|
Johnny
Werd: Criticism
Write
an online review and share your thoughts with other customers!
Review of Contemporary Fiction (Spring 2004)
Reviewer: Joseph Dewey
Every generation reinvents Holden Caulfield, the misfit resisting
the onset of complacency and banality, the lost cause locked on pause,
sahdowed too early by the absurdity of inevitable mortality. Johnny
Werd, unable to commit to his education, haunted by a sister’s
suicide, intrigued by the energy of setting things aflame, ia a post-Gen-X
Holden, the generation nurtured by television and sugared cereal, their
myths drawn from Star Wars and their humor from the Simpsons, their
childhood defined by Sesame Street, their adolescence by the cool lure
of recreational narcotics—each channeled by Johnny’s “voice,” itself
an unsettling ventriloquism that splits point of view into points of
views. Although this slender experiment riotously spoofs traditional
narrative, it is nontheless unsettling. Holden at his loneliest had
the refuge of his own narrative, the comfort of an unfolding plot,
the reassuring stability of his nnarrating voice, the block of chapters
and the rhythm of sentences, and always a sympathetic reader. Not so
here. Johnny Werd is left without a real-world environment—he
thrives within the fuselage-world of his own language constructions
in a “narrative” itself dismissive of storytelling. And,
in the end, he is left lonelier than Holden ever could be: the isolate
comforted by the kinetic tapping of his own keyboard. We eavesdrop,
we read—although our invitation is presumptive, our presence
intrusive. This is finally an exorcise/exercize of words, a desperate/exuberant,
private act of revisiting form. Plot collapses into paragraph premises,
characters are word-chords, sentences explode into Joycean sonic events,
sinuous patterns of exotic diction and unrestricted syntax. But there
lurks a strained uneasiness over the performance, a terror over a depthless
world that has justified such audacious refuge. A narrative so given
to the pyrotechnics of language closes with a most unsettling concession: “Give
me some text with silences in it.”
The essence of rock and roll, June 24, 2005
Reviewer: Mark Twain
This book is pure rock and roll--should the werds be connected
by an ampersand? Is it okay not to capitalize? I don't know much
about music, but the publisher
of this crazed psychological journey, whose equally intense radio show I
once listened to, and which can be found at www.spinelessbooks.com
along with many
other fine examples of trenchant fun (that is, of the cutting-edge literary
variety), promised me a copy (at a discount because I'm spiritually
bankrupt) and I must
say, Q rocks! Let me mix some, I mean metaphors, and say that the book is
not only an admirable sampler, but a screaming meta-ride through an
existential
rollercoaster park built on a palimpsest of despair. The coaster
pretty much never rides on
track and does not just coast, but supplied with the inexhaustible intertia
of the Q fire: does the freefall ride in reverse, quaffs all the
water from the
flume, rips holes through the walls of the funhouse, sneaks in and out of
the park for trips to the local liquor store, and even stands in line
for its own
attraction. For those of us who are prompted by little else, it dares you
to climb on board, despite the fact that the tallness yardstick is
sure to be
over your head.
-WERD- a hell of a book!, February 26, 2003 20:48:03
+0000
Reviewer: Iain Matheson
Werd
infinitely incarnatable( and there: ed - ha)
has worlds( passim) - has time( e.g. p. 33 pp.89-90) - as ... IMPLICATIONS
of various ... determinations-
SHIFT(s/ed ") which can have no( diegetic) limits a priori set
on them
being( diegetically/sic) suprasituational-
Werd
then( diegetically)
the pre( post: supra)determination
i.e.
the supremely germinal/issueless
that is:
the master which is not itself
= aprocess the WORD as we may wish to say-
that brilliant a/pan/a dimensional conscience call-
Werd
signifier( broken link: dislocation-freed) asignifies i.e. graphicises-
nothing so simple as graphicises-
THIS
adynamic adamicyn-
being
critically mnemonic
wr/r ite up to
-
-
more
Werds
aporiae-
Dionysiac syntax nonidentical master likewise( o) dissolutive of limitation
-
this = the future of graphic novels.
perfect unlocatables.
corridorless.
the aleatory aappears in sign [ o-] its opposite
the aleatory.
immeasurably fruitful-
brilliant brilliant-
Tortured cogitations of adolescent gazing over abyss of adulthood, May
21, 2003
Reviewer: A thoughtful reader
Synopsis purees English into smoothies of beauty. Tastes funny though.
The essence of rock and roll, June 24, 2005
Reviewer: Mark Twain, Amazon.com
This book is pure rock and roll--should the werds be connected by
an ampersand? Is it okay not to capitalize? I don't know much about
music, but the publisher
of this crazed psychological journey, whose equally intense radio show I once
listened to, and which can be found at www.spinelessbooks.com along with many
other fine examples of trenchant fun (that is, of the cutting-edge literary
variety), promised me a copy (at a discount because I'm spiritually
bankrupt) and I must
say, Q rocks! Let me mix some, I mean metaphors, and say that the book is not
only an admirable sampler, but a screaming meta-ride through an existential
rollercoaster park built on a palimpsest of despair. The coaster pretty
much never rides on
track and does not just coast, but supplied with the inexhaustible intertia
of the Q fire: does the freefall ride in reverse, quaffs all the water
from the
flume, rips holes through the walls of the funhouse, sneaks in and out of the
park for trips to the local liquor store, and even stands in line for its own
attraction. For those of us who are prompted by little else, it dares you to
climb on board, despite the fact that the tallness yardstick is sure to be
over your head.
