Book Thread. I have nothing good to read.

[Ed Wood]

I have a friend who has long complained that she has no confederates in our social circle with whom she can discuss Infinite Jest. After a prolonged period of badgering I finally caved and agreed to go ahead and wrestle with the Foster Wallace monolith but I threw in a caveat that I'd be able to counter with a book of my own for her to tackle. I realized that while Jest is a hard book to get through it's definitely not a bad book so I'm not so much opposed to reading it as I am very lazy and so I tossed A Confederacy of Dunces her way assuming that she'd take a few weeks to even begin digging into it.

Of course a week later I received a call back informing me that Ignatius Reilly was down for the count. At this point I resigned myself to taking a crack at Jest but smooth talked my friend into a second compensation text; A Confederacy having failed to serve as any impedement. I'm a softie at heart, however, so my second recommendation was the softest of softballs, The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay. I haven't received any further updates but I'm currently about a hundred pages in to both (I couldn't not reread AAKC having picked it up again).

I would absolutely recommend all three to anyone interested in good fiction, though Jest is not always an effortless read despite being very good.

Confederacy as a book is, I think, incomplete without an explanation of the circumstances of its publishing. John Kennedy Toole was a New Orleans based novelist who went unpublished during his lifetime. Toole taught for a time at both Southwestern Louisiana and Dominican University in New Orleans but eventually left the later while dealing with ill health and alcoholism. Toole killed himself in 1969, A Confederacy having been rejected by Simon and Schuster years earlier. It was only in 1980 when his mother insisted that Walter Percy, an author and professor at Loyola University in New Orleans read the book that it began to draw attention. The book was published soon after and Toole posthumously received a Pulitzer Prize in 1981. Confederacy is a comic tragedy about a modern medievalist in the French Quarter, Ignatius Reilly. Reilly moves through the book and his life at his own pace but is forced to join the ignorant masses of the employed, much to his own disgust. The book is very funny and Reilly is one of the worst great heroes in literature. At the same time I tend to group Toole and Kafka as authors whose work is pervaded by what is retrospectively a puzzling lack of appreciation that must have contributed to the short and difficult lives of both authors.

Kavalier and Clay is just the best Passover Seder meal you ever had in book form. The one when your family finally admitted that nobody really likes Manischewitz and your spirit enthusiast of an uncle really flexes his wine muscles and the matzah is good homemade stuff so you feel you should be walking out on pharaoh a little more often just for the bread. It's such an effortless and delicious read; the story is of two cousins in New York around the start of the second world war as they join forces to create a host of fantastic comic book characters that really reflect the sensibilities that both inspired some of the great golden age heroes and empowered them through the love of their readers. My only regret is that the characters created by mm. Kavalier and Clay are not, in fact, actual comic book characters, particularly the Houdini inspired Escapist.

Infinite Jest is, through a hundred pages, a jumble of several narrations, all of which have been engaging, centered around the story of a young tennis prodigy by the name of Harold Incandenza and his family. It is extremely funny; a passage in which Hal is interviewed by his father masquerading as a "professional conversationalist" is one of the funniest I have ever read, and despite presenting four or five separate story threads so far Jest has yet to miss. The agonizing wait by an addict named Erdedy for such a disgustingly large amount of weed that he intends to make the drug repulsive forever to him (this is not his first attempt at doing just this) has been, apart from the interview, my favorite thus far. The book also somewhat famously includes a passage involving a pair of toothbrushes and a well traveled urban legend which is effective, even more so apparently if you aren't already familiar with the story (my friend was not).

I'll finish by inviting anyone who will admit to reading Stephen King to reminisce with me a little. I wouldn't call myself a King fan, despite reading perhaps ten to fifteen of his novels. He's not exactly a guilty pleasure, I think I have the mentality that if I can take anything he can write it'll be free drinks on King's tab in the afterlife or something. On the other hand agonizing over his inability to end a book with a fellow sufferer is loads of fun.

[doclinkin]

Regret solved. Sorta.

Michael Chabon has been penning 'The Escapist' for Dark Horse comics for some time now. Problem being the art is generally ass, from various hacks trying to ape the pulp stylings of the long gone golden age. Various guest writers take a turn if I'm remembering right.

I have an hour-long slideshow and schpiel on the history and importance of comics, touching briefly on the ubermencsh figure, wherein two nebbishy jews from Ohio recast the story of the immigrants assimilation as a classic hero origin story-- accidentally creating our modern American mythology, the only gods most kids will ever really know and care about. If not for jews there would be no superheroes. Captain America, aryan blond as he is, was fighting Hitler in Germany two years before the United States entered the war.

