[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 103 KB, 650x1040, Stoner.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12181983 No.12181983 [Reply] [Original]

What am I getting myself into?

>> No.12181984

A meme

>> No.12181989

This is one of the worst kind of all writers, in my opinion. He's committed to telling us and not to showing us. He wants to control your attitude toward the characters by completely demystifying them. Williams lays everything on the table, as if he's handing you a psychological abstract. More than a few times, I wished that John Williams were not dead and were ready-at-hand, so I could give him a chocolate swirlie. And then I pulled back in my condemnation for a moment... I rethought my rage... There are literally jillions of shitty writers on this planet, and a not-insignificant number have had their works published. Why should I blame John Williams for having a dream -- a grand ambition? I wish for nothing less myself. The intended repository for my rage and general ill-will should be those who have applauded this crapfest -- the ones who've elevated it to the status of minor classic of 20th century American literature.

The straw which broke the etc. came midway through the book when Stoner's wife, until then a mousy, retiring, sickly sort, adopts a new attitude after the death of her father. She bobs her hair (it's the 1920s) and throws out her old clothes and buys some of those shapeless flapper-type shifts, and -- more consequentially -- she declares war on her husband. The psychology might as well be written in neon. She resents the dull (and not very affluent) academic life her husband provides. The switch is so abrupt and ridiculous that all of the author's explanations and expositions do nothing to make it palatable, even in his stubbornly distanced and abstract telling. I've read better character development when we got in small groups to discuss our first stories in Creative Writing 101.

>> No.12181993

>>12181989
fuck off with you're copy and pasting

>> No.12182328

>>12181983
DUDE WEED LMAO

>> No.12182361

It's a good and relatively short read, just do it OP not like you have anything better to do

>> No.12182371

>>12181989
This. Also I'd probably be a lot less antagonistic of Stoner if /lit/ didn't act like this lukewarm novel was the pinnacle of literature over and over.

>> No.12182377

>>12181989
this but unironically

>> No.12182405

People hating the main character for no reason at all

>> No.12182440

>>12181983
A really solid novel, anon.

>> No.12182912
File: 32 KB, 312x500, 682110.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12182912

>>12181983

>> No.12182950

It has its good bits, east of Eden is infinitely better and should have been in its place on my stack

>> No.12182975

>>12181983

Pic below is correct.

>>12182912

It's still a good book and you should read it. While many on this board consider it a meme and a waste of time, it's a relatively short novel worth the half day you'll need to read it.

>> No.12182989

It's a book you can read in a few hours. You really don't need to make a thread where people convince you to read it.