A relentless belly full of laughs and modern classic of comedy? Probably so. Still, despite the monstrously obese antihero slob Ignatius Jacques Reilly and all his belching, crazy antics, blathering writing damning contemporary society, hot dog scoffing, and nagging dipsomaniac mother - all of which did indeed produce a few chuckles - the Pulitzer winning novel left me with mixed feelings overall. Because of the tragic back-story of both novel and writer it's a book I so dearly wanted to love, but couldn't. I'm not for one minute singling out A Confederacy of Dunces as the first so-called 'American classic' that didn't get me raving with nothing but high praise, as there has previously been a host of others too. For me, the best thing about the novel is unquestionably the dialogue - that's where the bulk of the laughs come from - of not just the quixotic Reilly, but the likes of his mother and her sassy friend Santa Battaglia, the vagrant Burma Jones who trying to stay one step ahead of the law, and to a degree some of the workers at the Levy Pants factory where Reilly finds employment for a time before being drawn towards the smell of hot dogs in the fast food vending business.

While it was good to be involved in various side stories from the supporting cast, it is also the novel's biggest fault in my opinion. We have one of the great gargantuan 20th century characters in Ignatius Reilly - a memorable creations in modern literature who is inexplicably educated and scholarly, yet hopelessly detached from reality - and he simply doesn't feature enough. Had he taken up the bulk of the narrative then I just might have scored higher. When he isn't there, it's just not the same. Imagine watching the New York Yankees back in the day without Babe Ruth? Or going to see The Beatles at the height of their fame without John or Paul? Also, while it's not strictly a novel aimed at the younger generation, I do feel the most fun is to be had out of reading this at a younger age. Not saying I'm grumpy or anything like that, but I could see my former younger more exuberant self getting more pleasure out of its romanticism and lucidity. Yes, believe it or not, Ignatius is very much the romantic type.

I'm still trying to work out just how on earth he managed to strap a Mickey Mouse watch around those huge wrists!

“I am at the moment writing a lengthy indictment against our century. When my brain begins to reel from my literary labors, I make an occasional cheese dip.”

A very funny but, as its detractors like to point out, slightly flabby book, A Confederacy of Dunces is dominated by the huge blancmange-like presence of its protagonist, Ignatius J Reilly. Gluttonous, onanistic, loquacious and determinedly hard done-by, he's a Falstaffian creation, a kind of demonic Oliver Hardy rolling and farting and fulminating through a brilliantly evoked 1960s New Orleans.

There is no looking past Ignatius – if you can't stand him, then you're not going to get far with this book. Still, I'm kind of surprised that so many of the negative reviews here are just complaints that Ignatius is unpleasant, or that the underlying sadness of his situation stops it from being funny. Maybe it's just different backgrounds, but for me he fits perfectly into the tradition of English comedy where I'm most comfortable, and where focusing on articulate but amoral monsters has been de rigueur from Saki to Blackadder. And yes, his situation is pretty pathetic, but you can't have good comedy without underlying pain. Besides, he wouldn't have it any other way. ‘Optimism nauseates me. It is perverse,’ as Ignatius declaims himself. ‘Since man's fall, his proper position in the universe has been one of misery.’


(photo credit: Wally Gobetz)

A failure in every aspect of his life, Ignatius, in his thirties, still lives at home with his mother in a dilapidated house in (what was then) the lower-class district of Constantinople Street. The novel's plotlessness follows the plotlessness of his own life, as he fails in a sequence of menial jobs (including most famously as a street hot-dog vendor), sabotages his mother's social life, tries to lead a black workers' uprising, and concocts an innovative plan to bring about world peace.

