Unfortunately, this book had a rather disappointing outcome. In the first half, there were a couple of moments that truly made me burst out laughing. The kind of laughter that only works like that in books such as Catch 22 and those by Vonnegut. It was quite refreshing and gave me high hopes for the rest of the read. However, as I progressed, things took a turn for the worse. Finishing this book became an absolute slog. I found myself losing interest and motivation with each passing page.

Reluctantly, I resorted to skimming the final quarter of the book. Even though I really wanted to give it the time and attention it probably deserved, it just didn't have that captivating power to hold my attention. It's a shame because the initial promise was so great, but in the end, it failed to deliver on that promise and left me feeling rather dissatisfied.

A similar style satire to Catch 22 but nowhere near as effective. This statement implies that there is a work that attempts to模仿 the satirical style of Catch 22 but fails to achieve the same level of impact. Satire is a powerful literary device that uses humor, irony, and exaggeration to criticize and expose the flaws and absurdities of society. Catch 22 is a classic example of this genre, known for its biting critique of the military and bureaucracy.

However, the work in question, despite its similarities in style, falls short in several aspects. Perhaps the humor is not as sharp or the irony not as profound. Maybe the exaggeration feels forced or the social commentary lacks depth. Without these essential elements, the satire fails to resonate with the reader and make a lasting impression.

Nevertheless, it is important to note that not every work of satire can be a masterpiece like Catch 22. Each piece has its own unique strengths and weaknesses, and it is up to the reader to decide whether it succeeds or fails in achieving its intended purpose. While this particular work may not be as effective as Catch 22, it may still offer some valuable insights and entertainment.

The work in question is almost as enjoyable as the renowned "Catch 22". However, it holds an even greater significance and resonance when compared to the current political climate.

Just like "Catch 22", which is known for its satirical and thought-provoking take on the absurdities of war and bureaucracy, this particular piece also has its own charm and appeal. It manages to engage the reader and keep them entertained throughout.

What sets it apart, though, is its ability to mirror and comment on the present political situation. In a world where politics can often seem complex and chaotic, this work offers a unique perspective. It may highlight the contradictions, the power plays, and the various issues that are plaguing the political landscape today.

By doing so, it not only provides entertainment but also makes the reader stop and think about the state of affairs. It encourages a deeper understanding of the political climate and perhaps even inspires some form of action or change.

Overall, this work is a valuable addition to the literary world, combining the enjoyment factor of "Catch 22" with a relevant and timely commentary on the current political climate.

I could not be bothered finishing this task.

It seems that my motivation has simply vanished. Maybe it's because I'm feeling a bit tired or perhaps there are other distractions pulling my attention away.

Whatever the reason, I find myself lacking the drive to complete this particular thing. I know it should be done, but at this moment, I just can't seem to muster up the energy or the inclination to get it finished.

It's one of those times when I need to take a step back, reassess my situation, and try to find a way to reignite that spark of determination within me.

Joseph Heller's 'Good as Gold', published in 1979 when the author was 56 and 18 years after his masterpiece 'Catch-22', explores three main themes.

The first theme is the Jewish experience in America. Heller's character, Bruce Gold, attempts to describe this but struggles as he's unsure if he truly had one. Instead, Heller uses the circumstances surrounding Gold to illustrate it. For instance, his father is loud, opinionated, and verbally abusive. The communication between him and his daughter is very blunt, and there is racism against Jews by the elites and those in power. Gold constantly feels persecuted, often by those less intelligent than himself.

The second theme is a critique of the American government in the mid-70s. Having just endured Nixon, Watergate, and Vietnam, Heller takes a particular shot at Henry Kissinger. His character views Kissinger as a war-mongering, self-serving egomaniac who is a traitor to his race and perhaps a war criminal. The book parodies the incompetence of those in power, the lack of qualification for cabinet posts, the circular talking and lying, government spying on its own citizens, politicians profiting from writing books instead of serving jail time for scandals, and the bureaucracy. As Gold tries to get a government job, he's told, "This president doesn't want yes-men. What we want are independent men of integrity who will agree with all our decisions after we make them." With Trump as president, this reading feels timely, and it reminds us of the dark times America faced with Nixon's abuse of power and government scandals, yet it also provides some solace in our current situation.

Finally, Heller describes a darkening view of life in middle age. He doesn't have a perfect marriage and cheats. He desires a sexually free woman but is shocked by how free some of them are. He sees stupidity and sadism in the recent conservative administration and among the rich, but he's also disillusioned with liberals, idealism, and mankind in general. "Either Gold had grown more conservative or civilization had grown progressively worse. Or both." He laments the urban decay on Coney Island, where he grew up. He wants to look back on his life and youth but often finds his memories inaccurate.

I suppose this is why I didn't give the book a higher rating. While it's not entirely dark and has humor throughout, and it may be an honest portrayal of Heller at that time in his life, it sometimes feels too much like a crotchety old man, making it less enjoyable as a result. However, you could definitely do worse.

I read this years ago and can't remember much about it.

However, one thing that sticks in my mind is that I didn't get a lot of the humor.

This was because it was very specific to the time and location of the story.

The context in which the events took place was likely something that was well-known and understood by the original audience, but it was lost on me.

Perhaps if I had been more familiar with the time period and the place where the story was set, I would have been able to appreciate the humor more.

Nonetheless, it was still an interesting read, and it made me realize how important context can be when it comes to understanding and enjoying a piece of literature.