At some point I can drop a rundown on great graphic novels folks should track down. BUt if you only read one, take a look at Understanding Comics by Scott McCloud a scholarly graphic non-ficiton work describing how and why comics work. A really remarkable breakdown.

[doclinkin]

As for John Kennedy Toole. Depressing and funny -- I've worked with a few Ignatious Reilly's over the years. I wouldn't say I liked the book, so much as I feel for the guy, and would hate to sit next to him on a bus. There are a few folks on a certain sports-related message board that I know, who I suspect to be analogous to that books shambling wreck of a protagonist. Where all the world must surely be idiots for failing to recognize sincere genius...

Puts me in the mind of another favorite book I read around the same time. As far as delightful disasters of human beings. I recommend highly Frederick Exley's A Fan's Notes. A cautionary tale maybe for those who might lose their perspective when it comes to their favorite hometown team. At points hernia-inducingly funny, tinted with tragedy when you recall the book is a 'fictionalized memoir', and yet for all that sorta tranformative and cathartic considering he milked his dysfunction into a book this brilliant.

A Librarian I once knew said she would recommend that if you find a memoir written by an author not yet into their forties you should snatch it up and read it. Chances are if they have enough to fill a book by then they must have lived an interesting life. That advice led me to The Same River Twiceby Chris Offutt. If you can find that one I suggest it as another good read.

[doclinkin]

Stopped reading Stephen King halfway through 'IT' and have never looked back. Book was a piece of festering garbage.

Though as an adolescent I loved the Bachman books, his short fiction (Different Seasons et al), cried at the end of Cujo, loved Firestarter, The Shining. Not so much The Stand since I had read better post-apocalyptic fiction at that point.

[BanndNDC]

Most of the books I've read recently haven;t been that great. So i've been a bit disillusioned (and now that ed wood gave me the opening on infinite jest im gonna go off). but i must say that i thought Cryptonomicon by neil Stephenson to be that rare combination of a good narrative combined with thought provoking ideas. it's not high literature but it's certainly not low fiction. it's a damn good read that keeps you engaged and interested while making you think. exactly what a book should.

[daSwami]

As for John Kennedy Toole. Depressing and funny -- I've worked with a few Ignatious Reilly's over the years. I wouldn't say I liked the book, so much as I feel for the guy, and would hate to sit next to him on a bus. There are a few folks on a certain sports-related message board that I know, who I suspect to be analogous to that books shambling wreck of a protagonist. Where all the world must surely be idiots for failing to recognize sincere genius...

Puts me in the mind of another favorite book I read around the same time. As far as delightful disasters of human beings. I recommend highly Frederick Exley's A Fan's Notes. A cautionary tale maybe for those who might lose their perspective when it comes to their favorite hometown team. At points hernia-inducingly funny, tinted with tragedy when you recall the book is a 'fictionalized memoir', and yet for all that sorta tranformative and cathartic considering he milked his dysfunction into a book this brilliant.

A Librarian I once knew said she would recommend that if you find a memoir written by an author not yet into their forties you should snatch it up and read it. Chances are if they have enough to fill a book by then they must have lived an interesting life. That advice led me to The Same River Twiceby Chris Offutt. If you can find that one I suggest it as another good read.

Dude, A Fan's Notes is my favorite all-time book (followed by Dunces, a close second). I also read pts 2 and 3 of the " Fan's" trilogy, but was very disappointed. The first was by far the best. Reminded me of Bukowski with more adverbs. Yardley's Exley bio is also a good read if you're interested in learning just how autobiographical AFN actually was.

And Ed Wood: check out http://infinitesummer.org/ - it's an Infinite Jest summer reading "book club" of sorts. Pretentious, yes. but maybe interesting to check in on. I have, at varying points in my post-college life, been obsessed with DFW. I've read everything he's ever written, including all of the non-fiction stuff ("Lobster" and "A Supposedly Fun Thing"). I was really bothered when he passed away, as he was one of my personal few must-read writers.

