Good points. I definitely think that is a legitimate position to take. I enjoyed Chronic City. In fact, I enjoyed Chronic City more than the second half of Fortress. The first half of Fortress was so good, I still give my personal nod to Fortress. But Lethem does have an excellent sense of humor and Chronic City shows it off (in a good way).

Thanks for the comment and the different perspective. I will say, Chronic City is improving in my memory.

I agree, and I leave open the possibility that Fortress is a masterpiece (I am noncommittal that way), because maybe I just don’t see it. I loved the first half.

On Chronic City, if you like Lethem’s writing and enjoyed Fortress, I think it is definitely worth reading. You probably have seen my review, but if not, I was generally favorable, if not glowing. I would love to hear what you think, not least because, again, I am worried that maybe I have undersold it. But go in with low expectations, and you cannot be disappointed.

I was hoping Chronic City would build on the potential greatness in the first half of Fortress, but I’ve read several disparaging reviews. I’m afraid I’ll be disappointed, so I haven’t picked it up yet.

I expected Fortress to be his masterpiece based on what I have heard others say. Perhaps my expectations are part of my disappointment. Fortress is very good, particularly the first half (which according to the excellent Paris Review interview (thanks!) was originally intended as book one of at least two books). And there is more literary heft and more philosophical heft to Fortress than Motherless. So, I would agree that Fortress is Lethem’s best, just, I am not entirely sure I would count it a masterpiece.

However, I think Motherless is a better introduction for someone unsure about trying Lethem altogether. It is shorter and it does have a more accessible plot.

Thanks for your comment!

As for the lack of cohesion, it could, of course, just be me. And that lack, as I perceive it, expresses itself in different ways in the two novels (Chronic City and Fortress). Notwithstanding that, both are worth reading, though not for everyone, I imagine. Based on your tastes, I think you might like them both, as I did, maybe more.

Plus I like detective stories, so that should help it slip down.

Lack of cohesion sounds a common fault, both in Chronic City and Fortress of Solitude.

I would recommend starting with Motherless Brooklyn if you are interested in trying Lethem. It has the advantage of being much shorter than this one and much less frustrating. It has a detective story and an interesting lead character that will pull you through whatever your final opinion of the book.

Chronic City is probably the weakest, but I could be entirely wrong about that. It just did not feel terribly cohesive or essential. Lethem writes extraordinary sentences and scenes, but the book did not come together as something I would unreservedly recommend.

If you like Motherless, then consider this one. You can also try some of Lethem’s short stories in the New Yorker. I believe Goat Man (or something like that) and The King of Sentences will give you some idea of his writing style, though the story of Motherless has nothing in common with these shorts, other than being compelling.

Thanks for asking.

Out of passing interest I grew up myself as a white kid in a mixed race area, though nothing as pronounced as you describe here.

The first half sounds much more interesting to me than the second. Have you read any other Lethem? I’m not familiar with his work. I can see myself potentially reading this, but it’s not going immediately on the TBR pile.

Now I’m rambling