This work is the second part of the saga of the cunning Snopes family. It continues to unfold the complex and often humorous storylines that the author began in the first book of the trilogy, "The Hamlet". The humor and irony that were so effectively highlighted in the previous installment are maintained, adding depth and entertainment value to the narrative.

Although Faulkner's writing can be challenging and not very accessible at times, I still highly recommend this book. His unique style and ability to create vivid characters and intricate plots make it a worthwhile read for those willing to invest the time and effort.

The Snopes family is a fascinating study in human nature, with their devious schemes and self-serving motives. Through their actions, Faulkner explores themes such as greed, ambition, and the corrupting influence of power.

Overall, this second part of the Snopes family saga is a captivating and thought-provoking read that will appeal to fans of literary fiction and those interested in exploring the darker side of human nature.

Is it not possible - the city that throws such a definite search on the earth - will the path of the three wise men be blocked by the wife of that person? If Jesus Christ is possible, that Jesus Christ is, can he be brought into the three wise men by the influence of the person?

Or I am completely confused by this man or simply it is not possible not to be able to follow his story from beginning to end and with the words with which he tries to convince... I am convinced that no one can create such a character of such a suit. Therefore

I don't understand why this novel is so controversial among readers.

The story of three fairies and three children and my unfinished thoughts...

A Masterpiece

Everyone holds The Hamlet in high regard, and while I did enjoy it, in my personal opinion, The Town is Faulkner at his absolute and inimitable best.

First of all, all the Snopes characters in the trilogy are so unique and unforgettable that you can sense Faulkner was writing for eternity when he composed this trilogy. We have the devious and intelligent Flem Snopes, who gradually takes over the town of Jefferson bit by bit. Consider the title - The Town - so simple yet perfect. It not only represents the expanding size and scope of Flem's rising empire since The Hamlet, but also the citizens of Jefferson, their jealousy (as I see it) of his rapid rise and success, and their condemnation of various moral outrages that occur in the story, some of which can be attributed to Flem, and others not. Then there's I. O. Snopes, who often has money problems and is involved in some shady business, whether it's sending his half-breed Indian children to Jefferson or trying to sell off mules. There's also Montgomery Ward Snopes and his pornographic picture shop. And my personal favorite, Wallstreet Panic Snopes, a young and up-and-coming whippersnapper running successful downtown grocery stores and perhaps the only threat to Flem's small-town empire.

Then there are the other great characters in this book - Mr. de Spain, the son of Major de Spain, an unforgettable character in the hunting stories of Go Down, Moses. I remember being shocked when I read Sanctuary and finally found out how the corncob pipe had been used, and I'll never think of it the same way again. The same goes for the corsage in this story - the unsavory 'gift' that de Spain presents to Gavin Stevens, without giving too much away. Gavin Stevens and V.K. Ratklif are my personal favorites, though - Stevens is a lawyer with strong values and someone intent on stopping the Snopes if anyone can, but he always gets caught up in the whirlwind of beautiful women, just like in other books. He's basically a sucker for anything that moves in skirts. Ratklif, on the other hand, is the model citizen, albeit a slightly uneducated one, but who seems to have the town's interests at heart. Both he and Stevens are two of the main narrators of this story, along with Charles Mallison, Stevens' nephew, who narrates parts of the story from the child's viewpoint, much like Vardaman does in As I Lay Dying. Maggie, Stevens' twin sister, is the backbone of rectitude that holds both of them together, and she is one of the strongest women in Faulkner's canon, I feel.

Finally, we have, of course, the unforgettable, sexy, and voluptuous Eula Varner (who becomes Mrs. Flem Snopes), a veritable Jezebel if there ever was one and the eye candy crush of Jefferson. I could never figure out if Stevens was more in love with Eula or with her equally beautiful daughter Linda...or both, if it's possible to be in love with two people at the same time.

Other things I learned from Faulkner while reading this trilogy:
1. You don't always have to spell things out for the reader to understand what's happening. Often, Faulkner will drop subtle hints along the way until it finally clicks that 'oh, someone just got murdered' or 'knocked up' or whatever.
2. The power of rumor in his books is amazing - through narrators and the lack of alternative narratives (or rumors to the contrary), the reader finds oneself having no choice but to believe the rumor circulated within the narrative because there is no other way to position the characters. This is something that blew me away in Faulkner's work and largely reflects the effect second-hand narratives can have on us in real life.
3. Writing doesn't have to be smooth, just like life. I like how Faulkner unleashes a string of adjectives (Kerouac does this too in what he calls a'scatalogical pile-up of words') that does full justice to the writer's vocabulary stockpile at any given moment, and it's far more powerful than cleanly revised, stripped-down, edited prose.

I'm going to take a short break from Faulkner for a while and come back in a few weeks to read the finale of this great trilogy. This book is my all-time favorite of his because a) the story is so gripping I couldn't put it down and b) the prose is immaculate. Damn, this man had a lot of talent.