[BanndNDC]

I have a friend who has long complained that she has no confederates in our social circle with whom she can discuss Infinite Jest. After a prolonged period of badgering I finally caved and agreed to go ahead and wrestle with the Foster Wallace monolith but I threw in a caveat that I'd be able to counter with a book of my own for her to tackle. I realized that while Jest is a hard book to get through it's definitely not a bad book so I'm not so much opposed to reading it as I am very lazy and so I tossed A Confederacy of Dunces her way assuming that she'd take a few weeks to even begin digging into it.
...
Infinite Jest is, through a hundred pages, a jumble of several narrations, all of which have been engaging, centered around the story of a young tennis prodigy by the name of Harold Incandenza and his family. It is extremely funny; a passage in which Hal is interviewed by his father masquerading as a "professional conversationalist" is one of the funniest I have ever read, and despite presenting four or five separate story threads so far Jest has yet to miss. The agonizing wait by an addict named Erdedy for such a disgustingly large amount of weed that he intends to make the drug repulsive forever to him (this is not his first attempt at doing just this) has been, apart from the interview, my favorite thus far. The book also somewhat famously includes a passage involving a pair of toothbrushes and a well traveled urban legend which is effective, even more so apparently if you aren't already familiar with the story (my friend was not).

having read both i feel compelled to share my thoughts on the matter. but i must warn that perhaps my current feelings regarding infinite jest are compounded by my thoughts on a recent screening of synedoche, new york. in short, confederacy of dunces is worth a read while infinite jest despite it's almost universal high praise is not. in fact, having read infinite jest i am convinced that all those who have praised the book have not actually read it and that the reason they hold it up as a paragon of literary virtue has more to do with their feelings of literary pretentiousness and desire to look down on those that cannot get through it than any critical analysis of whether or not it is a good work of fiction.

like, synedoche new york (the latest charlie kaufman film) it is an extremely difficult work of art to follow and therefore closed to the vast majority of people. but, if you successfully slog through its dense prose you are left with nothing but a sense of emptiness and an inate questioning of whether or not it's actually good. for many critics the fact that they dont know whether they viscerally liked it but do know that it was difficult to get through the default answer is that it must be the work of a sublime genius.

let me assure you that i am one of those pretentious people that poo poohs mainstream fiction. i would rather be tortured then read twilight. i read william vollman (one of the top wordsmiths of modern lit) for fun. im the type who reads faulkner and goes, you know i didnt really like the story or find the subject matter very interesting but the writing was compelling. in short, im the sort of pretentious wannabe literary high iq (if you forgive this moment of ego indulgance) the book was made for. im a faulkner/conrad person who thinks hemingway was overrated and pedantic.

perhaps i just couldnt get past the fact that the protagonist was a tennis player and that this was supposed to mean something besides pretentious prat. but the book was boring, its structure choatic and in the end not worth the effort of getting through it. its satire was over the top and not all that original. at 1000 plus pages it did not come to its own after a few hundred (such as underworld, anything by pynchon, or invisible man) and compel one to keep reading. in fact a friend of mine (who is always willing and wanting to take on similar literary endeavors) recently asked if i had read it. after responding in the affirmative (but not willing to expose my dissension with the accepted critical opinion) he asked to borrow my copy (i happily obliged, resisting telling him my impressions lest i color his reading). he reluctantly told me a few months later that he had stopped reading the book (and this is a guy who played tennis in high school and who's father was a semi-professional) because he just couldnt really get into it and that this was the first book he had ever borrowed from me that he didnt finish.

here's the rub, it isnt that funny, the characters are unbelievable (even in the context provided), the social criticism is unoriginal (though this might be due to it being too timely at the time of publishing, many of jay mciherney's books are similar in this regard), the story is not compelling and it's over a 1000 pages of dense prose. in short, there is no book i recommend less than infinite jest (providing you are not trying to get into the pants of an overly literate chick) due to its ability to turn those not predisposed completely off of literature. the only reason people read or profess to like infinite jest is to gain street cred, impress or look down on those less literate.


that being said, ive been reading broom of the system in phases and am nowhere near as cynical. my criticism might have a lot to due with the fact that i read it while backpacking through africa (with the genius thought that if took two books (the other was ulysses) id save a lot of space) and the sheer disappointed that the reality of it did not match my expectation due its critical reception.

[daSwami]

having read both i feel compelled to share my thoughts on the matter. but i must warn that perhaps my current feelings regarding infinite jest are compounded by my thoughts on a recent screening of synedoche, new york. in short, confederacy of dunces is worth a read while infinite jest despite it's almost universal high praise is not. in fact, having read infinite jest i am convinced that all those who have praised the book have not actually read it and that the reason they hold it up as a paragon of literary virtue has more to do with their feelings of literary pretentiousness and desire to look down on those that cannot get through it than any critical analysis of whether or not it is a good work of fiction.

like, synedoche new york (the latest charlie kaufman film) it is an extremely difficult work of art to follow and therefore closed to the vast majority of people. but, if you successfully slog through its dense prose you are left with nothing but a sense of emptiness and an inate questioning of whether or not it's actually good. for many critics the fact that they dont know whether they viscerally liked it but do know that it was difficult to get through the default answer is that it must be the work of a sublime genius.

