<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A slice of the auld 19th
Review: ...and not a Begbie to be found.De Quincey's prose is frustrating - Classical and 19th Century literary allusions go by at a pace that slaps my 21st century brain into its ignorant place. Shelley, anonymous nobles, Milton, Spinoza, all pop in and out of focus. Words are slung into sentences, and sentences into paragraphs, the end result being maddening to the young brain with but an inkling of classical education. However, for someone who has done a fair amount of pharacological research and become familiar with the stigma that drugs entail, it is absolutely fascinating to read of a time when opium used like we use aspirin today, and likewise the reverence De Quincey has for it. For the aspiring literary tragic, second-hand stories of Coleridge (fellow opium fiend, occasional friend and literary contemporary) and Wordsworth (all of the above, without the opium) are an intensely interesting perspective. Not Naked Lunch, not fun, nor for everyone.
Rating: 
Summary: Eloquent ,at times poetical ,
Review: De Quincey has been villified for leading innocents into addiction but that's only because they only read HALF the book ,"The Pleasures of Opium" the second half is enough to scare off anyone this side of William Burroughs or Timothy Leary(p.s I KNOW they're Dead!) The book is unusual in that it has difinite literary merit to it as well. Also when De Quincey wrote there were no legal or social ramifications, as witness fellow addicts Coleridge, Willke Collins, Francis Thompson and so on.
Rating: 
Summary: A Great Book and A Great Writer
Review: De Quincey is an exceptionally honest writer. Yet, while remaining honest, he manages to express his thoughts and emotions in beautiful words. While reading this book, one feels as if they're having a personal conversation with De Quincey(no doubt, a one-way conversation), and it becomes easy to develop a love and admiration for the guy. Moreover, it is interesting to hear a first hand account of what life was like in the early 19th century. It is not hard to see why this book is a classic. Read it, its short.
Rating:
Summary: Trainspotting -- Early 19th Century Style
Review: I recently learned that Thomas De Quincey attended my school, although this is a fact that is not prominent in its promotional literature (having the distinction of being the alma mater of one of history's most famous drug addicts not being high on the list of items deemed likely to attract the attention of well-heeled parents seeking a school for their precocious ten-year olds). This is a drug memoir of sorts, but it is washed in a romantic aestheticism that distinguishes it from the familiar gritty and sordid morality plays of more recent times. De Quincy sometimes comes off as an erudite version of the charcher played by Ewan McGregor in Trainspotting. Entertaining stuff, if a little dry in places.
Rating:
Summary: For Verbiage Junkies Only
Review: Thomas De Quincey was a contemporary of Wordsworth and more importantly in terms of comparison, Coleridge. He writes that Coleridge and he met several times and in one instance they perused some Parnesi prints together. Whether on not they were both high at the time, De Quincey doesn't reveal. However, given the tenor of the tangent upon which De Quincey expounds, it is certain that at least he was using, and given Coleridge's history, he probably was a well. Why do I cite this incident? Because it is one of the few points in the narrative that is memorable. As someone interested in literary figures, the image of two 19th century literary hop-heads grooving-out whilst staring at Parnesi prints (you should look up Parnesi on the web - a definite precursor to M.C. Escher)is just plain marvelous. Unfortunately, that, and a few paragraphs depicting some truly macabre nightmares are the only noteworthy incidents in this book. Too often, De Quicey's labarynthine riffs doen't really lead anywhere. His writing style in some ways can be compared to another of his more illustrious contemporaries, Thomas Carlyle's. Both go in for elongated Latinate constructions, with modifier upon modifier and dependent and independent clauses ad infinitum. Carlyle, however, can pull it off. His great wit and energy of mind holds the center of the thought together, even as the rest of his sentence veers off into Baroque space. De Quincey is not an adept enough magician to perform this trick.
