[ 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: 78 KB, 580x580, jack.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2865385 No.2865385[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

am I pleb/loser/entry level loser because Jack Kerouac is my favorite author

>> No.2865389

Well, how much have you read of him? And how much have you read in general?

>> No.2865393

On the Road, Big Sur, Dharma Bums, Some of the Dharma, Visions of Cody, Desoaltion Angels, Satori in Paris and the Subterraneans

idk really know how to answer your second question

>> No.2865395

Absolutely not, Kerouac is really fantastic.

I do think, however, Kerouac is one of those writers you kind have to live up to. Like, if you're currently getting your MBA and obsessing over your potential six-figure salary, but claim Kerouac is your favorite author, your kind of a fucking idiot.

>> No.2865398

>>2865395
...Of course I called someone an idiot while putting "your" instead of you're.

I'm not retarded, honestly.

>> No.2865408

no I'm a student lol. just wondering cause he always seems to get a rep as some drunk, overly sentimental hippie.

>> No.2865411

Let's just say that would mean you've been making a couple of very strange decisions about your life.

>> No.2865412

>>2865395
y, better be an edgy hipster and go on a road trip while reading kerouac

>> No.2865414

a student who isn't obsessed over an, "any figure salary" *

>> No.2865416

>>2865408
/lit/ appreciates craftsmanship in writers rather than passion, that's why it hates the Beats so much.

>> No.2865419

As long as you can explain why you like him above other authors, then no.

Just like some people love Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark even though they've heard a shitload of music

>> No.2865423

craftsmanship without passion is just as bad as passion without craftsmanship.

>> No.2865433

>>2865423
would you rather read a textbook or a diary?

>> No.2865434

>>2865423
true. and kerouac has zero craftsmanship.

>> No.2865438

>>2865419
Why OMD specifically?

>> No.2865439

>>2865434
the world would be so boring if every artist was like ts eliot or schoenberg

>> No.2865442

well what are your standards for craftsmanship in writing, to me it just craftsmanship is just being able to translate abstract ideas and feelings into words and I don't see how Kerouac is bad at that. Yeah it isn't grammatically correct most of the time but that's part of the beauty of his spontaneous prose, he writes without restraint in order to write below the level of consciousness "I want to fish as deep down as possible into my own subconscious in the belief that once that far down, everyone will understand because they are the same that far down."

>> No.2865445

>>2865434
Well that's just a flat-out lie.

I've always found it interesting that if you say you don't like Joyce or Faulkner, you're labeled an idiot who just doesn't get it, but if you say you don't like Kerouac, it's because he has no craftsmanship. Because god forbid all writers not try to do the exact same things.

>> No.2865449

I'm not sure if I'd sy Schoenberg's work had craftsmanship. I've not listened to all his romantic stuff though.

>> No.2865446

That's the thing, Kerouac is very spontaneous. I don't think he planned before he wrote. I like it, mind, but it gets on a lot of people's nerves.

>> No.2865459

>>2865395
That's pretty fuckin' stupid. This line of thinking implies that liking an author is contingent upon living out the author's philosophy. Imagine the consequences if this is how people actually functioned.

There is room to participate in a career that has nothing to do with your literary interests. And before you assume I'm a business major, I'm not. But I mention all this because I've gone hitchhiking, hopped freight trains, etc. for a while and spent a lot of time with the closed-minded "free thinkers" that call themselves Kerouac fans. I just get irked by the hypocrisy.

Jack Kerouac is not for me, though. I really dislike his work.

>> No.2865460

how do you even know your favourite for anything?
I feel like identifying my preferences is just making an arbitrary choice.

>> No.2865464

because out of every author I've read I enjoy him most

>> No.2865466

>>2865395
yeah just like you have to live in mordor if your favorite author is tolkein

ur a fukken retard.

>> No.2865480

>>2865459
>>2865466
oi, retards, he said he thought it was true for kerouac, not fucking universal.

>> No.2865484

>>2865480

And that's just as stupid.

>> No.2865488

I've never read him, what writing style does he possess?

>> No.2865496

he writes stream of consciousness similar to joyce with ulysses but he is very sentimental and romantic. writes about traveling, drinking, religion, search for truth and all that shit. one of my faves

>> No.2865499

>>2865496
I sure do hope you're trolling..

>> No.2865500

nope

>> No.2865521

yeah pretty much.

>> No.2865532

to quote Truman Capote, "That's not writing, that's typing."

>> No.2865533

>>2865385
No, you're entry level for caring what /Lit thinks of your favorite author.

>> No.2865537

good one, never heard that one before.

>> No.2865551

>am I pleb/loser/entry level loser because Jack Kerouac is my favorite author

no

you are this because yourself, not because your books

>> No.2865557

I did it!

