Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

I love this review. It's hilarious. Yet it totally destroys something I loved. I was totally sucked in by this book, because I wanted to believe it was some kind of indie fairy tale. I guess I'm no more than the fairy tales I'm gullible enough to believe in.

Wait didn't Ginsberg only buy her a sandwich thinking she was a boy? Now that's a good detail

This made me laugh. Thank you. The book was quite boring although to be honest, I gave up half way through.

Bummer this was your interpretation! She said herself she raised herself on old timey literature, so her phasing can be odd and outdated. So what? It's better than writing like Stephenie Meyer.

She seems like such a sweet, strange little creature. For me, somehow pretentiousness plays zero part. She's just an artsy weirdo without a mean bone in her body, and she weaves such a beautiful little story about her first true love.

I'm usually such a jaded jackass, but I loved it.

Amen.

Lol Elisabeth, that was hilarious. You should rewrite long books, so that people can read all the classics without losing too much precious time. To show you my appreciation for your summary I will summarise Harry Potter (all 7 books) for you: Harry Potter is a wizard. His parents were killed by an evil guy named Voldemort. Voldemort then goes after Potter. Potter kills Voldemort. The end.

Just read a hundred pages....I'm a long-time fan...first saw her at Max's Kansas City...just she reading a poem about Brian Jones accompanied by Lenny Kaye on Fender…think it was a double bill with Phil Ochs...and she opened. Sad to say, thus far, this is reading like another rewrite of a moment in our cultural history that many of us still hold dear and still uphold. The magnitude of self-aggrandizing artificiality is nearly unbearable. For example, she's roaming around Manhattan and Brooklyn starving to death? And while starving thinks "the skyscrapers...they were monuments to the arrogant yet philanthropic spirit of America" and "New York light, the light of the abstract expressionists. I thought Frank (O'Hara) would have loved the color of the fading day. Had he lived he might have written an elegy for John Coltrane like he did for Billie Holiday.� Who thinks this way while starving and homeless? Maslow’s pyramid, anyone? For anyone seeking a credible and authentic description of the zeitgeist of 1967 New York...you'd best read elsewhere. 1967? According to Smith's take "it was the summer John Coltrane died." Not the summer of "All You Need is Love." Exactly what epoch does she think her readers/fans are from? Wow.

And for all the references to Rimbaud...easily over thirty five...not. one. quote. My particular favorite episode was at Morrison's grave, when she wows us with her love of the french language: Bon. Jour. Madame. Je. ne. sais. pas. etc. etc. Really, pomposity enough to release tears.

Summary's spot on but missing the beatnik dungarees.

By Ian: I love this review. It's hilarious. Yet it totally destroys something I loved. I was totally sucked in by this book, because I wanted to believe it was some kind of indie fairy tale. I guess I'm no more than the fairy tales I'm gullible enough to believe in. "

I argued once with a friend over the lyric for the Stones' Ruby Tuesday....I'd thought it was "catch your dreams before they slip away," my friend argued it was "cash your dreams before they slip away." He was right. Alas.

Haven't read the book yet. Loved this review, though. Feel like I'll agree with it, sadly. Love Rimbaud and Baudelaire but hate Patti's poetry (not to be confused with her great lyrics, especially "Birdland").

'For' the night belongs to lovers!

Thanks for the hilarious review! Think I'll give this one a miss.

Omg so so funny and youre so right. Started off so well then its like she forget people were actually reading it. It became a bit self indulgent. All these names of people she kept meeting I began to lose track. It just became a bit long rambley and uneventful. She kept going over and her and analyising her relationship with Robert. Really want it that interesting to others? No it wasnt.

Ha!

I found your review of the book funny and witty, especially the last bit. I did not, however, face the problems you stated with her prose. It might also have seemed pretentious to me if someone were to talk like that but I find it tolerable, if not necessary, in pieces of writing.

Yes! "Partook of for the first time" instead of "tried." I listened to the audio version (which she read) and was semi-shocked at her pronunciation of words, too. Super distracting...though logging the weird regionalisms/ speech impediments was how I got through the boredom I partook of (felt) for (because of) her content and style.

While I agree with your review, I don’t think it deserves one star. If you read the very end, she makes it clear that the book was written to fulfill her promise to Robert. It’s well written and, even if it can be boring, she told their story well. It deserves a couple stars, but certainly not one star. One star is an exaggeration.

I enjoyed the book, but am laughing at this summary of it because that's valid

I loved the book, the summary is arguably somewhat correct though! It’s not really for everyone I would say.

I liked both the book and your review

Best review ever! ;-)