Thanks to Rikkyo University Library for having a copy of this in stock that I could borrow.

The new commercialism, as put forward by Flem, is on a pursuit of respectability. However, this pursuit comes at a great cost. It sacrifices the natural affections that are so precious in our lives. These natural affections, which are the essence of our human connections, are being pushed aside in the name of commercial success.

Moreover, the poetic dreams that once inspired us are also being trampled upon. Eula and Linda might have witnessed how the allure of material gain and social status has overshadowed the beauty and wonder of our dreams.

We need to be aware of the negative impacts of this new commercialism. We should not let it erode our values and emotions. Instead, we should strive to find a balance between the pursuit of success and the preservation of our natural affections and poetic dreams. Only in this way can we lead a more fulfilling and meaningful life.

Classic Faulkner is a remarkable work that holds a unique position among his literary oeuvre.

It is often regarded as better than "Unvanquished," which has its own merits but perhaps lacks the depth and complexity of this particular piece.

However, it falls slightly short when compared to the masterpiece "The Sound and the Fury."

Nevertheless, it serves as an excellent layover or stepping stone to his other great works.

Faulkner's writing style in "Classic Faulkner" is characteristic of his genius, with richly detailed descriptions, complex characters, and a narrative that weaves together multiple storylines and perspectives.

It offers readers a glimpse into the southern American society and the human condition, exploring themes such as race, class, and family.

Overall, "Classic Faulkner" is a worthy addition to any literature lover's collection and a testament to Faulkner's status as one of the greatest American writers of the 20th century.

Lukupiiripakkopulla, Part 2. At the beginning, a recap of the events of the previous part in the best serial style. Still, I had already fallen off the cart on page 25 and couldn't get back on board. The sentences in this book are shorter, but there are still problems in the use of pronouns (and perhaps in some other aspects as well). Beat-generation and Nostradamus are clear language compared to this. A female image floating unusually freely away from the real world.

"Have you ever made eye contact with a girl? You are human even though you are a woman." Yes, I remembered many times when my father was born too early, before girls were allowed to express their admiration.

The story seems to be filled with a sense of mystery and an almost dreamlike quality. The description of the female image floating freely gives an impression of something ethereal and unbound. The mention of the father being born too early adds an element of confusion or perhaps a hint of a disrupted timeline. It makes the reader wonder what the significance of these events is and how they will unfold further in the story. The use of short sentences and the problems with pronouns give the text a certain rawness and immediacy, as if we are getting a direct glimpse into the narrator's thoughts and experiences.

Just as in The Hamlet, the saga of Flem Snopes propels the plot forward here. We come to know about him solely through the observations and opinions of others, namely the three narrators: the sewing machine salesman and gossip connoisseur V.K. Ratliff, the chivalrous County Attorney Gavin Stevens, and his nephew Charles "Chip" Mallison.

They describe Flem's ascent from working in a back alley restaurant in Jefferson, Mississippi, to reaching the zenith of its economic and social elite as the bank president. Meanwhile, his wife Eula and Mayor Manfred de Spain betray him, and the impact of these events on the Snopes's daughter Linda is explored in the years before and after World War I.

Adding to the excitement: a peep show does brisk business until it is raided, one of the newfangled automobiles invading Jefferson accidentally kills old Colonel Sartoris, a Snopes embezzles from a bank, the drug store is robbed of cash and narcotics, and there are even some good old-fashioned crooked mule dealings taking place.

Because the tragedy of life is, it must be premature, inconclusive and inconcludable, in order to be life; it must be before itself, in advance of itself, to have been at all.

He doesn't just dwell on the past. Instead, he looks towards the future, constantly evolving and adapting in the ever-changing landscape of Jefferson. The story of Flem Snopes is a complex and captivating one, filled with drama, betrayal, and the indomitable spirit of a man determined to rise above his humble beginnings.

Superb!

This, the second installment in the Snopes trilogy, represents a significant improvement over and is much more accessible than The Hamlet, the trilogy's first book. It also outshines all of Faulkner's other works except for The Unvanquished, which is a collection of shorts, and Light in August.

I was truly taken aback, saddened, and ultimately enlightened when I learned of the fate of a crucial and highly symbolic character. This character was doomed by the encroaching commercialization of the American South during the first few decades of the 20th Century. The story unfolds against a backdrop of social and economic change, highlighting the impact of modernization on the traditional values and way of life in the region. The character's downfall serves as a powerful commentary on the price of progress and the loss of innocence in a changing world. Overall, this book is a masterful exploration of the human condition and a must-read for fans of Faulkner and Southern literature.

I read "The Town" and "The Mansion" one after another, so I can't really divide my impressions. Plus, Faulkner's style of repeating and repeating plots, telling them several times, including from the perspectives of different characters. Sometimes it's really annoying - for example, when he tries to tell about events from the perspective of a child who wasn't even born at the time of those events. I understand that for a writer this is a great challenge, but as a reader, I don't really enjoy watching him overcome it.

