[ 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: 482 KB, 1650x2475, 848CB9FA-8B58-4C5F-94C8-5B7281028B5D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20836579 No.20836579 [Reply] [Original]

People who say “great American novel” are delusional.

Yes, it points out that Americans are increasingly anxious and depressed, but it doesn’t say anything interesting about that. It’s just entertainment. No value.

>> No.20836583

>>20836579
It’s just a solid, middlebrow book. Stop being autistic.

>> No.20836594

>>20836579
It's alright

>> No.20836600

>>20836579
Most good novels don't 'say' anything, and any messages extracted by people fixated on that mode of interpretation are trivial enough to not need a whole novel to communicate them.

>> No.20836617

>>20836600
I’m sorry, why do you read?

>> No.20836619

Imagine how annoying it would be to release a book about the lives of American families around the turn of the millennium 10 days before 911.

>> No.20836623

>>20836619
Very inconsiderate of Muslims desu

>> No.20836644

>>20836579
Um... you're Chinese

>> No.20836731

>>20836617
Because I enjoy the act of reading fiction, which means navigating through the dense network of different perspectives, emotional experiences, historical details, narrative structures, compelling stories, ways of using language, etc. A message extracted from that density isn't interesting. You don't read Heart of Darkness in order to uncover the truism that colonialism was brutal and power corrupts, everyone already knows that at the mouth of the river. You don't read Women in Love in order to uncover the truism that it's hard to figure out what your real desires are. Good books retain their fascination after you've read them because they are more than just didactic vehicles. I feel like surely you know that, and your question is motivated by not having faith in your own aesthetic instincts and instead having to justify the pleasure of reading by saying 'it gives me useful truths about the world'.

>> No.20836741

Franzen isn't even a decent writer, let alone a good one. There was some buzz about this book like 20 years ago, when it was in Oprah's Book Club, but nobody even talks about Franzen anymore. His star fell just about as fast and hard as it rose.

>> No.20836752

>>20836741
Err... that's not true at all. Freedom was absolutely massive

>> No.20836777

>>20836731
Ok autismo, of course books are more than just didactic vehicles. When did anyone say that books can have no value beyond the truisms that they teach? No one said that.

The point is: Books are not literature if they have nothing to say.

>> No.20836792

>>20836777
But 'saying' doesn't capture anything that's unique and interesting about novels. There is no way to give an account of what a book says that doesn't make it sound like a truism. For the reasons I gave above.

>> No.20836819

>>20836792
I get you're point, all I'm saying is that if Corrections has all those things (multiple perspectives, emotion, historical details, ...) but it doesn't also teach its audience anything of value, then its value is purely entertainment and it will never be regarded as "literature."

>> No.20836880

>>20836617
lmao retard

>> No.20836928

>>20836819
what does ulysses teach the audience?

>> No.20836941

>>20836928
That no matter how much they try to escape it, at the end of the day a cuckold is still a cuckold.

>> No.20836960

>>20836792
i would argue that good literature has the power to make truisms come to life and let the audience really feel what truism x means. everybody "knows" that colonialism is bad (i disagree by the way but lets just assume it is for the sake of argument), sure, but for most people it's just a platitude that doesn't really mean anything to them, like math equations they know to be true but that they don't really understand. and a book like heart of darkness can really show them _why_ colonialism was bad (it wasn't but you get what i mean)

>> No.20836970

>>20836928
The big point I got out of it is that progress is made a day at a time. In most novels, conflicts are resolved and things work out all in the scope of 300 pages. In Ulysses we want this to happen too. We want Dedalus to work out his daddy/authority issues. We want Bloom to man up and pursue Molly and fend of the intruder. And we want Molly to re-commit to Bloom and love him. But we don't get any of that because it took place in only a day. But we do get some of it. Bloom and Dedalus make progress in their pseudo-father/son relationship. Bloom re-asserts himself as man of the house by asking Molly for breakfast in bed (the reverse of the roles played at the beginning of the novel). And Molly seemingly renews her "vows" of sorts as she ends the book by remembering when she said "Yes" to Bloom's proposal.

So progress is made for each character, but only as much progress as you can expect in a day. And you hope that the next day they will make more progress.

I was deeply moved by all of this. Corrections has nothing like this to offer. It's just: "Americans are depressed and anxious, bro."

>> No.20837102

>>20836970
Except the experience of reading Ulysses is not enjoyable in the slightest.

>> No.20837177

>>20837102
I agree with this too. So both Corrections and Ulysses fall short. But that doesn't mean that Corrections is more literary than Ulysses merely because the former is more enjoyable to read.

>> No.20837216

>>20836579
according to who is this "great american novel" some big macguffin?
publishing companies?

>> No.20838324

>>20836579
>>20837216
having your book called "the great American novel" by Time magazine or a similar publication puts you firmly in the camp of Oscar winners like The King's Speech, Green Book, Driving Miss Daisy, etc. it's meaningless and the only books that are given that title are ones like American Pastoral, Grapes of Wrath, etc. which deal with heavy themes but are incredibly obvious about it and don't contain any nuance, thus making them simplistic. The great american novel also has to be easy to read, which most great books are not. The only book that is both incredibly entertaining and also complex and worthy of being called the true great american novel is Moby Dick

>> No.20838480

>>20836928
That all women yearn for the BBC
(Big Boylan Cock)

>> No.20838798

>>20838324
tpbp (this post best post)

>> No.20838808

>>20836960
One of the better posts I've read on /lit/. Here is your react.

>> No.20838965

>>20836583
fpbp. it was enjoyable if a bit long.

>> No.20839015

OH NO THE HOUSE IS MESSY AND THE OWNERS ARE SENILE I'M GONNA GO INSANE BLACKAMERICAN FELINE HELP ME!!!1

>> No.20839085

>>20836960
>>20836819
no. good 8ooks are good 8ecause of what they've fashioned out of reality, not 8ecause of what they may or may not say a8out it.
>>20836819
>>20836731
sad that people even disagree 8ut at least youve stated it very well

>> No.20839383

I thought the book was alright but not utterly amazing. If I were to read another one of his books which one should it be? I liked when he used technical language, especially chemical terms, because I like to see how authors can use that kind of Description without taking away from the narrative.

>> No.20840693

>>20838808
thanks bro

>> No.20840808

>>20836619
lol
>>20836623
kek
>>20836644
KEK

>> No.20840818

>>20836970
Just to be clear: one of the "greatest" novels of the 20th century has a jewish protagonist? Why, tho?

>> No.20841398

>>20836579
Because it has value

>> No.20841475

>>20836579
It's just one of those stories where you've seen it before and done better

>> No.20842549

Surprisingly high quality thread

>> No.20842614

>>20837102
Ulysses is incredibly fun to read if you do not have a stick up your ass

>> No.20843357

>>20842614
no