House of Leaves Response

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

So, I'm sure somewhere in here there's a thread about House of Leaves, and whether you thought it was pretentious as fuck or not, it was definitely a hell of a mindfuck. I just found a response I wrote to it in one of my old sketch books, and I figure if I'm going to bother saving it I might as well throw it up here for discussion.

All the original awkward phrasing, idiotic references, and excessive use of "one" as a gender neutral pronoun have been retained. Ten-years-ago-me was kinda retarded like that, deal with it.

Also spoilers. All of them.

The Significance of the 5th Expedition
~or~
Why Zampano Wrote This Book

The House of Leaves was, for Zampano, an experiment in driving oneself insane, which unfortunately was too successful. Somehow he stumbled upon the one thing that we are all most afraid of, that which we cannot name, that we cannot own, that we cannot see or even hope to fight. Fear has claws like daggers and diamond sharp teeth that we are never permitted to see, but feel the presence of at all times. Fear chases us and inevitably consumes us, even as Holloway was consumed. Insanity is to give in. Insanity is to fight. Holloway loses his mind and his life running from it. The cliche that one must face one's fears to conquer them is somewhat appropriate here, although it should be noted that simply turning around to see what's chasing at one's heels is not enough. The 5th Expedition very nearly killed Navison. One must never forget when walking back to face death that One is Facing Death. That there is no prize for bravery and never a guarantee that anything will be fixed, let alone that one will be able to walk away. Navison is consumed by the same desire as Zampano, as characters are wont to resemble their authors. Zampano must return to the experiment (experiment/expedition...) he has begun, it must be seen through to the finish. Just as Johnny cannot escape the book. To find a resolution.
None of them find their resolution. Zampano disappears (dies?), Johnny rots away in a discount hotel, becoming a monster or a lunatic or something else entirely, and Navison leaves forever the House, but [ed: remains?] haunted by its presence. The 5th Expedition was not Navison's victory over the House, he was defeated, because there was nothing to find, nothing to fight, no power cord, no off switch, no answers. The House could never kill anyone, though.  Holloway shot himself before the darkness could consume him. Jan (?) was killed by Holloway, and Tom no doubt survived for some time in the abyss before his own body and mind betrayed him. (The reason the House changes "inexplicably" here is that Zampano wants Navison to return later, and Zampano wants Navison to suffer.)
The House could not kill Navison, and he remained whole, so in a sense he won. Was permitted to leave is closer to the truth. The House even waved goodbye as the ambulance took him away. Why did everyone get better? Because Navison stopped hungering to return to the House and its power began to dwindle. The House is not on Ash Tree Lane, it's wherever you find yourself when fear catches up to you, and the Langoliers nip at your heels and you face the very real fear of not dying, but ceasing to exist, dropping out of memory, becoming nothing. The House is where you can't find a trace of yourself, and it feeds on your fears.

[Faust]

One hell of a mindfuck?
Perhaps at the start. I found myself becoming numb to its trick very early on.

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

One hell of a mindfuck?
Perhaps at the start. I found myself becoming numb to its trick very early on.

Eh, I haven't gone back since reading it at 18, could be that it was only effective on my brain due to squishiness.

[Prince Glittersnatch III]

Im partial to the interpretation given within the book that the house is a metaphor for a vagina.

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

Im partial to the interpretation given within the book that the house is a metaphor for a vagina.

Given the stuff with the actual author's dad I don't really buy it. Sexual references are too easy.

[Cain]

I was always partial to the theory that it was a collaborative effort by a bunch of bored graduate literary theory students, who then went on to re-edit it and sell it under a pen-name for vast sums of money, all while still not having decided what the actual theme of the work would be.

[navkat]

It was a nice contribution attempt anyway, guh. It's new to some people here and there's no harm in the reminder.

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

It was a nice contribution attempt anyway, guh. It's new to some people here and there's no harm in the reminder.

It's not something I'm terribly proud of, but it's an early attempt to tackle some of the same topics I'm struggling to pin down now. There's something weird about reading something by past-you effectively for the first time. The themes of loss of self, cosmic impotence, and the necessity of abandoning unhealthy thoughts are all there in some embryonic form,just mixed in with a lot of leftover "literary analysis" and overly formal word choices.

[hirley0]

10:24 pDt ‰