A Classic Tale of True Love and High Adventure!

Talk about anything under the sun or stars - but keep it civil. This is where we really get to know each other. Everyone is welcome, and invited!
User avatar
Young Val
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3166
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:00 pm
Title: Papermaster
First Joined: 12 Sep 2000
Location: from New York City to St. Paul, MN (but I'm a Boston girl at heart).
Contact:

A Classic Tale of True Love and High Adventure!

Postby Young Val » Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:51 pm

My dear pwebbers! after much careful deliberation, Brent and I have finally selected the perfect book with which to reopen Pweb's beloved Book Club.
Fencing. Fighting. Torture. Poison. True love. Hate. Revenge. Giants. Hunters. Bad men. Good men. Beautifulest ladies. Snakes. Spiders. Beasts of all natures and descriptions. Pain. Death. Brave men. Coward men. Strongest men. Chases. Escapes. Lies. Truths. Passion. Miracles.

That's right.

Our first book will be none other than William Goldman's The Princess Bride.


This book should be easily found in your local libraries or book stores. Many of you have seen the movie, but never read the book it was based on. Please believe me when I tell you that reading the book is definitely worth it.



The official discussion will open on Monday, October 9th. We'll be discussing the first four chapters.




Now go out there and get your copy!
you snooze, you lose
well I have snozzed and lost
I'm pushing through
I'll disregard the cost
I hear the bells
so fascinating and
I'll slug it out
I'm sick of waiting
and I can
hear the bells are
ringing joyful and triumphant

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Sun Oct 08, 2006 2:15 pm

my copies not at my apartment in LA it's back at my parents house in Missouri. :(
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

Hegemon
Former Speaker
Former Speaker
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:54 pm

Postby Hegemon » Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:52 pm

Can I pretend to have read it based on the little bit I can remember from having seen the movie years ago?

User avatar
Oliver Dale
Former Speaker
Former Speaker
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:24 pm
Title: Trapped in the Trunk!

Postby Oliver Dale » Sun Oct 08, 2006 4:24 pm

I'm in, but I won't actually get the book until tomorrow when discussion starts -- so forgive me if I'm a bit tardy.

User avatar
Young Val
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3166
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:00 pm
Title: Papermaster
First Joined: 12 Sep 2000
Location: from New York City to St. Paul, MN (but I'm a Boston girl at heart).
Contact:

Postby Young Val » Sun Oct 08, 2006 4:30 pm

Can I pretend to have read it based on the little bit I can remember from having seen the movie years ago?
No, I believe that would be decidedly against the point of the entire club. Locke, however, may feel free to join in with anything he remembers from having read the book. And book/movie comparisons are certainly welcome (and will be interesting, as William Goldman penned both the book and the screenplay). Just so long as they are exactly that: posts comparing the book to the movie.


Brent and I thought we'd try to kick off each discussion segment with a few questions or ideas to think about. You need not answer these questions or address these ideas in your contributions if you do not wish to, however, sometimes they help to kickstart a discussion for those who want to participate, but aren't quite sure how to begin.

Here are some for the first segment of The Princess Bride:


The extensive opening of The Princess Bride deals almost entirely with Goldman's self-inserted character and his fictional family and up-bringing. Does this make "Billy" an unreliable narrator? Why or why not?


What differences (if any) do you notice between Goldman's voice, and that of S. Morgenstern? How do these differences (or lack of them) affect the reader?


Who do you believe is the intended Hero(ine) of the story? Why?



Official discussion opens tomorrow. I sincerely hope people will jump in!
you snooze, you lose
well I have snozzed and lost
I'm pushing through
I'll disregard the cost
I hear the bells
so fascinating and
I'll slug it out
I'm sick of waiting
and I can
hear the bells are
ringing joyful and triumphant

User avatar
Young Val
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3166
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:00 pm
Title: Papermaster
First Joined: 12 Sep 2000
Location: from New York City to St. Paul, MN (but I'm a Boston girl at heart).
Contact:

Postby Young Val » Mon Oct 09, 2006 2:06 pm

I'll kick things off, then, shall I?

