Customer Reviews

Tropic Of Cancer

5 star:		(67)
4 star:		(24)
3 star:		(12)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

Granted, this is not going to be everyone's cup-o-tea. The language is strong and the author is STILL ahead of his time, if you ask me, but TROPIC OF CANCER, and his TROPIC OF CAPRICORN are two must-read books. Yes, I did get a little tired of the "C" word bantered about every word or so, but after a while you get used to it. Would also recommend Jackson T. McCrae's KATZENJAMMER which is a little less strongly worded, but a great romp nevertheless.

Henry Miller wrote a lot of books ... but they are all essentially the same, about Henry.
Like all Miller's novels, the book contains some brilliant passages, but you'll have to slog through a lot ... a lot ... of self-absorbed ramblings before you get to them. But it's worth it just for the section of Van Norden's wanting to write something completely original, and Henry's missing of his wife. These sections are profound and true and wonderful and beautifully rendered. There's other good stuff, too, here and there.

Now, the dangerous part. Henry Miller made it fashionable to think you can be a bum/borderline sociopath, make fun of friends off of whom you live for your daily bread, avoid responsibilities and duties, and then publish self-indulgent ridicule about your dissolute lifestyle and derision of others and call it art. Fortunately, Henry was honest and talented enough at times to pull it off. And at times his writing raises to the levels of greatness. But he kicked off a school of writing that has been the destruction of more than one good writer.

Another novel written at the same time, and covering much of the same material (indulgent, pleasure-seeking expatriate meeting up with all levels of a society in crisis), is Giorgio Kostantinos's ' The Quest '. (It's like, hey, Henry, did you even notice that at the time you were muttering about blowing up the world, the country next door was electing a madman who would try to do just that.) The difference is Giorgio is a masterful writer and artist, and manages to artfully play off his self-absorption so that the reader isn't immersed in it, like in Henry Miller. Giorgio also has class and just abit better.

Since closing this book i have had a burning desire to travel to Paris...but not the modern day Paris; the 1930's Paris. Miller describes vividly the vibrant and jubilant Parisian atmosphere with it's incredible melange of aspiring artists, authors, whores, philosophers and down-and-out nobodies. Tropic of Cancer is also a fascinating intro-respective piece of literature as Miller reveals his own feelings towards the city and the many extraverted characters with whom he associates. Though miserable at times, largely due to his eternal struggle for food, Miller seems to adore this depraved, humble existance and does not allow his distressing financial situation to affect his rapturous spirits.

This is the first book by this author that I have ever read. My feelings? Deeply mixed. While this book is excellent with its poetic prose, insightful and introspective narration, and blunt facts told straightforwardly, it's also what many people would call a "Peice of Trash."
Why? Miller was, at times, a sexist, racist, idiotic buffoon who eventually would become more boring as the story progressed. Essentially, nothing really happens; the entire book is basically his run in with a bunch of prostitutes (Not told in the pornographic sense, fortunately) and supposed 'friends' that he would take advantage of.
Most of this novel is just bickerings and banterings on how much the world sucks; he talks frequently about how the human race is the 'Cancer which is eating up the mother earth' and how it is approaching its inevitable destruction. He describes, in excruciating detail, the slums of Paris and the slummy people who dwell there (him being one of 'em in a few parts). Not only does he do this happily, but he also drifts into a few parts that are simply nonsensical. However, this is only to be expected, seeing as how Mr. Miller was a surrealist in every sense of the word.
Most writers today owe lots and lots of gratitude towards Miller, for writing as truthful as possible and being as free as he possibly could. Disgusting and revolting details are not held back, and the infamous "C" word which banned this book from America for over twenty years, is used on almost every page.
Is it a good book? It's a nothing kind of book. Much like J.D. Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, it possesses a lot of social commentary and important facts; and like Catcher in the Rye, it's also a whiny novel. This is not a good book; and it most certainly is not a great book. As matter of fact, I would say it's incredibly overrated. There's so much fluff in this book it's sickening. Really.
However, it's not horrible. People should read this book, especially those whom have developed a taste for controversial and shockingly disturbing books. I'm going to read "Black Spring" pretty soon, and surprisingly, I find myself looking forward to it.
If you're weak at the stomach, don't pick it up. If you have an un-read Kurt Vonnegut novel or J.G. Ballard book lying around somewhere, read those instead. If you can tolerate a bit of a monotonous work that somehow manages to entertain at the same time, read Henry Miller's "Tropic of Cancer."

I understand that this is a classic--ground breaking and all that, but the "C" word was bantered about too much, and while the prose was at times elegant, I simply got lost in the story. Sorry, but I can't recommend this one to anyone.