Even though I didn't fully understand all of the jokes and references, I was still able to get a sense of the overall story and the characters.

In the end, it was a valuable learning experience that taught me to be more open-minded and curious about different cultures and time periods.

It had its moments of truly beautiful Hellerian irony and absurdism. The way the story was crafted at times was simply brilliant, making one stop and think about the absurdity of the situations presented.

However, there were also certain segments within the narrative where I couldn't help but feel that it dragged. It seemed to get bogged down in political ranting and excessive details of social commentary. These parts, while perhaps important in the context of the story, made the reading experience a bit less enjoyable at times.

Overall, when comparing it to "Catch-22", I have to admit that I liked the latter better. Nevertheless, I am satisfied that I finally had the opportunity to read this particular work. It has given me a new perspective and a deeper understanding of the author's style. That being said, I don't think I would read it again. Once was enough for me to appreciate its strengths and weaknesses.

Wordy and a waste of time.

It seems that this description is quite accurate for certain things. There are times when we encounter situations or tasks that are filled with excessive words and unnecessary details, which not only make it difficult to understand the essence but also consume a lot of our precious time.

Moreover, the mention of "had moments of brilliance followed by moments" indeed sounds like redundancy. It gives the impression that there is a pattern of alternating between outstanding moments and then something that drags on or is less remarkable. This kind of inconsistency can be frustrating and may prevent us from fully engaging or achieving the desired outcome.

In conclusion, we should strive to avoid wordiness and redundancy in our communication and actions to make the most of our time and efforts.

There are just some writers whom I DESPERATELY hope would like me if they met me. Joseph Heller is one of them.

"Good as Gold" is a remarkable satire that delves into the story of a Jewish man who is offered a position in the US government. It is filled with a plethora of elements that make it both engaging and thought-provoking. There is a palpable sense of hate towards Henry Kissinger, which is supported by evidence, adding a layer of authenticity to the narrative. The use of Yiddish language further enriches the story, giving it a unique flavor. The exasperating/exasperated family members add to the comical and chaotic atmosphere, while the themes of adultery, equivocation, and the exploration of Jewish identity add depth and complexity.

I must admit that at times, it felt like a bit of a slog to get through the book. However, I persevered and pushed forward, and in the end, I found myself thoroughly enjoying the experience. The dialogue in "Good as Gold" is incredibly clever, filled with wit and sarcasm. It contains a number of excellent monologues that would be a delight to see performed on a stage. The sheer number of side characters can sometimes make it a challenge to keep track of who is who, but as you read further, you start to get to know them better and their individual personalities shine through. This is my second Heller book, and I can't wait to read more of his works. I bet you can guess what the first one was!

I did not enjoy this book as much as Catch-22.

It seemed to have a bit too much of the "A Catcher in the Rye" feel for my taste.

The story, while perhaps having some interesting elements, just didn't grip me in the same way that Catch-22 did.

Maybe it was the writing style, or the characters didn't resonate with me as strongly.

There were times when I found myself skimming through the pages, rather than fully engaging with the text.

Overall, it was an okay read, but not one that I would highly recommend or rush to read again.

I was disappointed that it didn't live up to my expectations, especially after having loved Catch-22 so much.

Perhaps others will have a different opinion and find more to enjoy in this book.

But for me, it just didn't quite hit the mark.

There is simply no possible way to duplicate another Catch-22. As a result, Good as Gold fails to live up to the lofty standards set by its predecessor. In fact, at its very best, it might only be as good as tin.

Gold firmly believed that if given the opportunity, he would surely succeed in Washington. This was because he was a true master of diplomacy and palace intrigue. In the ongoing conflict within the college to attract students to liberal arts subjects from other divisions and to English subjects from other departments within liberal arts, he was the department's most lethal strategist.

Should a professor and the author of numerous unread, yet seminal articles in small journals embark on a political career? The answer is a resounding no. Never. Otherwise, he would merely become the subject of a mediocre and insipid novel like Good as Gold.

And what about love? Well, there is an abundance of it.

‘I can’t ball you today,’ she informed him the moment they stepped inside, ‘but I give good head.’

Actually, her performance was only average, but Gold chose not to criticize and didn't really care. Before the sun set on that same day, he realized that Linda Book was the easiest person he had ever met to give his heart to. Gold had this inclination to fall in love. Whenever he had free time, he would find himself falling in love. Sometimes, his infatuations would last as long as four months; more often than not, they would endure for six or eight weeks. On one or two occasions, he had fallen in love for just a minute. Confident that this new attachment had no greater chance of survival than the others, he surrendered himself to it completely.

He who is burdened with mediocrity is mediocre in every aspect, including love.

So far, I am truly loving this.

I heard Heller's daughter being interviewed on the NYT Book Review podcast. Tanenhaus mentioned something about this being laugh-out-loud funny, and after reading just twenty pages, he has been proven right.

The first scene presents an excruciating Jewish family dinner. And now, Kissinger is somehow involved in the mix.

I have this urge to take the phone off the hook or turn it off, or do whatever one does these days to avoid distractions.

I want to get into bed, have some kugel, and read this book, laughing and wincing along the way.

I haven't read Heller since "Something Happened" came out when I was a teenager and thought I was a big grownup.

I would really like to read that again. There are so many things I would like to do again.

But the question is, how many of them will I actually get to do?

Now, suddenly, I find myself feeling a bit depressed.