[ 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: 27 KB, 300x359, 1341155801656.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2781716 No.2781716 [Reply] [Original]

>lit class
>have to read The Crying of Lot 49
>it's a bad book
>everyone in class, including the prof, pretends to like it

do you have any funny lit class stories?

>> No.2781725

I heard Pynchon shat that story out for money while he was writing his other better books.

>> No.2781737

>it's a bad book

lol please do go on

>> No.2781739

He said as much in the introduction to Slow Learner. Or, I might be remembering something else. But yeah, his worse book that I've read so far.

>> No.2781738
File: 57 KB, 500x491, What-your-English-Teachers-Thinks-Author-Meant_c_91376.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2781738

>>2781725

I know and people are talking about it like it has some profound meaning when it really doesn't. "Oh it's about our search for truth or the 60s paranoia" but these people are just looking into things that aren't there. I thought we were actually going to talk about how story telling works but instead it's a bunch of bullshit.

>> No.2781754

>>2781725
>>2781738
Are you guys trying to resurrect the author-God?

>> No.2781758

>it's a bad book

Explain this, please. I thought it was great, it's a pretty interesting piece and a hallmark of postmodern fiction.

>> No.2781765

>>2781738
Wow, now that is a bullshit picture.

I can't believe people still think talking about a book is talking on "what the author meant". Giggles.

>> No.2781769

>>2781754
PYNCHON HEAR ME AND OBEY MY COMMANDS I SUMMON THEE FROM THE DEPTHS OF THE CARIBBEAN I SUMMON THEE

>> No.2781779

>>2781758

The plot sounds like he's making it up as he's going along. He doesn't even know how to finish it. "Oh but's it's open to interpretation" that's just an excuse for lousy writing. Also he's just not a good writer. The very first sentence of the book is a run-on sentence. It's like he has ADD so he needs to fit a lot of crap in every paragraph. Why don't you tell me why you think it's a good book?

>> No.2781785

>>2781779

Also there's this one part I had to skip where he's just talking about a play that really has nothing to do with anything.

>> No.2781795

>>2781779

>The plot sounds like he's making it up as he's going along.

How so? I thought it was pretty inventive and a fun take on conspiracy and knowledge

>He doesn't even know how to finish it. "Oh but's it's open to interpretation" that's just an excuse for lousy writing.

Unambiguous endings are much less interesting than ones that make you think. It's not 'lousy writing' simply because it isn't straightforward.

>Also he's just not a good writer. The very first sentence of the book is a run-on sentence.

Subjective opinions on his writing style aside, what exactly is wrong with run-on sentences? Why the need to be so demanding of run-of-the-mill writing?

>Why don't you tell me why you think it's a good book?

While it's among his least interesting books, it's far from bad. I thought his prose was eminently readable and very beautiful at times, his characters are interesting, Oedipa and Hilarius in particular. The elusive nature of the 'organization' she's seeking out makes for a fun story, and a pretty fascinating look at the nature of obscurity and confusion/lack of truth, etc. in the postmodern age. Overall it was a fun and short entry-level read, not a masterpiece, but far from terrible.

>> No.2781797

>>2781785

>a play that really has nothing to do with anything

Read the book again.

>> No.2781823

>>2781795

>and a pretty fascinating look at the nature of obscurity and confusion/lack of truth, etc. in the postmodern age.
>It's not 'lousy writing' simply because it isn't straightforward.
>Why the need to be so demanding of run-of-the-mill writing?

You're just proving my point. I hope you go to lit class because you'll have a lot of fun making bullshit up.

>> No.2781827

>>2781779
>"oh but's it's open to interpretation" that's just an excuse for lousy writing
Retard.
>Also he's just not a good writer. The very first sentence of the book is a run-on sentence.
Retard.
>It's like he has ADD so he needs to fit a lot of crap in every paragraph
Retard.

I don't like the book either actually, but you are so retarded I couldn't help myself.