There is something almost heroic about Ignatius's refusal to accept his dismal position in life – he reacts to every indignity not with acceptance, but with voluble fury. Every time he opens his mouth to issue another misplaced denunciation against someone who's only trying to help him, I mentally rub my hands together with glee. It's just too much fun. And he's surrounded by this wonderful cast of supporting characters, all of them nonsensical stereotypes but portrayed with such disinterested, across-the-board mockery that it's impossible to find them offensive. I particularly loved Myrna Minkoff, a New York beatnik and caricature of the lefty liberated New Woman, with whom Ignatius is conducting a feverish love-hate correspondence.

When she writes him her plans to deliver a lecture at the Bronx YWCA on the theme of ‘Erotic Liberty as a Weapon Against Reactionaries’, Ignatius scribbles back in extravagant derision:

On the dark night of that dubious lecture, the sole member of your audience will probably be some desperately lonely old male librarian who saw a light in the window of the lecture hall and hopefully came in to escape the cold and the horrors of his personal hell. There in the hall, his stooped figure sitting alone before the podium, your nasal voice echoing among the empty chairs and hammering boredom, confusion and sexual reference deeper and deeper into the poor wretch's bald skull, confounded to the point of hysteria, he will doubtlessly exhibit himself, waving his crabbed organ like a club in despair against the grim sound that drones on and on over his head.

Your mileage may vary, but I could read pages and pages of this stuff. Which is just as well, because the book is not as tight as it could be, owing in part to the author's having committed suicide before getting it published instead of after. Unlike with some authors, I don't think that Toole's suicide actually has much relevance to the themes of A Confederacy of Dunces; I don't see this book as a howl of despair at an uncaring world, and I don't think Toole intended us to sympathise with Ignatius's worldview any more than we need to to find him by turns funny or tragic. It's much more knockabout and picaresque than that, as I think the ending makes clear.

It's also, among other things, a wonderful New Orleans book, in which the city's language and psychogeography play a major role. Toole's notation of the local dialect is both cartoonish and somehow completely convincing, and in a memorable aside, Ignatius describes the city as being ‘famous for its gamblers, prostitutes, exhibitionists, Antichrists, alcoholics, sodomites, drug addicts, fetishists, onanists, pornographers, frauds, jades, litterbugs, and lesbians’ – which does rather unfairly raise my hopes as someone planning a trip there next week.

this is about my life

Two word review: Funny classic.

Unexpected side effect during or after reading: Extreme cravings for hot dogs.

New thing I learned from reading this book: The sad story of John Kennedy Toole.

General observations: This is a weird book for me because it's one of those ones I'd heard of for years without really knowing anything about it other than the title. I decided to check it out after seeing it on various lists here, and I read the story of how the book came to be published after Toole's death. Which is kind of a bad way to start a comedy.

I usually can't stand stories of any kind that involve self-absorbed people making jackasses out of themselves, but I did think it was very funny and Ignatius is an unforgettable character. Even if I spent half the book wishing I could reach through the pages and slap him silly myself.