One of the reasons Brent and I decided to start off "light" with The Princess Bride as opposed to something more "challenging" has a lot to do with the mass appeal factor. But a lot of people (talking about specific, faceless masses here, not forum members) think that if something is "fluff" it can't be intelligently dissected and discussed. I firmly disagree.


I've read The Princess Bride many times prior to this, and have always found it a delightful read. I've never bothered to look at it as anything more than an entertaining story. However, when reading it again with the specific intent to circumvent my standard opinions of it, I found a lot to be excited about.


I will be the first to publically embarass myself and admit that for years, I interpreted the text literally. and I mean LITERALLY. As in, I believed that it truly was an abridged version of the "classic" novel written by S. Morgenstern. There is, of course, no such person. I happened upon this discovery only within the last year, and only when discussing the book with a friend. I blame this on The Princess Bride being one of my "mind-off" books. For someone who spent much of her education and portions of her career reading books analytically, it was nice every now and then to read a book with your brain shut off, and simply enjoy the story for itself. Or, you know, it could be that I'm a lot less intelligent than I claim to be!


The first 29 pages of the book appear to have very little to do with the story at all. Goldman talks about his childhood dislike of reading and how that all changed with his illness. He talks about his family, his obese, dim-witted son and his cold, clinical wife. The infamous hunt for a copy of the book for his son, and then the horrible disappointment when his son doesn't love the book the way he does. Finally, Goldman reads the book himself and discovers why: the original version sucks! In hommage to his father, Goldman decides to revamp the whole thing, and publish a "good parts" version. And after pulling some strings, he manages to do it.

Only then, 29 pages later, does the "story" begin.

Why would any author spend the first 29 pages of his book talking about things other than the story? My answer? He wouldn't. And he doesn't.

This opening is not billed as an introduction. The book simply starts. This opening IS the story, as much as what happens to Buttercup and Wesley and all the rest. There are two stories in this book; they interweave, and often parallell.


I've got an awful lot more to say, but I'm going to take a quick break and give my fingers a rest.
you snooze, you lose
well I have snozzed and lost
I'm pushing through
I'll disregard the cost
I hear the bells
so fascinating and
I'll slug it out
I'm sick of waiting
and I can
hear the bells are
ringing joyful and triumphant

User avatar
Young Val
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3166
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:00 pm
Title: Papermaster
First Joined: 12 Sep 2000
Location: from New York City to St. Paul, MN (but I'm a Boston girl at heart).
Contact:

Postby Young Val » Mon Oct 09, 2006 3:34 pm

I was going to edit my previous post to add all this in, but since I'm moving on to other topics, I figured I would just double-post, faux-pas be damned. (Also, I'm reading and quoting from a paperback version of the book in which I cannot find the edition or publishing date to save my life. It's published by Del Rey, a sub-house of Random House. That's the best I can give you at the moment. Sorry if our page numbers don't match up).

The following is quoted from just about every list of discussion questions about The Princess Bride to be found on the internet.
Goldman, in his parenthetical asides to readers, refers to Morgenstern as a satirist and the “unabridged version” of The Princess Bride as a satire. Webster’s Dictionary defines satire as “a usually topical literary composition holding up human or individual vices, folly, abuses, or shortcomings to censure by means of ridicule, derision, burlesque, irony, or other method sometimes with an intent to bring about improvement.” Going by this definition, is the “good parts” version of The Princess Bride a satire?
I think this book is absolutely a satire, and one of its many purposes is to poke fun of fairytales as we understand them today.

There are two glaring and wonderful examples of this in chapter "One: The Bride."

Buttercup is described (like all fabled heroines) as "the most beautiful in a hundred years" (pg 56). But in the beginning she is "nowhere near that high, being barely in the top twenty, and that primarily on potential, certainly not on any particular care she took of herself" (pg 35).

