/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.1999354]

Have you ever been concerned that you're writing pulp? Not necessarily bad prose, but trashy subject matter.

[Anonymous No.1999359]

>>1999354
why would i be concerned if i'm writing something i'm intentionally writing?trashy is good.

[thewholesystemisawholesystem !19/MTb7X0g No.1999357]

why would one be concerned about this?

[Anonymous No.1999384]

Basically I'm wondering whether a literary equivalent of Quentin Tarantino would be respectable - minus the pop culture references, which I find obnoxious.

[Anonymous No.1999389]

>>1999384
He isn't even respected in the film world, excluding tasteles "cult"fags.

[Anonymous No.1999394]

Don't concern yourself with what's real literature and what's trash. Write the books what you would enjoy reading if only they existed. If that happens to be a bad-ass steampunk cowboy fantasy that balances strong characterization with sweeping aerial combat, then good onya. Do that.

[Anonymous No.1999397]

>>1999384
Since "pulp" (or "schlock" or "trash") are subjective views, a lot of respected writers were considered pulpy at some point.

Borges was--since he was doing some sort of Twilight Zone supernatural stuff.

[Anonymous No.1999398]

As long as you don't have any illusions about what you're writing, it's fine, just write pulp. Fucking own it. Who cares if it's respectable?

[Anonymous No.1999401]

>>1999384
One of the biggest influences on Quentin Tarantino's writing is Elmore Leonard, who is very respectable.

[Anonymous No.1999404]

Make your pulpy trash the greatest conceivable pulpy trash it could be. MASTER your weak genre bullshit and PROVE that there HAS ALWAYS BEEN a legitimate grain of Quality there, which others are too obtuse to see.

This is how literature moves forward.

[Anonymous No.1999413]

>>1999354
Some pulp is secretly quite good; that's why a lot of stuff that was once considered pulp is now well-regarded. Raymond Chandler, Jim Thompson, Philip K. Dick, etc.

There are a few guys now who are/were pulp writers who are basically the followers of that aesthetic -- Ed Gorman, Richard Laymon, etc. -- and their stuff is fantastic...but like those guys who came before them, nobody will figure out that their stuff is fantastic for about 30 years.

[Anonymous No.1999416]

> Tolkien writes an epic poem in the style of Beowulf
> Everyone goes "what the fuck"
> Tolkien begins writing The Salmarillion, a collection of epic stories and poems which extrude Norse mythology into a completely new mythology world
> Lol, that wacky Oxford nut
> Tolkien writes The Hobbit for his children and, on a whim, ties it into 'that other thing'
> The Hobbit receives tremendous financial success and critical acclaim
> Everyone tells him to write The Hobbit 2: Bilbo Goes to the Big City
> He tells them to fuck off. He knows what he's building.
> He commences work on Lord of the Rings
> Friends and family tell him he's retarded.
> Fans still crying for Samwise's Safari Adventure
> Tolkien slaves over LOTR for years, completes it, and publishes it to massive financial success and international praise
> Hailed as a master-stroke, completely redefining aspects of the fantastic tradition
> Is seen in retrospect as one of a number of works which shaped the fantasy genre as we know it today
> Tolkien is remembered as "a master"
> Tolkien's face when

[Anonymous No.1999420]

>>1999416

This. If you write with the intention of appeasing the status quo, you may as well not bother writing at all.

[Dr. Seussicide (SLAF) No.1999428]

mfw I write trashy lit and don't really care.

[Anonymous No.1999432]

Gonna have to thank the OP for this thread. Exactly what I needed. Currently writing a novel, and this worry has burdened me the past few days. Thanks to everyone in the thread - wish me luck.

[Anonymous No.1999434]

>>1999389
Inglourious Basterds was definitely an abortion, in writerese you could say it was full of unmurdered darlings, but I have Pulp Fiction in mind. Stylish, cathartic violence.