I recently watched synedoche (still don't know how to pronounce it) and initially found it so depressing I almost wanted to suck a bullet through my skull. But, that said, I found myself thinking about a lot for days afterwards (especially the eulogy at the end), so it stuck with me on some level. Kaufman is a crazy ambitious writer who, like Wallace, tends to meander all too willingly into the darkness of his own psyche. They are similar in respect to their mutual desire to eschew standard narrative form in favor of post-modern experimentation. I don't mind this at all.

[BanndNDC]

I recently watched synedoche (still don't know how to pronounce it) and initially found it so depressing I almost wanted to suck a bullet through my skull. But, that said, I found myself thinking about a lot for days afterwards (especially the eulogy at the end), so it stuck with me on some level. Kaufman is a crazy ambitious writer who, like Wallace, tends to meander all too willingly into the darkness of his own psyche. They are similar in respect to their mutual desire to eschew standard narrative form in favor of post-modern experimentation. I don't mind this at all.

i dont mind that tendency, frequently like it and actually tend to prefer it. my gripe with both is that they are overly self-indulgent and in the end poorly executed on the coherent whole (there are many individual sublime turns of phrase and shots in both). like episode one, both infinite jest and synedoche needed somebody to rein in their tendencies. both are interesting and good as experiments but not as a book or film respectively. i really like the work of foster wallace and kaufman, i honestly do, but i dont like either of those two works (which both received high critical praise) and think they both fail at the basic purpose of a book/film. had they both been either poorly received or met with critical indifference might tune might have been different. i went in expecting something grand and left disappointed. when ambitions are set as high as in both cases they often fail. i wasn't knocking either writer so much as the group think of critics that never calls somebody out when they reach a level of renowned universal acclaim.

[daSwami]

I recently watched synedoche (still don't know how to pronounce it) and initially found it so depressing I almost wanted to suck a bullet through my skull. But, that said, I found myself thinking about a lot for days afterwards (especially the eulogy at the end), so it stuck with me on some level. Kaufman is a crazy ambitious writer who, like Wallace, tends to meander all too willingly into the darkness of his own psyche. They are similar in respect to their mutual desire to eschew standard narrative form in favor of post-modern experimentation. I don't mind this at all.

i dont mind that tendency, frequently like it and actually tend to prefer it. my gripe with both is that they are overly self-indulgent and in the end poorly executed on the coherent whole (there are many individual sublime turns of phrase and shots in both). like episode one, both infinite jest and synedoche needed somebody to rein in their tendencies. both are interesting and good as experiments but not as a book or film respectively. i really like the work of foster wallace and kaufman, i honestly do, but i dont like either of those two works (which both received high critical praise) and think they both fail at the basic purpose of a book/film. had they both been either poorly received or met with critical indifference might tune might have been different. i went in expecting something grand and left disappointed. when ambitions are set as high as in both cases they often fail. i wasn't knocking either writer so much as the group think of critics that never calls somebody out when they reach a level of renowned universal acclaim.

I hear ya. But, for me, it's those turns of phrase you describe that keep me glued to the page/screen. It's probably the oldest argument in literary academia (or at least the loudest one in the post-war era), are the great artists the ones who find a way to make compelling art within the accepted "rules" of the form, or are the greats the one who seek to push those boundariesand still create compelling art? Are there some boundaries that need to remain rigid? For instance, in fiction, should writers feel obliged to have some sort of discernible narrative arc? That's the "fundamentalist" view is it not? Writer as storyteller: books should remain true to the oral tradition from which they evolved.

[BigA]

This is a good thread. I don't read much fiction but maybe I'll check some of this stuff out.

[He Hate Me]

Has anyone read 2666 by Bolano, Ham on Rye by Bukowski, or Bird of Time by Effinger? I am considering all these books for my next read.

Also, here's a couple recommendations:
What is the What? - very engaging recount of African refugee struggles and life in America
Journey by Moonlight - one of the best written books I've ever read.
Black Swan Green - awesome lighthearted story, with an incredibly engaging narrative voice. One of those books that makes you want to write.
Tales of Ordinary Madness - Man, you forget that people can write/be like this and make it work.