Buttercup must be the most beautiful woman in the world in order to comply with fairytale standards, but there are many who come before her, even during her lifetime, who have claim to that title. And presumably there will be many after her as well. It sets up an important idea that will be carried throughout the book; a sense of impermanence. Status and titles and emotions are fleeting.

Again in this vein comes the ranking of the kiss (pg 53). The idea that within this world, things such as beauty and kisses (and later strength, wit, all the great heroic traits) are ranked, kept track of. It draws attention to the idea that in our fairytales, Our heroes and heroines are always the best of the best. This story goes so far as to offer statistics as proof.


Personally, I adore the "Morgenstern asides," that is, those supposedly written within the text by Morgenstern himself. I also enjoy the "Goldman asides," but the Morgenstern ones such as, "this was after taste too, but only just," (pg 38 ) and "This was after stew, but so is everything. When the first man clambered from the slime and made his first home on land, what he had for supper that first night was stew," (pg 40) and how self-referential they get as in the one on page 41, "This was after taxes. But everything is after taxes. Taxes were here even before stew."
you snooze, you lose
well I have snozzed and lost
I'm pushing through
I'll disregard the cost
I hear the bells
so fascinating and
I'll slug it out
I'm sick of waiting
and I can
hear the bells are
ringing joyful and triumphant

Luxfiliae
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:14 pm

Postby Luxfiliae » Mon Oct 09, 2006 3:55 pm

I love this book and I was so excited to see it was the featured book.
Personaly though, when I read it I start with The Bride chapter and when I loan it to friends to read I tell them to skip to The Bride chapter. I find that first chapter to be boring and unfunny.

User avatar
Young Val
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3166
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:00 pm
Title: Papermaster
First Joined: 12 Sep 2000
Location: from New York City to St. Paul, MN (but I'm a Boston girl at heart).
Contact:

Postby Young Val » Mon Oct 09, 2006 4:10 pm

I love this book and I was so excited to see it was the featured book.
Personaly though, when I read it I start with The Bride chapter and when I loan it to friends to read I tell them to skip to The Bride chapter. I find that first chapter to be boring and unfunny.

Strange, I think the opening is vital to getting the most out of the story. The characters mentioned in the beginning continue to crop up in asides for the remainder of the book, and a lot of the themes of the book are set up (to either be supported or knocked-down) for the rest of the story.

I also have to say that I find the opening hilarious. Particularly the bit about how they discovered Billy had pneumonia, the Sandy Sterling bits, and ALL the parts with Helen and Jason. Wickedly funny.
you snooze, you lose
well I have snozzed and lost
I'm pushing through
I'll disregard the cost
I hear the bells
so fascinating and
I'll slug it out
I'm sick of waiting
and I can
hear the bells are
ringing joyful and triumphant

User avatar
Virlomi
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 564
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:57 pm
Title: has been eaten by a bear
Location: New York City

Postby Virlomi » Tue Oct 10, 2006 6:08 pm

Sorry I'm late. I'm a HUGE fan of this selection! Question though... if I just read this two months ago, do I need to reread it in order to throw in my two cents?

User avatar
Oliver Dale
Former Speaker
Former Speaker
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:24 pm
Title: Trapped in the Trunk!

Postby Oliver Dale » Wed Oct 11, 2006 1:47 am

I'm thrilled about this selection. Not because the book is a favorite of mine, but because it has been in my "read someday" pile forever and the situation wasn't looking to improve any time soon. That's why when it opened with [the character of] Goldman saying, "this is my favorite book in all the world, though I have never read it" it really resonated with me. I love the story already; I was almost afraid that the prose wouldn't hold up. I haven't been disappointed thus far.