>> No.2781833

>>2781823
what point? Your point is you have no point - that the book only what is written down and it has one certified meaning. It's bullshit. A book is how you read as much as how it's written and that guy didn't even say anything outrageous. he isn't so much making a point of his own as much as telling you that your point isn't sole meaning

I hope you never participate in discussion and I wonder why you're even doing it now if you can't accept that even your idea is only an opinion.

>> No.2781834

And in the end both OP and the people that like this book were retards.

>> No.2781838

>>2781716
>pretends

Yeah OP , they were just pretending.
I wish you were just pretending to be retarded, though.
Sadly, you are just a pretentious idiot.

>> No.2781839

>>2781834
The only retard here is the guy who thinks saging and condescending with no substance alone makes you superior.

>> No.2781849
File: 16 KB, 291x300, rage[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2781849

>we're studying Of Mice and Men
> be 16
> kid in my class says, "So...Slim's a bastard cuz he drowns dogs, and Curley's awesome because he's a fighter
>mfw

>> No.2781859

>asked to make a list of 'classic' writers
>guy puts down JK Rowling

>> No.2781868

>>2781834
but Lennie wasn't retarded, he was kicked in the head by an horse

>> No.2781875

>>2781849
reported for underage b&

>> No.2781881

>read Othello
>predominantly black class
>everybody's comments are insightful and interesting.
>the racist in me is surprise

>> No.2781882
File: 70 KB, 500x628, 1337183808872.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2781882

>taking a lit class

Dissecting literature kills it.

Literature classes are utter horse shit.

>> No.2781886

>>2781868
not sure if serious, but george made that up

>> No.2781888

>>2781882
Really? I find the opposite. I think it's really interesting to hear people's different interpretations. Of course there's nothing more annoying than those who make absolute shit up about her nails being red so we should anticipate danger or love.

>> No.2781892

>>2781882

>dissecting literature kills it

This is what philistines actually believe

>> No.2781897

>>2781888

Except that if the author makes a point of mentioning that her nails are red, and if the author is any fucking good at all (i.e. not Robert Jordan info-dumping every possible detail of a character's personal appearance to fill up space) then their colour really does have some significance, and it's very reasonable to speculate on what that significance might be.

>> No.2781899

>>2781882
That's why so many good writers were lit professors, huh?

>> No.2781902

>Novel module of English course
>reading Wuthering Heights
>people think Heathcliff's literally a devil

>> No.2781903

>>2781849
Oh that is rageworthy.

Most of my experiences come from teaching more than being a student in h.s.
>Teach all the background that goes into Orwell and Russian history before teaching Animal Farm.
>Teach Animal Farm
>Point out relations
>Urge students to see the point of it all and how it can relate to our world today
>Blank faces

Thank God I teach a few accelerated classes to get me through the day.

>> No.2781910

>>2781903
There's no such thing as a poor student, just a poor teacher

>> No.2781916
File: 5 KB, 589x380, 98698709.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2781916

Most of the people complaining about the bullshit in literature classes are the same people who cannot for the life of them grasp the subtleties of text. There were many of these people in high school; practical-minded young men and distracted young women who squinted with concentration when they learned of a 'hidden' metaphor or symbol in a novel. They would leave class denouncing the subjectivity of 'English' courses, in much the same way as when they received a bad grade on an examination or an essay.

When I got to my first year of university I assumed that all of these people would filter into the sciences or into business and management disciplines, but I found a new breed in the pseudo-intellectual misplaced literature student who, still a hopeless literalist at heart, will proudly claim that only he is able to see that the author meant nothing more than what is explicitly said in each passage, and that the rest of the class along with the far more educated instructor are wrong.

My message to all of you who fit this description; and you do know who you are, even if your pride prohibits your admitting it; is that if you refuse to explore literature along with all of its nooks and crannies and subtleties, then you have no place in the study of literature.

>> No.2781920

>>2781910
No. That's not true. That's stupid.