[Ruzious]

Stopped reading Stephen King halfway through 'IT' and have never looked back. Book was a piece of festering garbage.

Though as an adolescent I loved the Bachman books, his short fiction (Different Seasons et al), cried at the end of Cujo, loved Firestarter, The Shining. Not so much The Stand since I had read better post-apocalyptic fiction at that point.

Wait, does that mean you like it? I have to admit to enjoying all of the old Stephen King books - though I haven't read them in many years. Unless I got it mixed up with one of his others, the best part of "It" was all the nerds got to do the hot chick when they got older - so maybe you wanna keep reading just for that. I think feminists and moralists would have a hard time with ol Steve presenting that as a good thing. But nerds like me were happy with it. King's not a great writer, but he is a great story teller.

For Kingaholics, you might like Bentley Little. He's a very flawed writer who needs to work on his endings, but he writes in that style. All of his books are titled The ______, like "The Store". Read him for the entertainment of good storytelling, but don't expect to be happy with his endings.

[Spence]

Currently reading "Mao: The Untold Story" by Jung Chang and John Halliday.

[daSwami]

Has anyone read 2666 by Bolano, Ham on Rye by Bukowski, or Bird of Time by Effinger? I am considering all these books for my next read.

Also, here's a couple recommendations:
What is the What? - very engaging recount of African refugee struggles and life in America
Journey by Moonlight - one of the best written books I've ever read.
Black Swan Green - awesome lighthearted story, with an incredibly engaging narrative voice. One of those books that makes you want to write.
Tales of Ordinary Madness - Man, you forget that people can write/be like this and make it work.

I read Ham on Rye. In fact, it served as my introduction to Bukowski. Actually, technically "Barfly" was my intro, but I didn't know anything about bukowski when I saw the movie. "Ham" is good read, and is (as I understand it) a true depiction of his childhood. Its all you'd expect: tough father figure, fist fights, mysogyny, orneryness, sort of Holden Caulfield as sociopath.

Too, I love "Tales of Ordinary Madness," and find myself picking it up from time to time for inspiration for my own writing. I just like his sentences, he doesn't waste a word. Nobody says more with fewer words than Bukowski (w/the possible exception of Raymond Carver).

[barelyawake]

(w/the possible exception of Raymond Carver).

I'm a huge Carver fan.

And the thing about King that bugs me is his use of modern references (especially brand names and celebrities). That ruins any work of fiction for me, because I know instinctually that I'm basically reading a trashy magazine. Classic works of fiction (or any art) are supposed to be as timeless as possible. Anytime a work is dated with allusions that will be forgotten in a decade, it taints the piece for me. It's like plopping a Twizzler in a fine wine. And King's works are littered with jive curses and references to Cosmo or Twinkies. Which is a shame because he often has great concepts. It's just the execution that is so... I want to say Wonder Breadish.

[He Hate Me]

I actually like some of King's work. The Dark Tower series was enjoyable for me, although that has a lot to do with my personal adventures/life while I was reading them. He is at his best when the book is not set in our universe. He doesn't reference as much pop culture when it would be totally out of character for his protagonist to know of it, even if the protagonist is not the narrator. Hearts in Atlantis is also a fine read, although if you are unfamiliar with the Dark Tower series the first half of the book is basically a throw away IMO.

By the way, someone go check out Journey by Moonlight... it's one of the few books that I put down and thought, that was just beautiful. It was given to me in Africa by a chick from Norway who told me it was the best book she ever read. I passed it on to a Polish guy in Ukraine. We all wrote our emails in the back cover and when someone finished it they'd email a thought and pass it on to another traveler. By now that same book has passed through five continents. Last I heard it was somewhere in Canada. [/end random tangent]

Also if someone is interested in a fun adventure story that doesn't numb the brain go check out Carter Beats the Devil.

[Ruzious]

(w/the possible exception of Raymond Carver).

I'm a huge Carver fan.

And the thing about King that bugs me is his use of modern references (especially brand names and celebrities). That ruins any work of fiction for me, because I know instinctually that I'm basically reading a trashy magazine. Classic works of fiction (or any art) are supposed to be as timeless as possible. Anytime a work is dated with allusions that will be forgotten in a decade, it taints the piece for me. It's like plopping a Twizzler in a fine wine. And King's works are littered with jive curses and references to Cosmo or Twinkies. Which is a shame because he often has great concepts. It's just the execution that is so... I want to say Wonder Breadish.

