of interpretation and this is someone who loves the book who who knows the book through and through who has like read it reread it and reread it and it's not obvious at all in fact i did not figure that out on my own the idea that he was a killer explicitly was given to me by the radio play i didn't i did not figure that out on my own at all but after i listened to that adaptation i i started i started to really think it's not obvious at all you you could very well read the book and and never pick that up at all there's always this haze of subjectivity over the events because we're getting it from him one can never get a clear picture of the events in the story just as nobody can get a clear picture of anything in real life including ourselves ain't that something so in that respect the book is profoundly progressive as far as revealing the impenetrability of the truth when it comes to human nature and relationships the impossibility of ever really getting to the full picture so to speak of ever really truly knowing anybody anything or anyone i don't think we can from what i can see i i don't think it's possible the time span of human life doesn't allow it maybe if we had a lifespan of NUMBER_TOKEN or a thousand years then we would finally be able at one point to say that we could really see something from all sides that we can understand the mechanisms of human thought and behavior including our own but the truth as far as i can tell is something closer to like the socratic one you know which is like nobody really knows anything and we all know it deep down i don't think that's actually what socrates said or wrote or whatever but you know the idea of that i don't even know that i don't even know what socrates really said there you go we don't know anything we don't know anything josh mentioned something that uh was compelling to me which is you know dowell he doesn't really change exactly he starts as a man with nothing and he ends as a man with nothing nothing's changed but it's also maybe maybe indeed it was a confession so who knows so better than food nah interesting certainly smart and complex ambiguous uh subject to multiple interpretations but uh for me man that writing that voice that guy no that's the kind of guy you get stuck with at a party and you just want to commit suicide with a pocket knife yeah dry dull redundant writing it's like listening to a really boring guy tell you his sad story i mean that's basically what it is sure it might be intentional you know that is how people talk you know they repeat and contradict themselves it's meant to give you a sort of sense of realism i get it i just don't want that much reality when i'm reading a novel insufferably pedantic is what i would call as tone and the footnotes are excruciating it's like like several on every page you gotta go look at these obscure references that mean nothing so you should read it well it's been called the greatest french novel ever written in english i forget who said that though i'll link below if i can find it but i'm guessing they're referring to flo bear uh
NO_SEGMENT_TOKEN