‎اتحاديه ابلهان داستان زندگي جواني سي و چندساله به نام ايگنشس جي رايلي است كه متخصص فلسفه قرون وسطا است و با جامعه و افراد آن سر ناسازگاري دارد .با مادرش زندگي ميكند، اما حتي با او هم رابطه خوبي ندارد. ايگنشس كه فردي آرمانگرا،تنبل و خودخواه است ترجيح ميدهد تمام عمرش را در رخنخواب و جلوي تلويزيون بگذراند. كار نميكند و هزينه تحصيلاتش را هم مادرش ميپردازد اما كوچكترين تقديري از پسرش نميبيند.اما مادر ايگنشس با يك تصادف دنياي پسرش را خراب ميكند چون بايد خسارت زيادي را بپردازد و اين اتفاق ايگنشس را مجبور ميكند كه كار كند و اين آغازي است بر ورود او به اتفاقات جالب زندگي و جامعه ي آمريكايي و اتحاديه ابلهان.
‎ابتدا در يك شركت استخدام ميشود و سياهان كارخانه اي در حال ورشكستگي را به شورش تشويق ميكند و در فرصتي ديگر نقش يك رئيس حزب ترقي خواه را بازي ميكند اما در نهايت، هم جامعه و هم مادرش اورا طرد ميكنند و از خود ميرانند.
‎جاناتان سويفت ميگويد:(( وقتي نابغه اي حقيقي در دنيا پيدا ميشود، ميتوانيد او را از اين نشانه بشناسيد: تمام ابلهان جهان عليه او متحد ميشوند )).
‎جالب اينجاست كه قهرمان رمان ما هم نابغه است و هم عضوي از اتحاديه ابلهان.
‎در اين رمان ما با شخصيتي متفاوت با بسياري از كتاب ها مواجهيم، يك انسان تحصيل كرده كه به شدت اعصاب خردكن است ، خيلي سخت ميشه همچين انساني رو تحمل و يا درك كرد اما با تمام اينها ايگنشس هم قهرمان است و هم ضدقهرمان(از خودخواهي متنفر است اما به شدت خودخواه است).
‎اتحاديه ابلهان طنزتلخي را دارد و نويسنده در قالب اين داستان حماقت و جهالت يك جامعه را به تصوير ميكشد و تنها كسي كه به مخالفت و مقابله با اين جامعه ميپردازد ايگنشس است.
‎به نظرم كتابي است كه ارزش فقط يكبار خواندن را دارد و اگر بتوانيد خواندن اين رمان را تمام و قهرمان ضدقهرمان داستان را تحمل كنيد ميتوانيد با بسياري از ابلهان اطرافتان راحت تر كنار بياييد.
‎

‎

One fine morning Fortuna spun my wheel of luck and put me on a flight to NYC. The person who was sitting next to me, refusing to indulge in modern day perversities like movies, pulled out his book and sat down reading. He must have been enjoying it immensely, because he kept laughing out loud every now and then. Soon he realized that some people had started turning around to give him weird looks. Poor guy didn't have an option but to put the book down. But Fortuna being the degenerate wanton that she can sometimes be, was in a mood to play a cruel joke on him. Even after he had put the book down, he couldn't help suddenly bursting out into laughter. More stares. More embarrassment.
That was when I noticed that the book he had been reading was A Confederacy of Dunces. Having read it only a week earlier, I could understand that he wasn't a nutcase.

(To those who haven't read this book yet):-

WARNING: 'A Confederacy of Dunces' is extremely hilarious and is known to have caused uncontrollable laughter in several cases. Read it in public at your own risk!

If Archie Bunker, Frasier Crane, and J. Peterman from the Seinfeld show had any comedic appeal for you, then the pompous, lazy, and maniacally philosophical Ignatius J. Reilly might just have you busting out into laughter.

I have been snickering out loud for over a week now, and my 15 year old son ended up listening to the audio with me while on an hour-long drive. He was in fits and now has the book in his backpack, squeezing in chapters during breaks in school. He guffawed out loud at the end of English class today, but the teacher came over, read the title, and exclaimed AWESOME!

We are New Orleanians and therefore have insiders' tracks on some of the dialect in the story. It is spot on, unlike probably any other book ever written and sets us locals into giggles listening to the very familiar lousy grammar and horrific pronunciation. If you watch NFL football, you may have heard "Who dat? Who dat? Who dat sayin gonna beat dem Saints?" A good chunk of our population speaks like that! So yeah, the books gets "charm" points from us...if you're not from New Orleans, it may just annoy you.

Accordingly, this novel has a pretty bipolar distribution of lovers and haters - few folks are in between. I'm a lover, but would forewarn those who haven't popped into this satirical comedy-of-errors that it takes a few chapters to get into the groove of the story.

Generally, most authors write his or her protagonist so that we readers identify and eventually love him. Ignatius, however, is an asshole. He is an anti-hero who really just serves as the foil for the author to tie together other stories which make fun of aspects of society.

