Genre: Semi-Autobiographical Novel
Page Count: 331
Henry Miller’s controversial, semi-autobiographical novel tells inconsistent stories about his almost a miserable life in Paris. Going to the land of artists, Miller also thought to propel his writing career; and while it did work out, it wasn’t the same as he, or any artist, would’ve thought.
He didn’t produce any literary novel in Paris, but rather turned his own wild experiences into a censor-free literature. Explosive, then banned, and then acclaimed as ‘the literary corner-stone of American literature’, Miller’s ‘Tropic of Cancer’ has been one of the most controversial books in 20th century literature – and a most sought-out and read one too.
With the counterintuitive approach of banning things, one only attracts more and more attention; so is the case with the list of banned books. Rushdie’s ‘Satanic Verses’ and Miller’s ‘Tropic of Cancer’, I wouldn't have known or read these books if they had not been banned.
However, there are different reasons for books to be banned. Some are revolutionary novels, ones that reach the core evils of their respective society and cause a chaos of change there; novels like ‘Mother’ by Gorky and ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ by Lee are prime examples of such banned novels.
In case of Miller, and Rushdie also, the intention was more towards the ‘shock-element’ than the destruction of any particular evil. Sure, one can argue that they were either intended for the ‘freedom of speech’ or their being banned cause the discussion of freedom of speech – in themselves however, they aren’t particularly pointed works of literature.
Miller’s novel is but only an inconsistent array stories about his life in Paris, featuring mildly his struggles with joblessness, food, and writing, but featuring mostly the ‘edible’ sex with the abundant and always ready whores of Paris.
When it says ‘no censorship’, this novel really means it: not only are the passages erotic, but are filled passionate and obsessive commentary on sex. And I say ‘edible’ because it is so: Miller’s hunger is equally earnest for both sex and food, and more often than not, he talks about both of them with similar vocabularies.
However, unlike food and shelter, sex is more abundant in the Paris of ‘30s. Not a single story goes by where the narrator or his friends don’t have sex with the ever-abundant, ever-ready ‘cunts’ and ‘whores’ of Paris. I guess, underneath, it relates to the joblessness of Paris: where men sell their art, in whatever cheap form, to live another day – for women, it’s selling their bodies.
But being such an acclaimed novel, fortunately, it’s not all about sex; since you can only talk so much about sex or fuse it with literary element. Miller’s relentless cynic commentary, when he’s in full narration, is a joy to read. In these passages, uninterrupted by the outside stories, he passionately talks about writing, other writers, artists, Paris and New York, life, cheerful disparity, about ‘a cancer that is now under people’s skin’, and array of arbitrary topics.
It’s fast-paced, exciting and full of humor.
However, since it was written in the ‘30s, true to its times, Miller’s novel has elements of ‘stream of consciousness’ as well, and it doesn’t work most of the times. It feels like ‘stream of consciousness’ has been used as a substitute of the incoherent, unstructured, and loose storytelling.
And when a story starts with a few characters, stays and concludes with them, (with lots of sex involved of course) and with a Miller monologue at the end, it is quite enjoyable to read. But unfortunately, that doesn’t happen most often. Most of the times, the loose format of storytelling becomes irritating with difficult to follow characters, with the sex scenes being its rescuing elements, since they heighten the senses!
Miller’s ‘Tropic of Cancer’ produced in me a feeling of a stranger, reading a worn-out and used print of this book in one of Paris’s Café, and being constantly amused and erected by it.
Ratings: 3.5/5 *** November 11, 2020_