jesus' son. denis johnson

denis johnson's "jesus' son" is a flavorpill 30 before 30 book.  i had heard of it prior to my reading because of the film based on it starring billy crudup but never saw it or thought to read the book.

and since thirty is a week away, i ordered it on abebooks.com (for some odd reason the library did not have a copy) and read it in about two days (due to the quick-paced momentum of the stories).  "jesus' son" is a collection of stories told by the same narrator, a small town junkie.  there is an epigraph at the begging quoting lou reed's "heroin", "when i'm rushing on my run and i feel just like a jesus' son", which is where the collection gets its name.

to be honest, "jesus' son" wasn't for me.  flavorpill said that it would knock you down regardless of your age.  and yes johnson's writing is amazing.  it's just that the content wasn't for me.  i grew up and currently live in a small town (which is how i knew even before the narrator said it that his "work" would be stealing copper wire from buildings and selling it, people actually do this in delano) and don't like the druggies here so reading about one similar to them was of no interest to me.  i think individuals like the narrator are what is wrong with the world today and so i spent most of my time disgusted by what i read.

and i get it.  if i read "jesus' son" back in 92 (more like 99, i was only 9 in 92), it probably would have knocked my socks off.  i did read "trainspotting" when i was in high school circa 00/01 and that knocked my socks off back then.  but whereas i enjoyed reading about mark, sickboy and the gang, i was repulsed by the narrator of "jesus' son".

i tried googling to find an analysis to help me better understand my disapproval

of the content and found a quote in a new york times article:

The narrator "lives in a random world, a certain part of America where wildness is actually expressed rather than depicted," Mr. Johnson said. "Some of us go to the movies to see everybody shooting each other, and then there's another bunch who actually shoot each other." 

and perhaps this is it.  maybe i am

just tired of the lowlives in delano to have the openmindness to find this profound.  i just have no sympathy for people with drug addictions, its not a sickness, cancer and luekemia are.  and to clairfy,  i did grow up in an extremely sheltered househoild and do not know any actual junkies in real life.  but i did lose an uncle (that i never met) to heroin and perhaps that is where my prejudice against junkies comes from?  and due to these prejudices, though johnson didn't intent it to be, i read "jesus' son" as romanticising addiction.

but as i mentioned before denis johnson is a wonderful writer, it was just his subject matter that turned me off.  he did  have many beautiful lines.

"[the bartender] poured doubles like an angel, right up to the lip of a cocktail glass, no measuring. . . . you had to go down to them like a hummingbird over a blossom."

"she wanted to eat my heart and be lost in the desert with what she'd done, she wanted to fall on her knees and give birth from it, she wanted to hurt me as only a child can be hurt by its mother."

and though i didn't approve of the stories told, johnson is a wonderful storyteller. i loved the inconsistency of it all, the memories of the narrator were all jumbled just like a junkie.  but it's hard to appreciate good writing when you can't stomach the narrator.  however, i do plan on reading johnson's other works, "jesus' son" just wasn't for me.

the casual vacancy. j.k. rowling (96)

i should have wrote that letter to j.k. rowling suggesting her next book be the story of harry potter but from the prospective of professor snape! it would give snape a chance to be the hero in his own words instead of via flashbacks. give him a chance to tell his side! but alas i never wrote that letter and even if i did and j.k. somehow read it, it would have never convinced her, because she was determined to write the anti-potter.

if you are a potterhead and looking to get a fix, look elsewhere. if you are a heroin addict, looking to get a fix, you should actually read this book because it will show you how heroin will ruin your life.

at first, i was hesitant to read "the casual vacancy" because i am not interested in politics. i am ignorant of what goes on in washington and the world because let's face it even if you are informed on the political affairs of the world, you are still ignorant. i believe the government only lets us know what it wants us to know. also i am one of those skeptics that believe that the masses can vote but it doesn't really count for anything. i vote for the sticker. so when i read the premise, i was certain that 500 pages of small town politics would bore me to death.