De Quincey's subject is himself. His mode of writing in this instance is primarily that of a diarist. This leads to comparisons with some other English diarists of note. Two that come immediately to mind are Defoe (A Journal of the Plague Year) and Pepys (the most famous of all). De Quincey doesn't hold up well in comparision. Defoe's journal is interesting because his subject matter is compelling, he's a great journalist (conveying to our mind's eye the events he depicts), and he gets to the point. Pepys is wonderful because he provides us a full panorama of life in London in the latter half of the 17th century. De Quincey is so absorbed in his solipsistic self-examination, that we as readers aren't even allowed to come up for air, much less see anything around us. That would even be permissable if the narrator were like Proust's Swann, who is at least likeable and self-effacing. Not so De Quincey. He interupts his own narrative on countless occasions to tell us what a splendid scholar he is and (to borrow a phrase from Ophelia) "what a great mind is here o'erthrown." He peppers the text with words like "heautontimoroumenos" to indicate that he is learned in Greek. Throughout the narrative, he is in way to big a hurry to impress these points upon the reader, instead of allowing the reader to judge for him/herself. If you want to know what it's like to be a junkie, read Burroughs. If you want to read some painfully constructed English prose, give this one a go.
BK
Rating:
Summary: The Horrors of Addiction
Review: Thomas De Quincey wrote this account of his life and his struggle with drug addiction to both educate on the evils of opium and also to share the dream trances that he experienced while in the throes of addiction. This version by Penguin presents De Quincey's original version from 1821 and then his revision notes from 1856. There is also a short section of comments that De Quincey made concerning his Confessions from 1821-1855. The introduction by Alethea Hayter is one of the best I've seen in a Penguin book, and it really helps in understanding Thomas De Quincey and his writing style. The Confessions, in a nutshell, begin by recounting De Quincey's early life and the events that led him to begin taking opium. The rest of the tale deals with his problems with opium and his dreams that came from taking the drug. The original version isn't that long of a read, but his revision notes add considerable length, and for the most part weren't as interesting as the 1821 original. De Quincey's prose is absolutely amazing. He is one of the most gifted writers I've had the pleasure to read (up to this date). Many times I felt as though I was lifted up by his words and carried directly into his world. I've yet to have as profound an experience with any other author. De Quincey can also be difficult. His grasp of the English language will leave many modern readers scratching their heads. Footnotes and notes by the editor help, but a dictionary will find heavy use during the reading of this book. So those with short attention spans, be forewarned. You won't survive this book. Also, De Quincey received a classical education. He makes heavy use of Greek names, places and other classical references. He even uses Greek words in the text (although notes provide translations). I can read Greek and have studied classical history, so I got most of his references and in jokes. This is one of the things that impressed me about De Quincey. He mentioned early on that he could speak classical Greek fluently. Anyone who has studied Greek realizes how difficult this is to do. Even Romans had trouble speaking Greek fluently, so much so that it is mentioned in various historical works when an emperor could do so. The fact that De Quincey can do this is a sign of his deep intellectual abilities. I can only imagine how prolific he might have been if he had not been saddled with an opiate addiction. An amazing book and one I highly recommend to those who are prepared to read and understand it. For those looking for a justification for drug use, look elsewhere!
Rating: 
Summary: I confess, I found it severely lacking
Review: When I first heard of this book, I thought that it was a work of fiction. Given my basic knowledge of the Victorian era, I didn't think anyone, much less a writer, would stand up and talk about addiction. Alas, I was wrong, but do not regret reading this in the least. Although this book is short, about 70 pages for this edition, it is not as quick a read as you would think. His vocabulary can be quite extensive and to fully understand him, you have to have his background in Greek (the language and mythology) to understand his allusions. His writing seems to approximate a conversation with a very intelligent, but distracted, person. Many of these sentences (especially in the beginning) are quite long and filled with commas and colons. It is like the intelligent person trying to tell you something important, but as he speaks, he is not sure that he is being clear, so he adds little phrases to try to illustrate his point more effectively as he leans forward earnestly in hopes of adequately trying to prove his point. Within this piece, he talks of his background and why he started taking opium. He debunks many commentaries on opium use and explains why. DeQuincey also mentions other famous people who took opium (or laudanum). Lastly, he tells of some of his dreams which were "enhanced" by his opium taking. After reading these descriptions, I find myself looking at the work of Coleridge in a new light, and even the fictional character Sherlock Holmes. I would recommend this piece to any wanting a better understanding of DeQuincey and his time.
<< 1 >>
| 
