Talk:J R

Whoever decided to write here and in the main William Gaddis article that there is no indication of who is speaking clearly didn't read more than 10 pages of the book. Shame.

Ark2120 (talk) 02:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

J R and me
This is a book I love and I have added a lot to the article. I've tripled its length and it now has 16 footnotes. But I could not add the essence of the book. It eludes Wikipedia format. So I have written something about that here:

Perhaps the main theme running through JR is the impossibility of creating great art in modern times. And yet the novel itself negates that thesis. It IS great art. And not only is the book great art created in modern times, but it is also great art depicting modern times. It reminds me very much of the great Flemish Old Master paintings that so fascinated Gaddis. Take a painting by Rogier van der Weyden. Yes, there's Jesus crucified and his mother swooning, but all around that are groups of people, rich Flemish people, blithely oblivious to the main event, talking about their personal lives, and, from the looks of them, talking about money. (And parenthetically it's strange that Gaddis picked early 15th century Belgium as his example of revered painters, since if you had to choose one time and place between the fall of Rome and 18th century England where the economy, the ruling class and society are most like present-day America, you'd choose 1400 Belgium -- though 1400 Florence might be a good second pick.)

JR is the best novel of the 21st century. Okay, I can't categorically deny that maybe a better one will come along in 2090, but if someone in 2090 wanted to understand what life was like way back in 2010, he should read JR. It is an eerily accurate description of the heated crazy atmosphere that led to the stock market crash of '08. Surely the author must be an insider, must be a top exec at Goldman, Sachs. And even more... the whole writing style, the whole crazy jazzy improv dialog scat, the 10 strands of craziness all jumbled up and happening at once, captures the ADHD multitasking life in the Internet age.

JR was published in 1975.

And no-one then knew what to make of it. They knew it had to be looked at. The author, William Gaddis, had back in 1955 written a book ("The Recognitions") that at first was totally ignored but slowly became the most influential novel of the postwar age, the first postmodernist novel that spawned all the others. So critics read JR. A prominent reviewer at one of the top newspapers said, the author is to be congratulated for having produced over 700 pages, each sentence of each one of which is totally unreadable gobbledygook.

So I read the book and night after night it kept me up till one in the morning. I'd read and the words just sing and the juxtapositions of all the wacky things happening just sing and it's like a symphony. No, it's like hearing the most genius jazz saxophone player in the world do the wildest, greatest improv ever. And I've seen books and articles about this novel and they all say, this is an accurate and trenchant indictment of present-day American capitalism (little did they know just how accurate it would be), the use of dialogue indicates a skeptical view of objective reality, this character symbolizes the typical capitalist, etc. But you'd never discuss that saxophone solo like that. So why can't novels be analyzed like music? When (to take another great novel) stately, plump Buck Mulligan marches down that staircase, who cares if he is an accurate portrayal of a British preppie? Just listen to those words sing.Promking (talk) 15:34, 3 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi! It's 2022/10/18, 22:55 in Paris, France. I'm only 12 years late to your contribution. I don't have a Wikipedia account. In the odd event you're still alive AND you still get notifications about this article, I just wanted to THANK YOU for your passionate promotion of JR. See, I consider myself another fellow bookworm/booknerd (incidentally, I'm also a lover of Flemish masters.) I love reading so much that I also read a fair amount of crap. But reading great books is, of course, a god-like pleasure. So, whenever I come accross a kindred spirit, recommending a book s/he loved and explaining why, I rejoyce in thanking them for spreading awareness on great books. I haven't read JR yet, but your description is very enticing and endearing. So sincere congratulations on a job (your review) well done. Many happy readings to you, whoever you are!! 5.51.52.21 (talk) 21:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on J R. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713034841/http://inkslingerediting.com/blog/2010/03/30/william-gaddis-the-art-of-fiction-the-paris-review-interviews-vol-2/ to http://inkslingerediting.com/blog/2010/03/30/william-gaddis-the-art-of-fiction-the-paris-review-interviews-vol-2/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:13, 13 January 2018 (UTC)