is it necessary to read all the footnotes in "house of leaves"?

Question

I was so excited to read this book. I did a lot of research beforhand and knew that it would be interesting reading.

There are certain parts of the book where the footnotes seem to mean little to nothing....like lists, etc, etc.

I know the footnotes that are important...the other storyline etc. I am talking about the lists and lists and wierd things.

Will i still get the jist of the story without reading those wierd ones?

Answer 1

You'll absolutely still get the gist of the book without slogging through all the footnotes. The story is what mattered to me, when I read it; and the footnotes aren't traditional footnotes. Someone may answer saying that footnotes are important, etc., but with this particular book, I think Danielewski is poking fun at "tradition" and seeing just how much he can get away with. Those pages that are printed to be the same on both sides, as if you're seeing through the page, are ridiculous! Just like that huge list of names that go on and on and on---after a certain point, we get it, right? It's part of what's frustrating about the book, and at the same time it's part of what frustrates Johnny Truant so much: all the fake sources that Z. made up, the goofy notion that a blind man was afraid of the dark, etc. The old guy really gets under Johnny's skin, and the book's supposed to get under ours. Perhaps they are important? Did you decode that one letter from Johnny's mother? I bet Danielewski would love it if someone found reasons why those lists are important, why they matter, etc. Isn't there a HOL forum online? You might find answers there--I think it's actually run by Danielewski himself.

Answer 2

Not all the footnotes are necessary to read. Some are just there to look at (lists on the sides of the pages, in the middle of page where its normal on oneside and backwardson the other side to give the feel of a window) because these are symbolistic as well as help show what went on with zampano.



Others like "Consider John anthony's book ......." help construct a profile for Zampano. While some footnotes are just paragraphs to the side to go into depth of a topic. And of course Johnny Truants footnotes are astory within itself.



You could get the jist of the story without reading the "weird" ones. But There's so much to analyze in this book. I suggest reading the footnotes but just not reading the lists. The lists you just have to realize that zampano wrote out that list of people, things, structures, or whatever. I really dont want to say anything more about it becuase tihs is for you to read and enjoy. Read the book multiple times. You'll find more every time.

Answer 3

You should read the footnotes. There are a lot of codes and information given in the footnotes that enhance the story.



Sometimes, the little footnotes give bits of information that help you to understand the physics or something of the house. The referenes to real things like Rolling Stone help to really blur what you know is real and what you know is fake.



anyway, with Danielewski, everything has a purpose even down to the last typo