There are affluent liberal types in the story, intent on saving the downtrodden with make-overs and psycho analysis. McCarthyism runs rampant. A black character makes fun of his employer for paying him so poorly and sets up sabotage to her business. A group of factory workers is encouraged to riot by a do-gooder white guy who is paid three times as much as them, despite there being no chance of a pay raise. There is an effort to establish a political party composed of only gay men so they'll want to only redecorate federal buildings and will not get the country in another war.

The little subplots and characters end up tying in with one another in a way that reminds me of Pulp Fiction. I'm not sure what that literary technique is called, but it is really enjoyable as you start to see their trajectories heading for collision. That build up is fun.

Toole was a hilarious writer but also incredibly clever. The book's title comes from a line from Jonathan Swift: "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." The joke here is that our arrogant Ignatius considers himself brilliant, and the book's title would be something he might have chosen. On the other hand, maybe the philosophy he constantly expounds upon is a good idea - and he IS a genius.

The farcical Ignatius is regularly spouting quotations from the classic medieval book by Boethius. The book is Consolation of Philosophy, and while the reader doesn't know this, if you took Philosophy 101 in school you may remember that he had a theory of stoicism. Basically, we shouldn't get too overly comfortable with love or money because we are not in charge of our own lives. Likewise, we should try not to fret during bad times as they too will pass. Lady Fortune spins a wheel which arbitrarily impacts us. Happiness lies in being true to ourselves and being moral.

While this philosophy is not blatantly slapped into the hilarious escapades, if you know the contents of Ignatius' beloved book, you can see its lessons all throughout the novel. Try as we might to control our own destinies, sometimes it is the randomness of a pet cockatiel fascinated by a sparkling earring that can turn people's lives around. Oh, Fortuna - keep spinning thy wheel!

Have I lost my sense of humour?

Everyone seems to love this piece of writing, and I was highly motivated when I saw the Jonathan Swift quote in the beginning, giving the novel its name:

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

However, all I could discover in the story were the dunces, engaged in never-ending dull dialogues, showing off their vulgarity and stupidity without an ounce of fun. Slapstick, not irony or sarcasm, is the method to capture the audience here.

Had it been a short novel, I might have had patience for the silly main character, his mother complaining on the phone and all the rest, but to carry on for over 400 pages seriously annoyed me. I have not felt so bored when I was supposed to laugh since I was forced by my younger brothers to watch Dumb and Dumber and Wayne's World in the early nineties.

Over 400 pages, and nothing to quote. There is something between me and the Pulitzers. It just doesn't click, most of the time.

I had the time of my life with Beaumarchais yesterday, laughing out loud several times at his 1785 play, so maybe my sense of humour is just dated. Actually, there is one quote from Le Mariage de Figaro that describes the lazy hero of this novel quite accurately:

"Vous vous êtes donné la peine de naître, et rien de plus."

I doubt if he would agree, though - a master of self-indulgence and self-pity, representing the dunces of the world.

I first read ACOD at least a quarter century ago, and my reaction to it was meh. It had been extravagantly recommended to me, yet I found it to be painful to finish. I despised Ignatius. I was not amused, only annoyed. I mean, if I knew this guy I would actively avoid him.

Yet I continued to see this book praised highly. What had I missed? A reread was in order, this time an audible version, a format that had allowed me to appreciate other books that had previously alluded me (Burroughs's Naked Lunch, PKD’s Valis).

I listened to three chapters, and realized that nothing had changed -- Ignatius is far too annoying for me to waste some thirteen hours of my life in his company. A great big package of Nope.

I thought the book was ok. One of my old boyfriends recommended it to me, and while I was reading it I told him what an asshole I thought Ignatius J. Reilly was, and that I was sick of hearing about his valve. He got pissed off at me and told me that I didn't get it. He said Ignatius was a misunderstood genius stuck in a shitty town with no one who understood him. To be honest, my eyes kind of glazed over and I don't remember the rest of his rant, but I finished the book anyway. I think the most valuable thing I learned was to lie on my left side to fart.

