/lit/ - Literature

Anyone else having problems with pic related? I think Limonov (whether or not share his political leanings) is an interesting character who fits very well for a literary biography, but Carrere is such a shallow author for this.. His writing is nothing special, his prose always has this half-ironic detached tone as if he was just another snob frenchman to the core but was trying to hide it as much as he can. Moreover, anyone else has the impression that he's trying to make Limonov look good despite everything? I feel that at the end of the day the whole book is just a giant attempt by Carrere to drive Limonov back into the comfort zone of a rich, borgeouise, well-educated, leftwing frenchman rather than actually engaging with the eerie aspects of the character. It's as if he has to justify the ugliness of Limonov by constantly reminding us of Limonov's "loser resentment". For instance, when Limonov rejoices the death of of a leukemic rich kid, Carrere writes that of course we should think Limonov was an asshole for that, but that he also believes he would have helped the kid first if there was a way to save him. Why? Can't it be that Limonov really is just an asshole? Why does he has to be justified in being one because he had a certain childhood? Or rather, could he be completely conscious that his past had made him resentful and hateful and just be ok with it?
Or again, the passage about Limonov shooting a machine gun on Sarajevo. Why the fuck is Carrere so concerned on whether Limonov actually killed someone or not? Who cares? Why can't Limonov just be an evil, hateful war lover who has chosen to be like this? Why can't Carrere read in what justifies being the kind of person Limonov probably is rather than trying to justify him at all costs? I love every anecdote about the life of Limonov but all of Carrere comments feel so disconnected and so desperate to drive him back into the good guys and normalize him, as if you either are good, well-read, and essentially unconsciouly leftwing or you are a bad guy. He's not engaging with the possibility of a truly different psychology and has to justify it with the cheap "muh hard childhood" device. I feel like Carrere is an inward coward and a fundamentalist masked as a reasonable person.
What do you guys think? Have you read the book? I had similar feelings while reading his PKD biography, but it got way clearer once he took on a seriously controversial character. I feel like he's really trying to drag into mediocrity and normalize people who are out of his reach in term of psychological complexity.

Anyone else having problems with pic related? I think Limonov (whether or not share his political leanings) is an interesting character who fits very well for a literary biography, but Carrere is such a shallow author for this.. His writing is nothing special, his prose always has this half-ironic detached tone as if he was just another snob frenchman to the core but was trying to hide it as much as he can. Moreover, anyone else has the impression that he's trying to make Limonov look good despite everything? I feel that at the end of the day the whole book is just a giant attempt by Carrere to drive Limonov back into the comfort zone of a rich, borgeouise, well-educated, leftwing frenchman rather than actually engaging with the eerie aspects of the character. It's as if he has to justify the ugliness of Limonov by constantly reminding us of Limonov's "loser resentment". For instance, when Limonov rejoices the death of of a leukemic rich kid, Carrere writes that of course we should think Limonov was an asshole for that, but that he also believes he would have helped the kid first if there was a way to save him. Why? Can't it be that Limonov really is just an asshole? Why does he has to be justified in being one because he had a certain childhood? Or rather, could he be completely conscious that his past had made him resentful and hateful and just be ok with it?
Or again, the passage about Limonov shooting a machine gun on Sarajevo. Why the fuck is Carrere so concerned on whether Limonov actually killed someone or not? Who cares? Why can't Limonov just be an evil, hateful war lover who has chosen to be like this? Why can't Carrere read in what justifies being the kind of person Limonov probably is rather than trying to justify him at all costs? I love every anecdote about the life of Limonov but all of Carrere comments feel so disconnected and so desperate to drive him back into the good guys and normalize him, as if you either are good, well-read, and essentially unconsciouly leftwing or you are a bad guy. He's not engaging with the possibility of a truly different psychology and has to justify it with the cheap "muh hard childhood" device. I feel like Carrere is an inward coward and a fundamentalist masked as a reasonable person.
What do you guys think? Have you read the book? I had similar feelings while reading his PKD biography, but it got way clearer once he took on a seriously controversial character. I feel like he's really trying to drag into mediocrity and normalize people who are out of his reach in term of psychological complexity.