Now, originally I wanted to be a psychological novelist, maybe some subdued philosophy thrown in, but I'm tired of weak and meandering plots. So my notion is to integrate well-observed characters into a fast-paced bloodbath of a story, but the bloody plot is what everyone will notice first. Partly it's self-indulgence, partly to set limits on the length of the story (where would an average slice-of-life book begin and end?), but I'm a literary snob and I'm concerned my fellow snobs would see only a airport fiction writer. Then again, Cormac McCarthy's writing is both respectable and violent... I'm just venting here. The fact that it would be in a contemporary setting makes it a little more suspect than a historical bloodbath in the old west.

[married oldfag !VqaXcWQC4Q No.1999472]

Robert E. Howard, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Raymond Chandler, Sax Rohmer, H.P. Lovecraft - all pulpy as Hell, all amazing. Burroughs first novel is going to be released as a film a century after he finished it. Face it, they wrote something worth keeping.

[Anonymous No.1999516]

Bump.

[Anonymous No.1999529]

>>1999354
>>1999516

[Anonymous No.1999550]

>>1999529
You misspelled 'pretty entertaining I guess.'

[Anonymous No.1999564]

>>1999529
Bro do you have any more of those

I miss the guy that dumped them

Oh and could you post them here?

>>>/co/28552390

[Anonymous No.1999566]

>>1999434
>you could say it was full of unmurdered darlings

Way to miss the ENTIRE FUCK POINT OF THE MOVIE you fucking mongoloid.

[Anonymous No.1999570]

>>1999416

>The Salmarillion
>Salmarillion
>SALMARILLION

I cannot stop laughing at the mental image of all of the elves turned into fish.

[Anonymous No.1999574]

>>1999516
>>1999354
We should form a /co/a/lit/ion.

[Anonymous No.1999593]

>>1999570
I guess you could say they're a bit elfish.

[Anonymous No.1999594]

>>1999566
What was the point then? 'Hey, look how much I'm hamming the plot up, look how much, just short of seeming like an unfunny comedy is how much, I'm so crazy'?

[Froggy !!0K7fwx0WtC3 No.1999599]

>>1999574

Second.

Also, when you write a novel that's essentially about furries, whether it's lamblasting them and their behavior or not, you're pretty much already branding yourself for writing pulp.

Oh well, this is why you have backup subjects to write on.

[Anonymous No.1999615]

>>1999416
Tolkien is god-tier, who care if a lot of it is accessible to 14 year olds, it doens't detract fomr its brilliance

[Anonymous No.1999624]

>>1999434
Inglourious Basterds drew everyone with ads promising over the top violence and absent minded killing and so on. Despite this the violence in the movie was extremely anti-climatic and there was no where near the body count anyone was expecting, dialogue took up the vast majority of the movie not violence.

IN the actual movie, the Nazis advertise in a similar manner for their propaganda film. The Nazis all mindlessly go and enjoy the violent propaganda film of Nazis killing Americans (the exact same premise that was outline for the movie itself)

Quentin Tarantino is laughing his ass of. He trolled everyone and made it blatantly obvious to everyone exactly what he was thinking. If you don't appreciate the movie because it isn't Citizen Kane then you are a bigot with little value in your judgement of film.

The technique that Tarantino used of false advertisement to make a point was pioneered by Kubrick with his movie Eyes Wide Shut. Kubrick advertised it as a sexy movie with tons of hot celebrity sex. Instead everything sexual was presented in a grotesque and disturbing manner which should have alerted the viewer of their own petty pathetic-ness of craving cheap thrills.

[Anonymous No.1999632]

>>1999624
this, I am glad to see at least SOMEBODY on /lit/ caught that.

The pseudo-intellectual nature that permeates this board presents itself as a laughing stock when it comes to movies or film. The sad thing is, besides late night /a/ (not even trolling) this board has generally the best taste in movies. BUt the hastiness in passing down judgement on movies in the same manner they do with books leaves gaping holes apparent in their understanding and grasp of the movies they judge.

