dichromaniac reblogged
dichromaniac reblogged
I gave away my fifth copy of House of Leaves today.
Every so often, I run into someone who talks about it with interest but has never read it. I give them my current copy. Like a compulsion. Then I buy a new copy for myself until the next person comes along.
There's something about reading it for the first time when it's been given to you rather than outright purchased for yourself that is more on theme. As if it's something you really shouldn't want.
Yet it took five people before someone finally said "this feels like a curse" when I put it in their hands.
dichromaniac reblogged
been reading a lot of haunted/sentient house books in the past couple years, and i've encountered 3 main types of narrative: 1) the house loves you and that's a good thing 2) the house loves you and that's a bad thing and 3) the house hates you and that's a bad thing. this leaves a gap for a potential fourth type of story-- the house hates you and that's a good thing. excited to see if hauntologists delve into this quadrant and what it looks like if they do
dichromaniac reblogged
WAIT I HAVE AN AWESOME HOUSE DESIGN
I am architecture
dichromaniac reblogged
idunnoausersname-deactivated202
House of Leaves does a fantastic job of parodying academic film/art analysis. But the height of it for me was when the book goes on and on about the genius of Navidson, the Navidson record, the brilliance of this single genius.
Only to reveal near the end that Karen Green did the editing. Oh, you mean most of filmmaking?? Like yeah sure Nadison set up the shots and everything, but she actually put it together??? And its only mentioned off hand once?????? Spectacular.1 Never been more pissed at a blind man who doesn't exist.
1: Ed: this is possibly a reference to women like Alma Reville, better known as "Hitchcock's wife", who was an accomplished editor and screenwriter. For example, that shot on Psycho with the shower drain? Yeah that's her.
dichromaniac reblogged
Just finished House of Leaves...I will be making an essay on why Zampanò's analysis was completely off and how Karen is the main character and the only one who has defeated the house. She is actually the genius and the caring person Zampanò constantly tried to describe Navidson as. Citing imaginary sources for this while not a single action in the book proved those romantic claims was the real craziness fkjhjffjl But the book was good an interesting read and I will be coming back to analyze it.
#house of leaves#ok but KAREN THO#Karen found her love in the HOUSE#she was distant and traumatized and isolated and lonely and reserved#but she had to face what she might lose to appear it to truly LOVE it#the HOUSE saved her because she gave into love while the HOUSE ate those qho only clung to themselves when pressed
dichromaniac reblogged
So i’m reading Michael Schur’s book on how to be perfect
And…
Did he really have to be that Extra™️ with the footnotes?
If it wasn't linear and monochrome I would've thought this was House of Leaves
Reminding me here, I mean that line about "a code to decipher", how the greatest love letters are always encoded for the one and not the many.
dichromaniac reblogged
I think it's a sign of good media when you have to reread or rewatch it to get the full experience. First time is for getting your brain blasted by the story and being confused second time is for knowing who's who and what's what and willingly getting your brain blasted again.
... and look there's an echo at haand
"In the future, readers of newspapers and magazines will probably view news pictures more as illustrations than as actual reportage, since they will be well aware that they can no longer distinguish between a genuine image and one that has been manipulated. Even if news photographers and editors resist the temptations of electronic manipulation, as they are likely to do, the credibility of all reproduced images will be diminished by a climate of reduced expectations. In short, photographs will not seem as real as they once did."
Andy Grundberg, "Ask It No Questions: The Camera Can Lie," The New York Times, August 12, 1990
Ok but ya know how some versions of the new testament have jesus's words in red.
Funny that so far in house of leaves (pg 136 but what does that even mean anymore), all the red text has been written with a tone that seems to be speaking directly to me, the reader, and not the usual ramblings of zampanò and johnny.
Like just as you're reading about the true scale and scope and *beyond* the architecture of navidson's labyrinth is when the structure of the book goes wild.
These circuitous footnotes omg. The book IS a labyrinth.
Confining us to the comforts of a well-lit home gives our varied imaginations a chance to fill the adjacent darkness with questions and demons.
Why is there a checkmark on the bottom right hand corner of page 97, the start of chapter VIII???
I'm getting worried....
She feels a need to invent some non-existent "dark-force" to account for all ill will instead of recognizing the dangerous influence the unknown naturally has on everyone.