but guess what, it didn't. but also because it wasn't a political novel. well it was but in the sense that it is a novel about the class divide which is ultimately political. this novel actually reminded me of zadie smith's "nw" (amazon should consider doing a deal where you get both books for at a discount prices), both focus on the slums of england. oddly enough, i didn't like any of rowling's characters just like i didn't care for anyone in "nw". interestingly enough it was for the same reason, they were all horrible people who were selfish and only out for themselves. the only character i cared about was krystal weedon because she was dealt a bum hand by life. and yes there were some life choices she made that i didn't agree with but she dealt with her problems the only way she knew how.

quick digression. so the book is about the town of pagford and the divide within their middle due to the slums aka "the fields". interesting those those affected by the issue aka the lower class did not strive to keep their homes. this could a) be an analogy about how in politics the upper classes rule the lives of the lower without their knowing or b) the lower classes do not care about their own well being (which makes me question, why do the upper classes care than?)

this divide actually kept me interested in the book. my personal opinion on government assistance and welfare programs are that they have gone to shit. people abuse them. (see me on unemployment for 3 years). and there's no checks and balances on any of these programs. most people on assistance to not use the money properly. they buy iphones or ipads instead of what that money is allotted. plus a lot of time and energy is spent on people who would never spend the same amount of time and energy on themselves because let's be honest their lack of motivation in life is the reason why they need the assistance in the first place.

however, once i saw the story of krystal and how she could have a better life if she had the resources, i realized that life and assistance isn't so black and white. these welfare programs were put in place to help those in need. but sadly instead of doing that it has created a culture of dependence in which people abuse the aid. i have no real solution to this problem other than bitch about it. but i if i ruled the world, i would reform the programs to give assistance to those who truly needed it instead of junkies and teens that use their bastard children (sounds harsh but i am a bastard so it is kosher) as their meal ticket (krystal weedon planned on doing this).

at first glance, krystal seemed like the anti-potter. she was a girl born to a junkie mother who grew up in the slums. she skipped school, smoked, cussed, and had unprotected sex. but though rowling was trying to get away from her wholesome teen heros from hogsworth, krystal and harry both share a heart of gold. well krystal's was probably tainted a little, but she did try to sacrifice herself (via the attempt at pregnancy) to keep her family together. kinda like harry sacrificed himself for the world. also they are both searching for love due to lack of a home; krystal's single mom is a junkie and we all know what happened to harry's parents. both are also outsiders whose reputations proceed them, krystal is known as a hoodlum but she is actually a good kid. and well harry was a super star than a liar in the press about the return of he-would-at-that-time-couldn't-be-named and he really was the savior (not like blasphemous savior but he did save the world from evil.) so those rowling may have wanted her characters to be edgier, she still created a character you could care about.

however, her supporting characters were the opposite of the b-list characters in potter. whereas i loved ron, hermione, sirius black, remus, snape, and dobbie, i could have lived without all the other characters in "the casual vacancy". i absolutely hated simon and kept on wishing someone called the police about his abuse. he was such an asshole, i would have been okay with him dying. fats was another character i could not stand with his smugness and abuse of sukhvinder. (oh i forgot , i did like sukhvinder, she was a hero and had a heart of gold too.). i also couldn't handle gavin the coward. but everyone else were just sad.

also there were so many characters, it was overwhelming. like it was cool to see how they were all interconnected because that is how life is. but after a while, there were too many people. i could have done without knowing every detail of everyone's life.

overall, it was a good book but it wasn't great. i will not walk around singing its praise like i did once i gave harry potter a chance. i definitely would not recommend it to kids that read the series. this book talks about sex, drugs, affairs, and abuse, just to name a few. there is no denying that rowling is a good storyteller, she kept me interested with her plot twists. i was also shocked by her endings but without a person to truly care about or a cause to support, i did not get completely lost in the book. if you miss harry and the gang and looking for something to fill the void, just reread the series.