He definitely does that - and he does it on purpose, and part of that is that he knows what he is. He's not trying to write a work of literature. He's just a story teller - not trying to put on any airs (sp?). And it does help his typical low rent reader like me feel like he's there... telling me a cool story. He could say coffee shop, or he could say "Dunkin Donuts" and even say what the current advertisement they use is... in Derry, Maine... American runs on Funkin - It adds to the theater. So yeah, King is definitely not for the English majors or the lit elite; but for ordinary shmoes, he's great.

And really, most of the classics are dated - but that's okay. A couple years ago I read "It can't happen here" by Sinclair Lewis. Some of the references in there are laughably out-dated, but that was part of the fun of reading it. Great book, btw - and eerily profetic - comparing the fiction to how W was elected.

[barelyawake]

He's not trying to write a work of literature. So yeah, King is definitely not for the English majors or the lit elite; but for ordinary shmoes, he's great.

LOL Dude, you've identified the problem. I'm a snob about literature (and most art, if the truth be known). I hardly even touch modern fiction because it hasn't had enough time to age into a classic lol. I laughed at what Bannd said about Faulkner -- because I did the exact same thing with "Gatsby" (which only happens to be one of the greatest, American novels). Back when I was a decent poet myself, and used to read the dictionary for fun, I had some cred on the issue. Now, of course, I don't (though still have it when it comes to the musical and visual arts -- because I still have chops in those arenas). So yeah, it's me. I get that. Don't take offense. I'm just expressing my warped, elitist view. Same reason why I hate Eminem's new album BTW. As soon as I heard him mention Kim Cardashian, I was searching for the trash bin.

[doclinkin]

Has anyone read 2666 by Bolano, Ham on Rye by Bukowski, or Bird of Time by Effinger? I am considering all these books for my next read.

Also, here's a couple recommendations:
What is the What? - very engaging recount of African refugee struggles and life in America
Journey by Moonlight - one of the best written books I've ever read.
Black Swan Green - awesome lighthearted story, with an incredibly engaging narrative voice. One of those books that makes you want to write.
Tales of Ordinary Madness - Man, you forget that people can write/be like this and make it work.

I read Ham on Rye. In fact, it served as my introduction to Bukowski. Actually, technically "Barfly" was my intro, but I didn't know anything about bukowski when I saw the movie. "Ham" is good read, and is (as I understand it) a true depiction of his childhood. Its all you'd expect: tough father figure, fist fights, mysogyny, orneryness, sort of Holden Caulfield as sociopath.

Too, I love "Tales of Ordinary Madness," and find myself picking it up from time to time for inspiration for my own writing. I just like his sentences, he doesn't waste a word. Nobody says more with fewer words than Bukowski (w/the possible exception of Raymond Carver).

Chime in to agree on Ordinary Madness, Ham on Rye and Barfly. His poetry is equal to the prose.

For the longest, Bukowski was the only poet I'd ever purchased. Always got my money's worth, never had to guess what he meant. I suppose that gets back into the debate of style vs content again. I myself never really was driven to write much because there was nothing in particular I was driven to say, even if I could occasionally gild a turd.

Bukowski, if he wasn't writing he'd be dead. So, as a writer he was a typist, still he meant what he said more than most. I admire that. Something like the truth.

That said I also occasionally like a baroque and impenetrable tangle of phrases. I'm a huge fan of works that read well aloud, I love books written in vernacular. Every now and again I'll snatch up Finnegan's Wake and roll out a bit of the old Joyce just to say a few phrases aloud, had fun one New Year's in NYC when the James Joyce society had a marathon reading of the work. Tag team, like, pass the baton, drink and read aloud. Without delving too deep into scholarly analysis (which to me is like dissecting a dancer to discover why she is beautiful) the book makes no especial sense perhaps but boy does it really sound like it means something. Especially when read aloud after pint or two.

Other books that are scribbled in vernacular. I liked a couple:

How late it was, how late by James Kelman. Written in the thick dialect of Glasgow. Man drinks himself blind then staggers around for the entire books trying to adjust. Pretyy bleak, but the cadences stick in your head.

Spider Boys by Ming Cher, written in a dialect my cambodian foster son calls "FOB" for 'fresh off the boat'. This is the story of young juvenile delinquent street kids in Singapore and what they'd do for fun. Catch and train spiders and make them fight each other, mostly, but also, rob folks, and discover nookie with girls and the like.

Other notable works best read aloud, or with a voice that sounds in your head. Well Anthony Burgess' A clockwork orange of course. And then there's that Bill Shakespeare cat from old england way.