I didn't catch Tarantino's ploy at first when I watched the movie, but after being with people bitching about how it suck, not enough action etc. It donned on me how he advertised explicitly to that end, and delivered the opposite, yet he made a point to leave the large body counts in the Nazi propaganda film within the movie; essentially poking fun at the stereotype that his movies have become and the audience he has acquired

[Anonymous No.1999650]

I don't know if the subject matters are trashy, but I've realized that lately all my story ideas are pure wish fulfillment.

[Anonymous No.1999651]

>>1999570

only if Morgoth is a bear

[Anonymous No.1999658]

>>1999624
Tarantino is such a doofus that I can sorta, kinda, almost understand and accept people who think that the fuck-yeah violence in IB is done with a straight face - but yeah, I'm with you. When the girl gives a second thought to that nice-guy Nazi after taking a look at the film based on his exploits - oh man

[Anonymous No.1999666]

>>1999570

> mfw

Whatever maaaaaaan. Fucking where else but /lit/ would I get called on that mistake?

[Anonymous No.1999670]

>>1999624
: /
Still didn't like it. I don't care if it was ironic, it just seems like a self-indulgent vessel for Tarantino's hobby horses. The violence or lack isn't the issue with me, it just seems he started with ideas for a few cool scenes, then pulled the rest of the film out of his ass to justify them. Especially that burning cinema scene, jesus.

[Anonymous No.1999674]

>>1999624

This.

> people thinking the giant face in the smoke and the Basterds cackling as they fire down into the crowd from the balcony box was intended to be anything other than an apotheosis of both satisfying revenge and malevolent horror

It's Tarantino's quiet judgement of the easy "black and white" morality it's become standard practice to nostalgize WWII as having; even hearken for lustily. It's a very self-criticizing-American scene, that one. The fact that it flies over the heads of popcorn movie goers and STILL WORKS as the explosive revenge scene is just icing.

[Anonymous No.1999682]

>>1999670
well I am certainly not claiming Tarantino to be among the greats, and if you simply didn't enjoy it, then that can't be held against you, I myself wasn't overly entertained either until in retrospect I appreciated it in a "Ah I see what you did there you clever basterd" moment

>>1999658
>>1999674
>>1999632
Well the movie certainly seemed to mark him sort oa having some clarity in his movies and making his clarity more readily apparent to the audience.

Kill Bill is still my favorite though, I love Spaghetti Westerns and I love Anime, and a movie that pays over-the-top homage to both is aces in my book.

But I am glad to see others didn't dismiss the movie before picking up on what Tarantino was really saying

[Anonymous No.1999685]

>>1999682

Yeah I don't know if he'll ever be able to make anything that tops Kill Bill pt2 for me. That entire movie was a 2-hour frisson of "Holy shit, I love what is happening right now and how it is happening." Absolutely fucking perfect.

[Anonymous No.1999688]

>>1999682
>>1999685

[Anonymous No.2000776]

>>1999416
I love you for this post.

[Anonymous No.2000951]

Every single Tarantino movie I've ever seen left me with a feeling of just having watched someone else's masturbatory fantasies on a screen.

Sage for off-topic.

[Anonymous No.2001048]

>>2000951
But it's not off-topic, jackass.

[Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ No.2001077]

>>1999416
I think this is a nice example of skillful writing overcomes the 'trashy' label of some subject matter. There is a sense which I will not elaborate on right now in which a masterful artist can take something grotesque or abhorrent and elevate it to beauty in an strictly aesthetic (I'm not saying, for example a great artist takes a physically ugly person and magically transforms him into a beautiful-looking person) sense. That is a genuine master of his craft. On the totally opposite hand however are the swindlers who counterfeit the mundane and the repugnant as valuable and aesthetic such as Warhol.

[Anonymous No.2001144]

>>2001077
I hate you so much, but you have impeccable taste, so I find this so hard to do.