Henry Miller's "Tropic of Cancer" is easily one of the best books written by any American author in this century. Written with a refreshing honesty and a realistic outlook, "Tropic of Cancer" is a fine example of the autobiographical-novel form (so autobiographical that Miller says its not really a book at all and that he is referred to as Henry Miller in the book). It is sad to realize that this book was banned from 1934, when it was published, to 1961, when it finally got published in America (although the legal battles did not end until 1963). For nearly thirty years Americans were denied this fabulous book, and it makes me wonder why this was allowed to happen. But perhaps all the hoopla got more people interested in the book and therefore helped the exposure of it.
What more is there to say? "Tropic of Cancer" is an outstanding work and I personally will be reading more of Miller's books very soon. I bought this book along with Jackson McCrae's "Katzenjammer" as it was said that it too should be banned, but for different reasons. The McCrae book is funny---hysterical in fact, but nowhere near as off-color as "Cancer." Still, it was a great read. Also try Miller's "Tropic of Capricorn."

Henry Miller's "Tropic of Cancer" was a biographical novel of his years as an ex-pat in Paris. It includes tremendously creative, wonderful writing, but in the light of retrospection much of it is reduced to gratuitous pornography. When it was written in the 1930s, Miller's graphic sexual content was considered avant-garde, shocking and artistic. It was banned for this reason until 1961. This was the best thing that could have happened to Miller and the book, creating a cause celebre. But reading it in 2004, it is rather incoherent and, if it came out today, it would not hold up to scrutiny the way Hemingway and Thomas Wolfe stand the test of time. Miller's "cancer" appears to be a cancer of the soul. His descriptions of Parisian life in the 1930s - the whore houses, the scum, the thieves, liars and morally corrupt - describe an eating away of goodness, the way real cancer eats away at bone, skin and body. Reading Miller, one wants to shout, "Get this man to a church." Liberals would excoriate this sentiment as judgment, which of course has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the one thing that could have saved Miller from his moral atrophy is and always will be the Lord Jesus Christ!

STEVEN TRAVERS
AUTHOR OF "BARRY BONDS: BASEBALL'S SUPERMAN"
(...)

Tropic of Cancer is clear, concise, crude, euphoric, base, philosophical, ecstatic, and immorally moral. It is written as the man lived his life. Henry Miller expresses life and people with a sharp eye and a sharper pen. He writes philosophy with the brilliance of a master making many of those praised men seem foolish and does it all with the language of a common man. Miller is not lofty. Miller is far from unknowable. He writes himself as a vagabond pop philosopher and violent lover. No other author can express such clarity of passion in his every word. Some may fault him for his jerky, somewhat erratic style of prose and the lack of flow throughout his writings. I have heard these comments before. But, Mr. Miller's works are not novels. They are not works of fiction. They need no crutch...a segue'. The writing is real, crisp, and does as I have stated already. It cries from the gut of life. I recommend it highly. I also agree with the other reviewer who mentioned The Losers' Club by Richard Perez, another strange, lively novel that I enjoyed.

Tropic of Cancer is Henry Miller's seminal work and is sometimes compared to On the Road, though I think this is better than anything Kerouac wrote. Miller's work is existential and to that end it is one of the best works I've read. He lets the reader into his head in a surreal stream of conscious dialog. This book is a classic and has a place in contemporary literature because of Miller's ability to challenge established thought and censorship. For that alone this book is worth reading. Without the liberal use of the "c-word" this book is relatively unoffensive or at least unlikely to be banned. His use of that word in particular is both its hallmark and its least impressive quality. His use of it will challenge the reader, perhaps to be open minded, perhaps as a screen against the prudes and narrow-minded readers of the world. His work is similar to Kerouac in that you have someone able to capture their search for meaning in life. Miller delves into the subject far more deeply than Kerouac. Kerouac's search led him to travel across the US, while Miller's search was to a far greater extent internal. Although he travelled across the Atlantic, he really didn't explore Europe the way Kerouac explored the US. Although Miller's novel is set in 1930s Paris and Montparnasse, it really isn't a novel about Paris or even France. Rather, it's about Miller's ability to capture his thoughts and understandings seemingly as they occur to him. You get the impression that these thoughts are fleeting as they are woven into the story and as a result they become much more eloquent.

This book was banned for about 30 years. This is due to the questionable topics and language that Miller delves into. He uses a certain c word at least a couple hundred times. I would be very interested in a word count to see exactly. I was written some where are 34' and finally printed, in America, in 1961.

Now the book really doesn't have a story in the modern sense. It is far ahead of its time. It resembles the writing of the Beats and the Psychodelics of the 50's and 60's. The style is very stream of consciousness. There is no plot to speak of. It is all about Miller trying to survive in Paris, with no money.

Written in first person the language is straight out of the gutter. There are parts that are written in French. I could only pick out a few words and usually didn't even bother to try. It is usually in the dialogue. The characters are mostly Americans trapped in Paris during the 30's. Miller is haunted by his wife, Mona. She left him to return to America. She never actually is in the book, but he thinks about her often. She fits into his idea about America. They are both mythological to him. Beautiful and dangerous. He speaks of returning to America, and his wife, but it is never more then a fleeting thought. The dark reality of Paris sings to him. He is at home there as brutal as the city was.

Anyone who is well read should at least have an opinion on Miller. He is an important American author. You can see his influence on later American writers, including Kerouac, Bukowski and others. Along with Tropic of Cancer, I recommend another recent Amazon pick: The Losers' Club by Richard Perez, another personal novel obviously influenced by Miller.