Corrections, this collection of 14 essays offers a diverse range of topics. From the heart-wrenching account of his father's battle with Alzheimer's disease in My Father's Brain to the examination of privacy in the age of data-hungry businesses in Imperial Bedroom.

The visit to the Federal Correctional Complex in Control Units reveals the enormity of the correctional business and the blurring of boundaries between the human species. The penultimate essay, Meet Me in St. Louis, beautifully captures the longing for the past and the fakeness of TV shows.

Several essays also focus on the status of novels in the contemporary world, providing insights into the modern culture. Franzen's views on politicizing art are sharp, yet he offers a disclaimer that his life is understood in the context of literary characters, not TV personalities.

Overall, How To Be Alone is a thought-provoking collection that earns a rating of three and three quarter stars.

DFW is clearly the more imposing mad genius in the realm of the essay form. However, after perusing "How to Be Alone," I find that Franzen might actually be the more courageous and effective one.

We are specifically discussing the major, reputation-defining essays here, not the more casual, everyday pieces that merely fill out the collection for the sake of completeness.

I would contend that these essays are more lenient and impartial than his critics make him out to be. What I find admirable and somewhat refreshing is that he is also only as much as he needs to be in order to uphold his standards of writerly integrity. If the reader is not already inclined to believe that unrestricted technological consumerism and TV culture are infantilizing and spiritually/politically corrosive, well, he won't prolong the argument just to ingratiate himself with the reader and preempt accusations of "elitism."

This theme is just one of many that Franzen and DFW have in common. However, if one author's commentary on it receives a more favorable reception than the other's, I don't think it's because Franzen is less persuasive or eloquent per se. Rather, it's because DFW goes to such excruciating lengths to remind the audience that *he is as helplessly lured by these forces as anyone*. If he rails against them, it's certainly not because he thinks succumbing to them makes someone inferior or because he lacks a profound first-hand understanding of their allure.

Not only that, but I think on some level, DFW must have realized that while the lengths he went to in humbling himself before his readers may have been honest, entertaining, and of great artistic merit, they also functioned equally well as a hedging, perception management strategy.

Franzen might be considered the lesser artist or generational voice for not even bothering with that sort of thing. But goddamn it, I'm a college-educated leftist who has actually read Gaddis' "The Recognitions" cover to cover. And if Franzen is a cranky, moralizing old man, I like him for that.

As a writer, I have a rather strong opinion about this book of essays.

I believe it has a negative impact on a person's soul. Franzen, without a doubt, is a talented writer. His arguments are indeed interesting, and it would be difficult for me to dispute that he has some valid points.

However, for me, that something he presents is a kind of cynicism that I find quite toxic.

Ultimately, his insistence that anything not adhering to the Charles Dickens/Henry James model of the novel is a waste of the reader's time seems to me to be the most insecure reaction to experimental fiction.

I truly liked "The Corrections" and I am interested in reading "Freedom" someday. But I really don't like the Franzen who constantly tries to distance himself from the world of avant-garde writing while simultaneously demanding that his work be regarded as high art. This, to me, is real pretentiousness.

It seems as if he wants to have it both ways, which I find rather off-putting. I think he should either fully embrace the experimental and avant-garde or stick firmly to the traditional model and stop trying to straddle the line.

Overall, while I can appreciate his writing skills to some extent, I cannot overlook the aspects of his work and attitude that I find so unappealing.

I bet he thought he was so clever writing that smoking essay.

The first essay was good, presenting unique perspectives and engaging the reader. However, the rest were either boring, insufferable, or just average as hell.

I found myself losing interest halfway through the smoking one. It failed to hold my attention and lacked the depth and excitement that I was hoping for.

The one about the Chicago post office had the potential to be a romp, a lighthearted and entertaining piece. But unfortunately, it never really went anywhere or had a proper punchline.

It was just long and drawn out, ultimately leaving me unsatisfied. Although there were moments when it was interesting, it didn't quite deliver on its promise.

Overall, the collection of essays was a bit of a disappointment. I had high hopes, but most of them failed to live up to my expectations.

Hreint út sagt, það er algjörlega áreynslulaus og ánægjulegur lestur. Það eru tvenns konar pælingar um það að vera einn eða einmanna. Einnig segir Michel Montaigne: "Einungis í einsetu getur maður upplifað raunverulegt frelsi." Hins vegar hefur Blaise Pascal sagt: "Öll vandamál mannsins stafa frá vangetu hans til þess að sitja einn í þöglu herbergi." Þetta sýnir að það eru mismunandi skoðanir á því hvað það er að vera einn eða einmanna. Sumir telja það vera frelsisupplifun, en aðrir lítur á það sem vandamál. Hins vegar er það alltaf áhættulegt að vera einn eða einmanna, því það er auðvelt að verða einangraður eða einsamur. Það er því mikilvægt að finna það rétta jafnvægi milli að vera með fólk og að vera einn eða einmanna.

The original article seems to be rather short and perhaps a bit unclear. Here's an expanded version:

I mean, you really have to read it. Reading is an essential activity that offers numerous benefits. It allows us to expand our knowledge, explore different perspectives, and enhance our vocabulary.

When we read, we are transported to different worlds and can experience emotions and situations that we may not otherwise encounter in our daily lives.

Whether it's a thrilling mystery novel, an informative non-fiction book, or a thought-provoking poem, reading has the power to engage our minds and stimulate our imagination.

Moreover, reading can improve our concentration and focus, as we need to pay attention to the words and ideas presented on the page.

So, the next time you have the opportunity, pick up a book and start reading. You'll be amazed at what you can discover and how it can enrich your life.