[One of my pet peeves is when someone says, "You just don't get it." No, I get it, I just don't like it. One time I saw this shitty band (I don't remember their name) open for the White Stripes, and they kept saying, "You guys don't get it. Some of you get it, but the rest of you just don't get it." NO, you guys just SUCK!]

خب، اگر بخوام منطقی در مورد این کتاب اظهار نظر کنم، احتمالا باید یکم بی‌رحمی به خرج بدم!

در یکی از نقدها خوندم که عزیزی نوشته بود کتاب پونصد صفحه‌ای باشه، انتشارات چشمه باشه، ترجمه پیمان خاکسار باشه، قیمت بالای صد هزار تومن باشه، بی‌اختیار آدم انتظار داره که با یک شاهکار ادبی طرف باشه!
ولی باید بگم که نه، اینطور نبود... متاسفانه...

اتحادیه ابلهان، برای من، از خیلی لحاظ کتاب بی‌نظیری بود، شخصیت‌های داستان به قدری خوب ساخته و پرداخته شدن که راحت میشه تصورشون کرد، انگار می‌شناسیمشون! از طرفی همین شخصیت‌ها، در طول کتاب، به‌طوری در هم تنیده شدن که با وجود اینکه هرکدوم در هر فصل، برای خودشون روایت و دنیایی مجزا دارند ولی در آن‌واحد روی بقیه شخصیت‌ها و خط داستانی هم تاثیر میزارن!

در زمان شروع کتاب، خواننده احساس می‌کنه که با یک روایت خطی طرفه، ولی با پیش رفتن به جلو متوجه میشه که اینطور نیست، و در هر قسمتی از هر فصل، مکان و شخصیت اصلی داستان عوض میشه!
کمی که پیش رفتم، احساس این رو داشتم که قراره در این کتاب مثلا پنج داستان مجزا رو دنبال کنم که هرکدوم در گوشه‌ای از یک شهر در حال به‌ وقوع‌ پیوستن هستند، ولی کمی که پیش رفتم، تمامی شخصیت‌ها و روایات به هم تنیده شدن! گره خوردن! پیچیدن، و با هم یک پایان شکوهمند رو رقم زدن...

دیگه بیشتر از این لو نمی‌دم که چی به چیه! :))

فقط یک توضیحی بدم که سوتفاهم پیش نیاد، اتحادیه ابلهان کتاب فوق العاده‌ایه! محشره! ترجمه روان و متن خوانا و داستان به شدت گیرا با شخصیت پردازی‌های عالی و صحنه‌سازی‌های کم نظیر...
ولی
ولی
ولی
این کتاب‌هایی که اینهمه درموردشون تبلیغات میشه، و اینقدر گرون هستن، و اینقدر مترجم در مقدمه تمجید می‌کنه ازشون، خب، آدم خیلی ازشون انتظار داره.
بی شک اتحادیه ابلهان یکی از بهترین هایی هست که تا حالا خوندم، ولی اونطور که باید انتظارات من رو برآورده نکرد! بنده بشخصه براش این همه پرشور تبلیغ نخواهم کرد!
بخونیدش، البته با توجه به قیمت بالاش به نظرم امانت بگیرید، از کتابخونه و یا از دوستانتون، با صد تومن کتابهای بهتری میشه خرید!

I finally finished A Confederacy of Dunces and it was pure torture for me. I do not get why this is considered genius. I hated the way it bounced about, the way the characters seemed willing to do anything but work, the pseudo-intellectualism. I respect the opinions of all who enjoy this, but it was palaver for me. And between me and the Pulitzer Prize people who do you think is wrong? (That was said tongue in cheek, BTW).

We can't all love every book, so this is just one I will choose not to love. It did not help that I started it months ago, put it down, picked it back up and refused to start over so picked up where I left off, put it down again, determined to get through it so started reading one chapter a week. Not the best way to get the most from any book. I will, however, never be trying this one again.