>> No.2781921

>people trolled by the most obvious of all trolls
>2012

Are you even trying /lit/?

>> No.2781922

>>2781910

No, there are bad students. Certainly most students can be brought to love learning certain subjects with a colossal and concentrated effort, but some children simply will not learn. I say this not as a trained professional teacher, but as a psychologist and occasional assistant and substitute teacher.

>> No.2781923

>>2781920
>>2781910

It's relative.

>> No.2781930

>>2781923
Only in a general sense.
Some students can only flourish under specific tutorship.
Some students flat out refuse or are, actually, too stupid to learn.
Sometimes teachers are bad at their jobs, some don't bother trying to teach unwilling students, and some can teach just about anyone.

>> No.2781938

>>2781910
Come to my classroom and resist the urge to bitchslap a number of my students. I dare you. By high school, many kids who could not make the grade in Elementary school have already resigned themselves not being "academic students" and have carved out their persona as a class clown, rebel, or what have you. I've taught long enough to realize that many kids at this age just aren't going to be motivated to change despite my best efforts. I still put out my best efforts, but if an idealistic teacher can't accept that this career will wipe the floor with them or turn them into poor, bitter teachers as they grow older.

Here's another:
>Give all the background on Rome and Julius Caesar's life.
>Show movie based on the historical life of Caesar.
>Discuss how the play will cover the last portion of his life and how it is somewhat true but Shakespeare took whatever liberties beyond that to make it an engaging play and build characters.
>Read all of play with class
>Go over everything that should be studied from notes and whatnot
>Give out test
>Hand raises
>Question about historical Julius Caesar
>Wait, Caesar was a real person?

I really want to know where some of their minds wander for such lengths of time.

>> No.2781957
File: 101 KB, 640x480, 1338850702343.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2781957

>>2781938
>Wait, Caesar was a real person?

>> No.2781983

>>2781957
It always amazes me how little some of these kids know about the world around them or its history. I'm sure most couldn't even find China on a map.

>> No.2782031

>>2781983
I'm pretty sure most of the population of the United States couldn't find China on a map

>> No.2782039

>>2782031
They already did this experiment. I can't remember the name of the documentary, but about 80% couldn't name any of the countries outside of the US.

>> No.2782046

>>2782039
Bullshit.
That can't be true, it just can't.

>> No.2782048

>>2782046
I don't think you can fathom the depths of America's intellectual decline.

>> No.2783312
File: 48 KB, 344x517, 1318106697644.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2783312

>I didn't like it
>everyone else liked it
>everyone else is wrong not me

>> No.2783369

>>2782046
>>2782048

Yepyeptheyreallyaredumb

>>2783312

What?

>> No.2783382

>>2782039
>>2782046
>>2782048
It's worse than that. I remember watching some documentary about the U.S. economy, and they went around and asked seniors in high school and seniors in college the same questions, all of them about basic U.S. history and policy, and none of them knew. Then they even asked questions about modern day U.S. things that most everybody should god damn know, and nobody knew it.
Only one girl got one question right.

>> No.2783413

You guys realize Pynchon himself said he hates The Crying of Lot 49? In Slow Learner, he said something like "I forgot everything I knew about storytelling when writing it"

>> No.2783417

>>2783413

>>2781754

>> No.2783432

>>2781716
You're a putrid fucking cunt.

>> No.2783442

>>2783413
Oh you mother fucker. Thomas Pynchon doesn't do interviews. He doesn't say shit about his books, no one even knows who he is!

You or your friend are a god damn liar.

>> No.2783446

>>2783442

Not him, and Pynchon said that, but it's irrelevant. The book is good.

TS Eliot said he wasn't thinking when he wrote The Waste Land.
DFW said Infinite Jest wasn't a funny book.

The author's dead, brah

>> No.2783448

>>2783446
He's not dead.
He just did a promo for inherent vice a little while ago.

You find me a link that proves that Pynchon said that shit and I'll believe you.