>> No.2865561

>>2865532
oh my god, how mad would he be if he saw blogposts and fan fiction

>> No.2865567

>>2865484
thanks for your clear elucidation.

why don't you just shut the fuck up, you clearly have nothing worthwhile to contribute

>> No.2865606

>>2865395
Wrong. Your occupation and station in life don't determine or dictate "correct" taste.
Books, for most, are about escapism, dude. People want to get out of reality and go into a romantic or grimy, deeply flawed world. On the Road is about freedom and a young, nubile America that doesn't even do harm anyone. On the Road is pure escapism and, deep down, wants to leave reality, even for a moment.
>>2865393
Hey, OP, I've only read On the Road, which I loved. I'm going to B&N Saturday and was wondering: which of his books or collections should I read next?

>> No.2865612

my favorite by him is Big Sur, they should have that but if they don't go for Desolation Angels

>> No.2865634

>>2865395
I agree with this, but in the case of every author. People who claim their favourite author is, say, Sade, while living your average suburban life, should be shot.

People too often try to get their identity from the things they passively consume. Like they somehow deserve credit by living vicariously through others. I imagine a lot of /lit/ to be among the worst examples of this.

>> No.2865654

>>2865612
Thanks, OP. I wanted to do Lonesome Traveler, but I'll take your recommendation.
>>2865634
Not everyone can fit the lifestyle of their fantasies (I already said, this see here: >>2865606 )

>> No.2865660
File: 132 KB, 809x1024, 1341342766784.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2865660

Kerouac is utter shit. He can't write and his ideas are ridiculous. Being an irresponsible kid (I call it pseudo carpe diem) isn't the best way to live life - it may be good while it lasts, but on real world, things works in a different way.

>> No.2865661

jack kerouac = overrated bum

Shitty writing and shitty books.
Maybe they were important in the 50-60's, but now they dont mean SHIT.

>> No.2865663

>>2865459
Not the guy, but it's perfectly understandable that those whose frame of mind and way to live are similar to the author's will appreciate him more.

You don't have to live like he lived or agree with everything he said, but it will gain a different meaning to you.

I haven't even read Kerouac, though, so I won't make a call on him.

>> No.2865665

>>2865660
When will it stop working? I've been doing pretty well so far.

>> No.2865670

>>2865606
>Books, for most, are about escapism

For most? You really think that?

I see no problem with you reading to escape (I really don't, I do it sometimes too), but don't speak for everyone or most people like that.

>> No.2865671

I found a copy of the Subterraneans deep inside a well built lean-to in the middle of a long hike. More than the first 90 pages were ripped out, probably used for a fire because hikers don't understand Kerouac.

>> No.2865686

the Lonesome Traveler is good to, especially the Railroad Earth section

>> No.2865690

>>2865670
The people on /lit/ (I occasionally include myself, but I read too much fantasy to do so) are a part of an incredibly small percentage of readers: those who pick a book with the intent of reading something that is symbolic and allegorical. Most of /lit/ is comprised of troglodytes and mouthbreathers that barely comprehend the books they read (which is the reason we lack threads that go beyond "HEY GUYS WHAT KINDA BOOKS DO YOU LIKE?"). The few on this board (everyone thinks they are, but most aren't) that actually think about what they're reading, obtaining some message from it in the process, read to challenge their mind and to further their knowledge and intelligence. This minuscule group of "intelligent" (you can't fully understand how lightly I use that word on this board) readers is so sparse and small because most readers don't want to feel stupid doing something for fun.
TL;DR most read for fun, and to claim otherwise is idiotic.

>> No.2865713

>>2865634
You Marxist faggot.

Just kidding. But no seriously, there's nothing wrong with a fair dose of escapism. I'm a Mexican immigrant and my favorite author is James Joyce. Joyce and I have probably nothing significant in common, but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate his work.

>> No.2865715

>>2865713

>Joyce and I have probably nothing significant in common

Emigrated from your homeland.
Come from a culture influenced by Roman Catholicism.
Possibly working class.

That's two for sure, maybe three.

>> No.2865716

>>2865713
You were both immigrants from countries heavily affected by the hegemony of both their immediate neighbours and of the Catholic church, which left any kind of indiginous culture to suffer.

>> No.2865723

>>2865715
I'll admit generally those are similarities.

But I can refute a bit of those:

1. I never knew my homeland. I imagine Joyce lived in Ireland for at least more than a decade, while I only lived in Mexico for 5 years before I left.
2. My culture is influenced by Roman Catholicism indeed but I can't say it's remained a force in my life. My family doesn't attend church but once or twice a year, and I'm not obligated to go. I don't see religion as much of an influence in my daily life.

But, anyway, I don't consider any of these things when I reflect on why I appreciate Joyce. In fact, I don't even think of Joyce as a man when I'm reading his work. The text is all that matters to me.

>> No.2865724

>>2865690
It's incredible how you put everything in terms of idiotic vs intelligent... I said there is really no problem with reading for mere escapism. There really isn't. Those are not any less intelligent than the others.

