I agree with you for the most part. My central issue while reading was Hofstadter’s self-references. They eventually fall into the background but it was a turn-off for me in the beginning. And they aren’t inherently distasteful but in context of the ‘wandering’ and precarious nature of the work, I had to wonder if the dependency on one’s own series of particular fascinations do have an intellectual corollary or not. If I had to conclude, I’d say they do, but the book itself might still be a house of cards, however inspiring and all the rest.
"House of cards" is an interesting analogy. Most books do a better job of appealing to a wide audience, while GEB comes with a long list of potential pitfalls, even for interested readers.