One thing I want to squash before I move on is the idea of this being a 'lesser' book because it isn't 'challenging.' This is just wankery. Accessibility has nothing to do with intrinsic value (not that anyone here was implying otherwise). This is exactly the kind of book I hope we continue to read: good/fun/entertaining books that I haven't (yes, I'm personalizing a bit, but I'm selfish like that) read yet, but should have.

Anyway.

I should also, at this point, insert the disclaimer that I'm a writer. I say this as a confession, in as far as I am virtually incapable of retrospectively thinking about prose from any other viewpoint. I interpret things through those particular sunglasses and so many of my comments will be founded thusly. And, considering that, I am surprised how well this book is so far working. It isn't a 'formula' I would ever think would work so well.

I fall with Young Val in that I liked the first chapter, although I wonder whether or not I would have if I had been a younger reader. Actually, the whole thing confused me a bit. I'm not afraid to admit it. All this referencing an "abridged" version made me paranoid that I grabbed the wrong copy from the library. Knowing what I know about it now makes me appreciate it even more. It's a very clever frame story for an otherwise silly fairytale that, I think, would fall apart without it. No one wants to read such a goofy story unless you do it from the safe vantage point of not taking it seriously, as Goldman allows us to do with his constant commentary and claims that the original is so boring, and he's just giving us the good stuff. I love that. But, again, it isn't something I would have ever guessed would be an effective storytelling device.

Moreover, I didn't particularly care for the 'character' of Goldman in that first chapter, just as I didn't particularly like the character of Buttercup in "The Bride." He is deceitful and she is whiny. But then, that too goes with the setup of the story. We don't have to like him because it isn't really him. And we don't have to trust him because we know from the get go (unless you were confused a bit at first like I was) that he's lying to us. Morgenstern isn't real. This is the actual book. The emperor isn't wearing any clothes. And we don't have to like Buttercup because she isn't the main character. Come to think of it, Westley isn't shaping up to be the main character either. The main character seems to be Goldman. It is him we find delight in. He is the source of our marvel and our chuckling. Normally such an apparent narrator as author is seen as narcisistic, but then, the narrator really isn't the author since the author is claiming to be an editor of a text he actually wrote. The whole thing gets convoluted quickly, but I hope you see my point.

Needless to say, I'm enjoying the story thus far.

To respond to comments of satire, I suppose I have to say that yes, it does feel satirical. But then, what change is Goldman (the real Goldman, not Goldman-as-narrator) hoping to effect? Or is his goal simply to show that fairytales aren't real? I'm fairly certain everyone is aware of that fact. And he seems to hold too much affection for this particular fairytale to be criticizing it. Can it still be satire?

As an aside, I've already laughed out loud twice. It has been YEARS since that has happened. (One was from the "taxes came before stew" line.)

User avatar
Oliver Dale
Former Speaker
Former Speaker
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:24 pm
Title: Trapped in the Trunk!

Postby Oliver Dale » Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:20 pm

And now I have scared everyone away.

P.s. what is the timeframe on the next chunk?

User avatar
Young Val
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3166
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:00 pm
Title: Papermaster
First Joined: 12 Sep 2000
Location: from New York City to St. Paul, MN (but I'm a Boston girl at heart).
Contact:

Postby Young Val » Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:24 pm

you haven't scared anyone off, Ollie, the discussion is thus far mostly me and you anyway. and i've had a hectic few days.

next week's segment is Chapter Five: The announcement. it's a LONG chapter.

the following week we'll wrap up the book.


more of my thoughts later on. tonight, if i'm lucky!
you snooze, you lose
well I have snozzed and lost
I'm pushing through
I'll disregard the cost
I hear the bells
so fascinating and
I'll slug it out
I'm sick of waiting
and I can
hear the bells are
ringing joyful and triumphant

ratesjul
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:12 am
Location: NZ

Postby ratesjul » Fri Oct 13, 2006 1:36 pm

I read this a year or three ago, and I'm annoyed I didn't check this thread before going to the library last weekend! GAH! (I'll see if I can find it today).