But fun and escapism are not the same thing, even if they go hand in hand a lot of times. The opposite of escapism is also not to "read so you can challenge your mind and further your knowledge", which is too much of an utilitarian view for my tastes anyway

I don't think most read to escape, I think most read for the joy of reading it. Regardless if it is fantasy or non-fiction, there is joy in all of those. It's not about reading for "it will make me a better person", because, honestly, I don't think most people have the dicipline to put up with too many boring books just for that, I think they must not find them boring to begin with.

What I thought it was kind of weird in your logic is that you started by making a statement on what books are for and why people read them. And on top of that you based your argument that one appreciates a book more if it's far away from your reality, so there is a more effective escape.

cont

>> No.2865725

>>2865724 cont
But mental reality is another thing and if you like a book, that reality has something to do with the reality of the book. If you like On the Road to escape, it's because you wish you were there and you can't be there. But if you like On the Road and you've been through something similar, you'll have a different joy, a second thought on similar experiences, you'd catch more of its appeal. That's perfectly normal for any book.

It's not a rule, nor a statement on what makes one an "intelligent reader" and a dumb one, that is just too much of an arrogant thought to me.

>> No.2865731
File: 3 KB, 126x125, 1337193454752.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2865731

>>2865665
Really? Are you traveling around the world with your friends and drugging yourself while you browse /lit/?

>> No.2865736

>>2865723
>My culture is influenced by Roman Catholicism indeed but I can't say it's remained a force in my life. My family doesn't attend church but once or twice a year, and I'm not obligated to go. I don't see religion as much of an influence in my daily life.
Neither did Joyce. He didn't like the influence Catholicism was having on the culture of Ireland, which is why he's been described as a metropolitan revivalist, or something along those lines.

>But, anyway, I don't consider any of these things when I reflect on why I appreciate Joyce. In fact, I don't even think of Joyce as a man when I'm reading his work. The text is all that matters to me.
A lot of his work is semi-autobiographical.

>> No.2865744

>>2865731
>implying that's difficult
>implying that's admirable
>implying one in 5 americans haven't done that

>> No.2865752

>>2865459
>>
That's pretty fuckin' stupid. This line of thinking implies that liking an author is contingent upon living out the author's philosophy. Imagine the consequences if this is how people actually functioned.

As if Twilight hasn't taught an entire generation of women that it's ok to act like Bella.

>> No.2865753

>>2865752

>>
That's pretty fuckin' stupid. This line of thinking implies that liking an author is contingent upon living out the author's philosophy. Imagine the consequences if this is how people actually functioned.

>> No.2865755

>>2865753
>>2865752

Please stop. You apparently aren't cut out for this whole image board thing.

>> No.2865770

>>2865744
The idea of the beat generation is to free yourself from the corrupted society. You can only travel the world and drug yourself if you have money. Taking money from your parents (which seems the only reasonable option) would be hypocrisy. So we conclude that the only way to live the beat ideology completely would be living in the wild. You can't escape from capitalism, buddy. It's everywhere. Deal with it. And even if you could, the childish beat ideology would be stupid. Why not life live and truly enjoy everything on it (carpe diem) instead of throwing everything away and not measuring the consequences (pseudo carpe diem)?

>> No.2865772

>>2865438
Why not?

>> No.2865779

>>2865770
That's so fucking wrong. It's fairly cheap to travel the world and drug yourself, don't be naive. You won't be staying in luxurious hotels or anything like that. If you haven't even thought of trying it, how do you expect to know this?

Also, it's "carpe diem quam minimun credula postero" and measuring consequences is part of believing in the future. Money is all about securing the future. I don't know why you even brought that up...

And no, I'm not a beat or pseudo-beat and I don't think it's the best way to live, but your criticism is just so plain horrible I HAD TO post this.

Not him, btw.

>> No.2865822

>>2865770
All you need is money for a plane ticket. Once you get to the continent you want, you don't need money.

Lrn2travelculture. There are entire networks set up for broke travelers.

>> No.2865842

>>2865779
The whole beat ideology is stupid. So you think it's that easy and pleasant? Eating, sleeping and living like a bum shouldn't be part of any ideology.
And you're wrong. It doesn't necessarily involves money - you're just measuring the consequences.
In the end, following this beat generation is ingenuous. You don't like capitalism? You don't like the media? Well, then become a monk. There's no need to be irresponsible and futile. Such terrible ideas could only come from such a terrible author.

>> No.2865889

>>2865842
Are you talking to yourself? Because I didn't say anything about the beat generation being stupid or intelligent, pleasant or not pleasant.

And how am I wrong, if I said it doesn't necessarily involves money just like you did? And how does measuring consequences come into this? I think you lost your track on what you were trying to say there...

...Why on Earth are you even whining about this?