>> No.2783454

>>2783448

It's in his introduction to the short story Slow learner, like 2 people have already said, goombah.

>> No.2783458

"anybody who likes something i do not personally care for must be faking" - a literal child, 2012

>> No.2783460

>>2783454
Alright fine. That still doesn't excuse the rampant stupidity permeating this thread, that's what's really fucking irritating.

>> No.2783465

>>2783448

You've never heard the term 'the author is dead', have you?

>> No.2783470

>>2783465
I haven't.

>> No.2783473

>>2783470

Fair enough.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_Author

>> No.2783475
File: 58 KB, 626x625, 1339670748126.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2783475

>"So, like, uh, Mersualt's mother dying was, like, the, uh, death of the relationship between, like, America and, uh, France."
>"Very good Nicholas, I never thought of that before :)"

Why can't English teachers just tell their students they're fucking wrong?

>> No.2783477
File: 23 KB, 499x487, 1319179704430.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2783477

>>2783475
because that's a legitimate analysis

death of the author nigga

>> No.2783482
File: 31 KB, 526x300, 1322870649439.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2783482

>>2783477
One time in high school I used death of the author to argue against copyright and my teacher told me that wasn't what Barthes meant.

>> No.2783485

>>2783482
... le fuck? xD

your teacher should take an arrow to da knee

>> No.2783489
File: 996 KB, 290x231, 1339801666090.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2783489

>>2783482
That's a slow burner.

>> No.2783492

>>2783473
>"To give a text an Author" and assign a single, corresponding interpretation to it "is to impose a limit on that text."

Why is that wrong?

>> No.2783500

>>2783482
Its not because he explicitly acknowledges legal ownership as a different topic in the very text.

or maybe I'm mixing things up with Foucault

>>2783492
Because you "impose a limit."

>> No.2783502

>>2783500
I think >>2783482 was a joke breh.

>> No.2783503

>>2783492
Who the fuck are you to limit our exploration of the vast potential of the text?

>> No.2783504

>>2783502
can't be too sure in this thread.

>> No.2783506

>>2783500
I understand it is "imposing a limit," my question is: why is it wrong to impose a limit on a text?

You can't read 1984 and say it's about Middle Earth. Limits are useful and necessary, and to ignore the creator of a creation is ignorant. Just because some uppity Parisian felt "imposed upon" by brighter, more creative people who actually wrote novels doesn't mean I have to take his word as law. Not that it's "his" word, anyway, if I'm to take his own vapid arguments seriously.

>> No.2783510

>>2783503
Who the fuck are you to eradicate the creator of a creation and proclaim him dead?

>> No.2783524

>>2783506
>You can't read 1984 and say it's about Middle Earth
And you don't need to appeal to the Author authority to come to that conclusion.

"The author writes..." or "Because the author meant...," what such statements really mean? None of us have direct access to the mind of the author. And if you cite an interview, neither does the author have direct access to his/her process of writing, as memory unreliable and unconscious forces no doubt factor into a passionate activity such as writing.

What we're trying to express is simply our interpretation of the text, and the limit is our imagination. The appeals to an author are more or less shorthands, sometimes pretentious, even dangerous because its imposing.

>> No.2784001

>>2783524

Some interpretations are more supportable than others, you dumb fuck.

>> No.2784776
File: 24 KB, 451x333, 1326351544296.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2784776

>>2781779
>caring about run-on sentences in fiction, especially when they work and serve a thematic purpose

Keep back, you filthy casual.

>> No.2784851

>>2781716
>>2781738
>>2781779
>>2781785
Wow, OP. You're like everyone I hated in high school, all grown up.

>> No.2784865

>>2784776
Actually, I don't think that sentence is "run-on" at all, it's just long. Correct me if I'm mistaken.

>> No.2784897

Why is /lit/ so easy to troll? There should have been no doubt after this post>>2781785
2/10 just because you got others so riled up.

>> No.2784906

>pretend to like
How retarded must one be to honestly believe that?