I thought this was Miller's best ... until, two-thirds of the way through, he began rhapsodizing about world history and overindulging in the kind of philosophical rumination that can drive is fans crazy, and not in a good way. Much as I like Henry Miller, it's clear that deep thinking was never his strong suit.



Miller guided me to other writers--Celine, Knut Hamsun, Anais Nin, Blaise Cendrars, among others--as he did for many others. In my case, out of an inclination toward history, he turned me on to Oswald Spengler, with whom I was so taken that I spent a year reading and rereading Decline of the West, an obsession culminating in an essay that appeared in the old Los Angeles Free Press.



Here's my Capricorn theory: Given evidence that Miller was similarly captivated by Spengler back then, I'm guessing that out of admiration, and the unconscious imitation a writer manifests when encountering an influence--something I know a bit about--Decline of the West interfered with what Henry Miller does best: presenting an adventurous everyday life in flowing, literate, often humorous detail. Which is why, I believe, Capricorn fell down.



Still, it's certainly not bad.I Think, Therefore Who Am I?