I got lucky and managed to find a copy of House Of Leaves from one of the free library pantries placed around my city (along with a copy of Catch 22 but I digress). I have no experience with Ergodic literature. I have no idea about book about despite hearing about it quite a lot, which I think good since I get to experience for the first time. I am worried though that I may not "interpret" it well the first way around. I have some experience with narratology so hopefully that can help me with it? Anyway, here I currently think having read up to Chapter 3, so far. Also please try to not spoil it for me if I get something wrong. This is kind of I think of it so far...>Zampano is some guy, now dead guy, who's writing about all of story with a bunch footnotes varying credibility and legitimacy.>Truant is some guy who found these papers. Having involvement with footnotes in the work occasionally weaving anecdotes about himself throughout.>"The Editors" have some involvement with the work. Having edited footnotes along with "discussing the publication" of the work.>Ed some rando so far? Appearing in the fiction notice at the front and twice up to Chapter 3.>a TON of citations, some fake, some real. Not sure how it feds into the story so far. >Main narration of the story seems to be some kind of like report? Like its a news article or something? I can not pick up on a specific reflector (narratological concept) effecting the perception of the narrator's dialogue but seems to be one. With the subjective descriptor slut being used to describe Navidson wife, which out place with the rest of the writing.So yeah, that is current what I see it as. I'm hooked by it and will keep reading. Do I continue to keep going in blind or will better serve me to pick up specific tips for interpretation?
>>25390201Blind. Half the fun is what you come out with after feeling around the blanks. Reread it and look for interpretive tips another time.
>>25390201my general recommendation is that there will be some points where the book suggests you go check out the appendix for stuff, and I highly recommend you do that then rather than just leaving all of it for after the book (though you can do that too).Keep in mind Zampano was blind and he's giving a review of a film about a photographer.