The device of repetition elevates the prose to the level of an epic, a fairy tale, or a family story that everyone has known for a long time but still continues to tell around the table. This is what I love about Faulkner, as well as his ability to tell about a secondary character in just a few paragraphs so that he is remembered no worse than the main hero.

Take Mrs. Rouncewell, for example, who ran the flower shop; not because she loved flowers or even because she loved money but because she loved funerals. Or Jebbo, the best mechanic in the area, who never completed his punishment for his drunken hooliganism because someone's car always broke down and he paid Jebbo's fine. This part of the trilogy is my favorite. Here is this dialogue, simple in its genius:

“You fool,” Father said. “Don't you know you can't fight? You don't know how.”

“Can you suggest a better way to learn than the one I just tried?” Uncle Gavin said.

Gavin Stevens, V.K. Ratliff, and then Charles try to save Jefferson from "Snopesism". Basically, these "rescue operations" come down to observing Flem Snopes' climb up the social ladder. And even when they try to do something (send Linda to school, find Mink before he takes his revenge) - their efforts have little impact.

Perhaps this also reflects Faulkner's worldview: in the new world, people of a new type, enterprising, driven by the desire for profit, make decisions, but they are also unable to overcome fate.

It feels like heresy to give this a mere 1 star out of 5. However, I simply could not get into it.

After reading about 40 pages, I had to quit. It wasn't so much the dialect and stream of consciousness style that defeated me.

The real issue was that the stream of consciousness often made no sense at all.

Linda, on the other hand, said she found it fairly interesting after somehow managing to slog her way through the first 100 or so pages.

This makes me wonder if all the eggheads who revere Faulkner are not completely bonkers.

Perhaps there is something more to this work that I'm just not seeing.

Maybe if I had persevered like Linda, I would have discovered the hidden gems within the convoluted prose.

But for now, I can only give it a 1 star based on my initial experience.

I'll have to take Linda's word for it that it gets better further along.

Maybe one day I'll be brave enough to give it another try.

I wasn't anticipating that I would like this more than "The Hamlet," but to my pleasant surprise, I thoroughly relished it and found it deeply moving towards the end.

The use of narrators was, in my opinion, extremely skillful. I didn't have the usual aversion to V.K. Ratliff or Gavin Stevens. Chick Mallison, in particular, was an outstanding narrator. He spoke both as himself as a child and as an adult reflecting on his childhood perceptions, which added a unique depth to the story.

I adored the tales about Montgomery Ward Snopes and Wall Street Panic Snopes and the diverse ways they conducted business. Maybe my increased liking for Gavin Stevens this time around was due to seeing him in the context of his interactions with his family. Understanding more about his romantic bachelorhood also contributed to my newfound appreciation.

I was glad that Flem had a smaller role in this novel, despite the fact that the action centered around him. The comparison between the canteen economies of ice cream and women was truly captivating. I also loved learning about the history of automobiles arriving in Jefferson and how de Spain became the mayor. The story of Ratliff's name being revealed by Eula was another interesting aspect.

In "The Hamlet," Eula was both fascinating and comical, with her beauty being described as a "natural phenomenon like a cyclone or a tidewave." However, in "The Town," I found her to be one of the most heart-wrenching female characters in all of Faulkner's works. Her life seemed to be at a dead end after her fate was traded too many times among the men closest to her. I even began to envision a movie adaptation made at the time of the novel's publication, perhaps starring Marilyn Monroe, who could have infused her own personal woes into the role.

The scenes between Gavin and Eula, and later Gavin and Linda, took me by surprise. I became completely invested in their relationships and was terribly concerned about everyone's outcome. Throughout the novel, I had the opportunity to revisit many of the characters from previous novels and stories, such as Willy Christian, old and young Bayard, and Byron Snopes. Overall, I believe the novel was successful because it focused on the entire town rather than just the Snopes saga.

I hadn't been born yet, so there was only cousin Gowan, old enough to see and remember and tell me about it later, when I too had grown old enough to understand. That is, cousin Gowan plus uncle Gavin, or perhaps rather uncle Gavin plus cousin Gowan. He - cousin Gowan - was thirteen years old. His grandfather was a brother of my grandfather, so at the time we found out, neither he nor I knew what kind of cousins we were to each other. So he called us all "cousins" except for grandfather, and we all, except for grandfather, called him "cousin" and that was it.

They lived in Washington, where his father worked at the Department of State, and then suddenly the Department of State sent his father to China or India, or, in the end, somewhere far away where he had to stay for two years; and his mother was going there too, so they sent Gowan here to stay with us and go to school in Jefferson until they returned. "We" at that time meant grandfather and mother, and father, and uncle Gavin. So that was what Gowan knew about that matter until I was born and grew old enough to know too. So when I say "we" and "believed", it's about Jefferson and what Jefferson believed.