Was this review helpful to you? (Report
this)
Underrated, October 10, 2002
Reviewer: Arthur Danto
Johnny Werd, the Fire Continues is the most outrageous, most intense
and in a certain sense the most significant young prose in America,
indelibly sad, unforgettably beautiful, witheringly funny, grotesquely
comprehensive, grimly smart, and so wrenching as to be moving, infinitely
readable, a grand monstrous powerful thing, shadowy yet redemptive,
unreflectively entangled in crimes of demarcation, original and audacious,
a vast comic epic and a study of the postmodern condition, hilarious,
appalling, moving, subtle, wise, witty, gritty, startling, memorable,
multilayered, precisionist, enigmatic, in this book lifelong themes
of love and anger, family politics, sexuality, and the body of the city
can be seen gathering in power and clarity. In its complexity, its scrutinizing
and utterly unsentimental humanity, and its grasp of the subtle relationships
between domestic drama and global events, it develops a freedom and
psychic energy born triumphantly of well-wrought pain and determination,
all in a new architecture, a wholly new voice, and a new chemistry of
words and images. Vital, heartfelt, and even profound. It is to laugh.
Not enough sex, November 28, 2000
Reviewer: A reader from Las Vegas
This is kind of like a cult novel that doesn't
have a following.
Yet.
Worse than the movie, November 13, 2000
Reviewer: A reader
I'll admit that I'd never herd of Werd before
the movie, but I'm incredibly glad I found out it was a book first.
This is an amazing piece of fiction. I agree with one of the previous
reviewers in saying that I wish I had read the book before seeing the
movie, but what the hell, they're both awesome. If you don't know anything
about the story, there's this guy (called, mostly, Johnny Werd) who
blows up the world in junior high then goes on to be a temp worker.
It's a really quick read, but it's awesome. The movie is great too,
but if you haven't seen it yet, read the book first. The movie follows
the book pretty closely, although the endings are different.
*** Why no voting buttons? We don't let customers vote on
their own reviews, so the voting buttons appear only when you look at reviews
submitted by others.***
J. Werd: The X-Generation's Very Own Holden
Caulfield?, November 2, 2000
Reviewer: Chandra Vega
Q.Synopsis dazzles us with wordplay the like
of which we haven't enjoyed since Finnegan's Wake in a novel (unlike
FW) as hilarious as it is experimental. I heard that Q.once read it
to a writing workshop whose members told him in one voice: You shouldn't
write like that. Thank God, he has. If we dare to refer to J. Werd as
the Holden Caulfield of the X-Generation, it is because under the pyrotechnical
display of Werd words, a contemporary tragedy is played out as J. Werd
bids an emphatic good-bye to childhood by using his chemistry set to
ignite toys,room,house,neighborhood, the earth,and verily even the waters
of the earth,only to find nothing to replace them except for a lightbulb
sealed in the cellar which burns unseen, shedding light on absolutely
nothing and no one. The fire burns on; our best and brightest cannot
find any meaning in an MBA-dominated world beyond absurdity and the
destruction of absurdity with more absurdity. Depressing it would be,
except that it is an absolutely wonderful read. Q. Synopsis is not only
a philosopher but a brilliant humorist. We look forward to a sequel
in which J. Werd gets his own MBA and takes over the universe, if it
hasn't totally burned up.
A groove that satisfies, August 15, 2000
Reviewer: Joseph M. Futrelle
Synopsis is, ironically enough, virtually impossible
to synopsize. As experimental as he wants to be, he lays down some gone
changes in this psycho-epic coming-of-age comedy of forms. Scathing,
riotously funny, lyrically ornate, dangling from a narrative thread,
this novella is as much a head-scratcher as it is a page-turner. Lest
that deter you, casual surfer, let me qualify that Synopsis was hypertext
before hypertext was cool, and that the excesses of intertextuality
and internal cross-reference in this frantic early writing of his (dating
back some ten years) should delight every netizen's inner channel-flipper.
I write this review based on earlier, pre-publication editions, which
seemed to change even while the author was printing them out, but I
don't have a shred of doubt that this handsome edition will be ideal
for Xmas gift-giving.
Esemplastic!, February 20, 2002
Reviewer: Q. Synopsis
Mr.Synopsis may be introspective, but he is no critic: unspecific and
antianalytical. His review gushes with overweight and flatulent praise
for that incomprehensibly silly novella he hails as "the pinnacle of
humankind's ascension through the clouds that obscure heaven into immortal
splendor: this story is why Darwin invented evolution." Is this gaseous
exaltation exhalation deflated by the obvious fact that Mr. "Q" Synopsis
is actually reviewing HIS OWN BOOK? Is it possible that this book squarely
overlaps the reviewer's tastes in books because HE WROTE IT?! It is
important to consider important considerations like these when one is
reviewing any review.
Despite the fact, however, that the review is a clumsy and insincere
attempt for Mr.Synopsis to carve a pedestal for himself where he can
artfully pose and bask in his own admiration and appreciation, the writing
is just plain lousy. This guy needs to read some Hemingway, drink less
coffee or something. When Mr.Synopsis says that Mr.Synopsis "creates
a metaphorical metaform: a form he uses to refer to forms while, in
the process, discarding the form form usually takes. The result is an
unformed form that deforms the various forms it takes on in a malformity
of formality..."... What the hell is he talking about? Is he insane
or uninformed? He is hoping that in my attempts to follow the questionable
transitions of his logic I will get lost, and, in the process, get lost.
What an arrogant asshole!
Anyway, his review is doodling compared to this one. A glance will
inform: this is a review worthy of review. This is masterful criticism.
Perhaps reviewer Q.Synopsis would care to take a crack at reviewing
this review of his review, in a reflexocursive cycle doomed to frustrate
his only reader: me. And not for long. I can find better things to read.
Hell, I can write better things to read. I can't believe I have the
same name as this guy. What an embarrassing coincidence.
Werd
|