A lot of what I remember about the first part is when he's scouring the bookstores to find a copy of this book that he had remembered adoring (when it was read to him??) to give to his son ... and when he finds it he finds out that it wasn't as good because all the annoying parts were skipped. I loved the idea of such dedication - to go out and find a book, and when it's not what you remembered, to WRITE the book that you remembered, so you wouldn't disappoint yourself or your family.
Member since: Sept 11 2002, 07:31

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Postby Rei » Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:42 pm

My apologies for weighing in so late. I must confess, between my copy being posted from home late and school work I have not gotten very far in re-reading it.

That said, I admit that I was caught hook, line, and sinker with abridging joke. However, I'm noticing, as I read, that I read it a bit differently knowing that the whole story is by Goldman than when I thought it was an abridgement of a somewhat absurd book. (Who in their right mind writes 56 pages of packing and unpacking?)

One of my favourite running jokes is the abridgement. I find it especially funny after hearing about Les Mis, which is still on my soon-to-read list and the 50 page aside on the tactics at the Battle of Waterloo. I am convinced that the plummetted price of book production caused people to stop doing their own editing.

From what I can tell of the hero or heroine of this story, I'm apt to agree with Ollie. I think the hero, if he can be called as such, is the author, thus far. If only because of his constant interruptions. He is like a commentator taking a text and telling his readers how it is really all about him and not at all to do with what you might think if you read the book without his invaluable commentary. This also contributes to the satire being woven here.

...And at this point, between a Syntax mid-term (which is making me question the structure of everything I write -- O, my poor damaged mind!) and my other homework, my thoughts are waning, so I shall return when I have gathered myself again.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

Eaquae Legit
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 5185
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:30 pm
Title: Age quod agis
First Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Location: ^ Geez, read the sign.

Postby Eaquae Legit » Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:34 am

I have to agree. The "hero" is the narrator. Buttercup and Westley are icons, not real people. They're... archetypes. We're not meant to cheer for them, not like we cheer for "Goldman."

The first time I read The Princess Bride, I was in elementary school, and I had a shakier grasp of world greography. It didn't occur to me that there was no such kingdom, and that the "asides" couldn't possibly be real. (I did not, for the record, think that the story was real, just the geography, like setting a story in England or Italy.)

I've been doing some reading of Foucault and Derrida (and a few others) recently for one of my own classes, and I think it would be absolutely fascinating to pretend that the "full text" version did exist, and look at it through those lenses. I want to elaborate on what I'm talking about, but it's kind of difficult since we're only four chapters in. I'll do more thinking and when we get further, I'll try to expand.

(In case anyone's curious: Derrida and Post-Structuralism, Althusser and Ideological State Apparatuses, Foucault and The History of Sexuality.)
"Only for today, I will devote 10 minutes of my time to some good reading, remembering that just as food is necessary to the life of the body, so good reading is necessary to the life of the soul." -- Pope John XXIII

ratesjul
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:12 am
Location: NZ

Postby ratesjul » Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:23 am

I think I agree, the hero is the narrator.

I just had a sudden thought with regards to the 'original' manuscript ... someone who writes 56 (or however many) pages about packing and unpacking was either doing a VERY early version of "NaNoWriMo" or it was a self-published - vanitypublished - book.
Member since: Sept 11 2002, 07:31

salmuera
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 5:13 pm
Location: B.C.

Postby salmuera » Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:11 am

Just out of curiosity, what do people think of all the differences from the book to the movie?
"Music is the silence between the notes" Claud Debussy

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Postby Rei » Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:54 pm

I think one of my favourite differences that the book has is the Zoo of Death and Humperdink's emphasis upon hunting. I love how elaborate it is and how it demonstrates his character. I mean, he is so incredibly awful! Yet he is so calculated that you almost admire him in his cruelty. And that bottom level just reminds me of The Most Dangerous Game, by Richard Connell.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm


Return to “Milagre Town Square”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 49 guests