data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9505a/9505a836ad5cd7093910999df4f62271ec535a60" alt="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7025/6524887167_3f3a4c1d7e.jpg"
This book is, frankly, disgusting, full of aimless erotic tableaux presented with an air of nonchalance reminiscent of parts of Moorcock's Dancers at the End of Time. Whatever
the limits of each individual reader's taste may be, Beardsley was
clearly determined to exceed them. Indeed, it may be that the only
interest this book holds is as an experiment in excess and
transgression. The second half of the novel, written by Glassco, tones
down the transgression but also loses the hallucinatory, fever-dream
quality of Beardsley's work, with the result that over-the-top
perversion is replaced by the merely prurient and tawdry. A plot
appears briefly near the end, but while Beardsley might have been able
to use it to tie the work together, Glassco was not.
Someone, somewhere will like this book. I do not want to meet them.
Now, this was published in 1959... so wouldn't the over-the-top perversion of 1959 seem, uh, somewhat tame by today's standards?
ReplyDeleteNaked Lunch was also published in 1959 - is the Steely Dan sequence really "somewhat tame by today's standards?" Beardsley died in 1898, but Krafft-Ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis was published in 1886...
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete