[ 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: 484 KB, 723x1000, tao-yates-pic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171992 No.4171992 [Reply] [Original]

Just saw the king of /lit/ Tao Lin speak at my university campus. an hour ago.

Ask me anything.

>> No.4171996

>>4171992
What was it about? Did you talk to him? Do you have any particular quirky anecdotes to share?

>> No.4171997

Did you speak to him? What did he do?

>> No.4171999

Did he act autistic?

>> No.4172004

O/U on 35 complete words spoken?

>> No.4172005

was he wearing plaid

tell me he wasn't

>> No.4172007

How much is he paying to viral market him?

>typical lit repsonse

>> No.4172013

>>4171996

He was doing a poetry reading and a Q and A about his writing. He had some funny poems to read but (see below)

>>4171997

Was going to ask him a question, had a few mildly trollish ones with possible /lit/ references rolling around in my head, but time was up before he could answer any more questions. Actually I think he avoided noticing me on purpose when I raised my hand because he might of suspected I was a /lit/fag.

>>4171999

he talked in a monotone voice and avoided eye contact. I don't think it was autism though. He kept talking about wanting some xanax.

>> No.4172014

>>4171992
what was he speaking about? can you summarize? how did he act?

>> No.4172018

>>4172005

He was wearing a plaid shirt and a grey zippered sweater, like in the pic, except I think the flannel shirt was yellow but it was hard to tell with the lighting. He looked older and more apathetic than in his publicity photos.

>> No.4172032

>>4172014

Mostly about his poems and novels. He left most of the discussion up to audience questions but usually responded with snippy replies that completely worked their way around the actual questions.

>> No.4172033

who was in the crowd, mostly? Is Tao Lin well known at your university?

>> No.4172059

Do you get the feeling that people outside of /lit/ and alt-lit tumblr communities care about Tao Lin?

At my uni, for example, everyone's still crazy about Denis Johnson, but no one's ever heard of Tao Lin.

>> No.4172061

>>4172033

Yes, most of them were Literature or Creative Writing majors.

>>4172054

His poems have some quirky comedy value, especially when they take unexpected directions or say something snarky. I'm not familiar with his novels though.

>> No.4172062

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2BJSV8Q1Yw [Embed]

I find him sort of offputting, particularly in this appearance.

Does anyone really enjoy his work? I'd like to hear what you have to say about his work. I don't understand the appeal. I don't want to start another thread.

>> No.4172065

>>4172032
Any insight gained on his works? How does he view them himself?

>> No.4172076

>>4172065

He pretty much deflected any questions that could provide actual insight, haha. Like when he was asked about books or movies he liked he just said "I like it" and said he couldn't/wouldn't explain why.

>> No.4172084

>>4172062

He's somewhat well known, but I think that's because there are a few alt-tumblr kids who attend.

>> No.4172085

did he get unintelligibly philosophical sometimes

>> No.4172096

>>4172085

Not as much irl as he seems to in writing

>> No.4172114

Should also add that he accidentally got some people upset by confusing our university with our university's main football rival when he asked if one of their prominent faculty members taught at our university. There were a few snickers and gasps but nothing much more than that though.

>> No.4172121

>>4172018
>more apathetic than in his publicity photos.
jesus

>> No.4172127

Why do people continue to book him?

>> No.4172132

I wish a cool author would come to my college... where do I find that stuff out?

>> No.4172141

>>4172132
you're in luck, pynchon and tao and mccarthy are all lecturing at west-north kentucky polytechnic southern state university college

>> No.4172145 [DELETED] 

>>4172141
where do I go

>> No.4172154

>>4172132

Your college probably has some kind of events coordinator or venue that books authors to speak and/or musicians to play shows. Hell, even the community college I used to go to had Christopher Buckley give a reading and signing there once.

>> No.4172181

>>4172062
I've read eee eeeee eeee (or whatever it's called), part of Shoplifting (a friend had it and I read the first 50 or so pages) and i've read Taipei. The first thing that draws me to Tao is his voice, or his style. Although eeee eee eeeee was surreal, his style tends to be minimal, objective, and dry. When I read books, especiallly "literature," I tend to enjoy an author who develops their unique voice/style. Once they have mastered it, it is even better to see authors that experiment with it.

Faulkner is an example of someone who had an improbably talented gift for writing who mastered his own voice/style early on, and for the greater part of his career successfully experimented with it. Although WHAT is conveyed is important, HOW it is written is more what I pay attention to and enjoy. Although Tao does not reach the same heights as, say, Faulkner, Nabakov, or Kafka (to name a few), what I like seeing is that he improves exponentially with each book he writes.

Taipei not only saw an almost air-tight realization of his style, it expanded into another plane. The sentences he was able to write were much longer. The ideas he conveyed were from not only the lived reality of characters but also from their minds. This kind of craft can only be appreciated when you have tried to write fiction yourself, or if you are a very careful reader. One reviewer said of Tao that he must 'hate language,' since his prose is so austere, minimal. I loved the way he wrote Taipei the same way I might love seeing the 'monolith' in Kubrik's 2001. He takes an unflinching look at his own life (and people always say: 'write what you know'). I have a minor objection; I think he still flatters himself for all the pretensions of neutral-third-person. Another skill he has is something another reviewer called 'emotional close-up.' You must have read the book to understand this theme. His reconstructions of dialogue make me smile inwardly with their accuracy; people in real life are often inarticulate--especially compared to movies or pop fiction.

The things done well in Taipei I can only try to relate by comparing with other authors. For example, compare Tao's 'emotional close-up' with Garcia Marquez. The latter author wrote well, of course, but his novels have no 'emotional close-ups.' Especially in 100 Years of Solitude, the characters and their interactions never include details about the way they move through space, their facial expressions, the tone of their voice, etc. Although I also love 100 Years, Marquez does something different: the scale of his writing is zoomed out. Both in time and in space. Marquez writes over hundreds of years and continents, Tao captures interpersonal interactions. I don't think one scale is inherently better than another.

All the objections to Lin I've read here have little do with what I'm talking about here--his writing--and more to do with how they perceive him as a person, and the social culture of which he is a nominal member.

>> No.4172204

>>4172141

Funny since I actually go to a southern state university college where Tao Lin spoke a little while back

>> No.4172219

>>4172018

Hey Tao

>> No.4172229

>>4172181
I appreciate this. I'll have to revisit Taipei.

>> No.4172262

>>4172013
>Actually I think he avoided noticing me on purpose when I raised my hand because he might of suspected I was a /lit/fag.
I don't understand, how can you tell someone browses /lit/?

>> No.4172267

>>4172262

There's a very specific "type" of person who browses 4chan.

>agesaso 420

>> No.4172280

>>4172267
I assumed everyone everyone that went to go see Tao Lin was a fucking nerd anyway.

>> No.4172284 [DELETED] 

>>4172013
what question could you ask him with a /lit/ reference?

>> No.4172291

Does this guy browse /lit/ or something?

>> No.4172298

>>4172291

He posted about seeing a reference to himself on /lit/ over twitter a couple years ago

So now whenever a thread about him pops up there's a running joke that it's him self-promoting

>> No.4172321

>>4172291
In Taipei he mentions reading two long as fuck threads on 4chan, so not only does he browse /lit/, he writes about it too

>> No.4172338

>>4172298
he also wrote about lit in his book and implied how everybody here hated him and all these new wave micro-movements in literature like "k-mart minimalism" and "mumble-core" and "post-irony"

which I think caused some blogger hipster types to collide with some Bloom types or something and drove up board traffic a bit and caused a few fights

>> No.4172359

>>4171992
where you talking in front of a mirror?

>> No.4172374

>>4172267
and what's that type?

>> No.4172375
File: 58 KB, 300x300, typical4user.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172375

>>4172267

Well, I can't tell what "type" of person browses 4chan.

I googled "typical 4chan user" and this appeared.

Do you really look like this?

>> No.4172385
File: 20 KB, 625x414, tmp_mobile-24099-1375738930-271916347749.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172385

God he's getting annoying with that drug talk. He tries so goddamn hard to be edgy. Maybe he thinks that the whole drug thing will make him seem deep and fill in for his vacuum of a personality. Or maybe he wants to more closely fit that Tormented Artist© image. Fucking stop it Lynne

>> No.4172396

>>4172385

Or maybe that's just a genuine topic of interest for him that he enjoys speaking and writing about.

>> No.4172397

>>4172375
My hair isn't nearly that magnificent.

>> No.4172401

>>4172375

A lot tanner and thinner, but yeah.

>> No.4172405

>>4172267
Tall, jacked, articulate, and white?

>> No.4172416

>>4172396
Yeah, his eyes light up when drugs are mentioned. It seems to bring him so much genuine joy. And the adventures he has in his books! Nonstop adventure when he's high.

>> No.4172417

>>4172405

The tall and white parts are the only accurate descriptors, although if you look at /r9k/ seems like 4chan has a shit load of <5'7" midgets.

>> No.4172422

>>4172401
Tao Lin is posting in the thread right now, I knew it. When are you coming to Portland next? We should have drinks. I'll bring Xanax.

>> No.4172434

>>4172417
I don't think there is any actual descriptor. If say, even up to 40% of 4chan was tall and white (which I doubt) it is still an unimportant percentage to describe and predict 4channers because there is still a 60% population of short but white, tall but tan, black and tall, black and short, tan and short... even well groomed and badly groomed is a variant

>> No.4172439

>>4172434
nigga
40% bein one kind is a fuckin lot
dont need a fuckin majority of peeps just need the major playas
dont matter if other 60% divvied up 10 dif ways
6% ea worthless
that 40 tho that some big shit
can work with a 40
cant with a 6
l2l8cap

>> No.4172440

>>4172375
black curly hair, a lot thinner, not quite as white, slightly better groomed, had never worn shorts (I mean it, not once in my life), keep myself well shaved. I don't know how tall is that guy since there's no reference, a more square jaw, probably bigger penis (nothing impressive, that one just looks small)

>> No.4172447

>>4172439
you missed the point. I acknowledged it's huge but it's still a useless predictor because the margin of error is huge. there's no utility

>> No.4172473

>>4172062
Did they fuck after?

>> No.4172477 [DELETED] 

>>4172473
Probably, I mean the sexual tension was palpable.

>> No.4172499
File: 33 KB, 768x270, tmp_IMG_20131009_1953351325380945.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172499

>>4172076
That is incredibly /lit/ of him. This board has a nasty fucking tendency to give some retard opinion and not say why, it's just a totally useless thought floating out there that adds nothing to the conversation.

Pic fucking related

>> No.4172505
File: 58 KB, 500x747, tmp_IMG_28371556443456-593633943.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172505

>> No.4172552

>>4172114
Wait... Is this UGA or GT?

>> No.4172598

lmao
that guy was on my tram coming back from the city this afternoon
I looked at him, and he looked at me, and he knew I knew, a passing unsaid understanding- I narrowed my eyes almost imperceptibly, thought disapproval at him, and saw him squirm

Hi Tao that was me on the tram u r a gaybo

>> No.4172609
File: 107 KB, 652x427, ty.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172609

>>4172505

>> No.4172619

>>4172499
well it makes sense
you can't go off on a long spiel about why you like a film or a style during an audience-based interview and if you can't actually go about it in length, you're not going to end up saying anything more than a half-assed, oversimplified response easily misinterpreted.
The large scale interview system is extremely flawed. Hell, most interview systems are flawed. Recorded conversations between a couple of guys, like podcasts, are by far a more effective manner for getting a glimpse at an intelligent person's structure of thinking. Of course, this is just for bit-sized segments. On an entirely different level, you have his actual works.
I've only watched a couple of interviews of him but I think it's pretty clear that he thinks they're pointless and nothing more than a publicity chore, which I entirely agree with. With this being most obvious in the previously posted cooking interview, where he basically says nothing as the chick spews pointless questions.

>> No.4172631

>>4172619
however you feel about DFW you gotta admit he gave some damn good interviews. He did so even when they weren't that long. By just saying you like or don't like something you are giving no insight into yourself. Just a few words why, is that so taxing on the interviewee or the interview? Hell, even those banal questions have a purpose, they're to lead into questions that probe deeper into the subject. You can't immediately jump into those types of questions, they have to be eased into.

This is a pet peeve of mine on /lit/, too often people just float their useless - I can't stress enough how useless - opinions with absolutely zero to back them up. It doesn't have to be some eloquent tirade, just a few fucking word about WHY. Let us know you're not just some mongoloid parrot that burps out opinions taken from elsewhere, let us know there's a mind and reasoning behind it.

>> No.4172638 [DELETED] 
File: 59 KB, 768x382, tmp_IMG_20131009_195258-207413399.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172638

>>4172631
Forgot pic. A prime example

>UR WRONG THIS SUX

>> No.4172644
File: 59 KB, 768x382, tmp_IMG_20131009_1952581547104039.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172644

>>4172631 (You) #
Forgot pic. A prime example

>UR WRONG THIS SUX

ok now tell us why you shitbag

>> No.4172677
File: 97 KB, 811x554, 1358293554265.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172677

>>4172181

>> No.4172708

>>4171992
Did he pozz up your neg ass?

>> No.4172751

When will this fag write a piece on /lit/?

>> No.4172754

>>4172598
It wasn't your disapproval. You looked filthy and I try to stay clean. Sorry

>> No.4172790

Why does his voice so perfectly suit who he is?

>> No.4172794

>>4172004
>O/U
What is the significance of this?

>> No.4172820

>>4172708
I hope that doesn't mean what I think it means.

>> No.4172835

>>4172609
Thanks for reminding me that this board has the second highest girl to guy ratio of all the boards.

>> No.4172838

>>4172790
/thread

>> No.4172990

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5D9zxFoBO8

>> No.4173014

>>4172794
Over/Under

>> No.4173041

>>4172644

you only screencapped that opinion because you disagree with it

cut the self-righteousness. it's just a website

>> No.4173448

>>4172598

That's pretty fucking awesome.

>> No.4173450

>>4172552

A little further below the belt.

>> No.4173468

>>4172820

IT MEANS TO ASS FUCK YOU AND GIVE YOU AIDS

>> No.4173472

>>4171992
>the king of /lit/

Go to bed Tao.

>> No.4173491

>>4172754
TAOBURN

>> No.4173503

>>4172375
Yeah, pretty much.

>> No.4173509

>>4172631
well keep in mind /lit/'s a whole nother field, you actually have time and space to answer properly and thanks to anonymity, there's no actual obligation to answer a question except for the sake of answering. So on /lit/, or any forum really but more so on a chan forum, it is really fucking stupid to go around spouting opinions with nothing to back it up. There's no reason to be doing so.
With the interview, however, you don't really have the option to not answer a question. There's no fifth amendment rule either, you can't really opt out of one question and answer other's all that easily. If someone asks you a question and you answer it properly, but then they ask you another question that's really fucking stupid you can't really do anything but now attempt to deal with a really stupid fucking question. You can't just say no, that's a stupid question and you can't just say "i like it" because people already expect more from you and giving a short answer now insults the interviewer. By going through the whole process just saying "i like it", you only insult yourself and in a much lighter sense, more of a 'i'm just awkward' kind of manner (and in the case of tao lin, he doesn't give a shit about that opinion). You also have the defense of your works that actually brought you to the interview as well, showing that you're not actually a worthless awkward fuck

Like here, I could have not responded. There was nothing forcing me to do so. I'm this late because sleep.

>> No.4173524

>>4172076
That's because the guy doesn't like to repeat things. Supposedly he has written about his favorite stuff before.
When someone asked him (in formspring) what were his favorite books he just posted his goodreads profile url.

>> No.4173547

>>4173524
I've read mostly everything he has done. But I have to know - does he come from a rich family?

This is really important and I have not been able to figure out the answer. Anyone?

>> No.4173551

>>4173547
I have it read it claimed on /lit/ that he does.

>> No.4173555

>>4173547
You can extrapolate the missing information.

>> No.4173560

>>4173551
???
>>4173555
??? B/c he went to NYU and lives in brooklyn with very little work?

>> No.4173987

>>4173041
I disagree with how useless it is. Quit making half-assed assumptions you horrible bitch

>>4173509
You're all over the place m8. Or maybe I am cause I don't get your point. You're saying that Tao not giving long answers is so he won't be forced to give short answers on the off chance a stupid question rolls by?

>> No.4173993

>>4173547
>I've read mostly everything he has done.

why would someone do this to themselves? Well people do get penis piercings, but still

>> No.4174699

>>4173987
It's more of stupid questions are going to be more likely than intelligent questions
the primary problem is that it's difficult to ask an intelligent question when you really don't know the guy at all, so you're going to end up asking questions that he thinks, and knows, is very shallow and pointless (in regards to his own benefit) to answer. For the most part, an interviewee even when trying to be helpful is going to spend the first good chunk of any interview answering questions he doesn't actually care all that much to answer about.
Another problem is when the audience gets involved, it's pretty much guaranteed to be filled with stupid questions. The majority of these things, from what I've seen anyways, are filled with stupid fucks. Not to say that you're a stupid fuck to going to one, or that stupid fucks are the only people who go but that if you do happen to go to one for any semi-well known author (which obviously, is the main time you're going to have an audience-based interview) you will be surrounded by stupid fucks.
A third problem is that interviewers tend not to be picked for their intelligence but, I suppose, their 'charisma' and all that it composes of in relation to the viewer. Like, for example, the previously posted cooking show clearly has a complete moron for an interviewer who goes on the 'discuss' with any number of popular/intelligent (two traits not directly related to each other) authors. It's not out of the norm.

>> No.4174740

>>4174699
and finally, many interviews are simply too formal or too predetermined to really present anything interesting. 'what were you thinking when you wrote book A' kind of nonsensical bullshit. There's too many underlying layers and expectations to be fulfilled that cause the whole thing to fall apart and it's not often you'll get an honest, insightful response.
However, the thing to keep in mind is that there is still value in the interview. Even in a stupid interview, like again the cooking show, there's a good heap of information to be gathered despite nothing being explicitly said. His mannerisms, his clothing, his speech, his attitude, his reaction, even his very being there can tell you a lot.

And then going back to the /lit/-lin comparison, being on a chan board where things are kept anonymous excluding the almighty tripfag, it is extremely stupid to state an opinion with no intention of backing it up when argued if you are not directly being called out. It benefits no one (except, possibly in humor) and muddles the intelligence of community. There are no forces, again thanks to anonymity, to require that you do so. Even when called out, there is still nothing because it will all simply fade away into the databases given enough time. Again, this post being an example of that. I had no exterior obligations to respond. There are no consequences for responding, there are no consequences for not responding. (no immediate, significant and guaranteed ones anyway)

>> No.4174782

>>4174740
And going back to the comparison between /lit/ posts and tao lin's interviews
the interview response is far more complicated and has far greater potential significance than a responding post on /lit/. I don't think it's fair to compare the two.

I also forgot to mention that I think it's true that oftentimes interviewers are simply given a set of questions to ask and basic summaries of the author/books but they themselves have no actual knowledge about anything related to the guy. And assuming this is true and that that the person interviewed both recognizes and understands that this has occurred in this specific interview, then he is forced to his answers simple, blunt and shallow. So even if the question was an intelligent one written by some no-name intern, and intelligent response cannot be given because the interviewer will quickly be lost. There's likely a 'retarded audience' assumption going on as well, at least with live broadcasts like a radio talkshow. The interview can't actually go in depth about any topic because the audience, the majority likely knowing little pre-hand and incapable of doing enough research as the show is aired, simply can't keep up. So the conversation is forced to remain on the surface.

So now assuming all of what I said, or at least a good portion of it, is at least similar to what lin's understanding of interview form, it makes sense that he doesn't respond in most interviews with any thorough answers.

>> No.4174895

>>4172835
which board's the first?
/soc/?

>> No.4174908 [DELETED] 

Does anyone have a download link for one of Lin's books?
Any of them will do, I'd just like to form my own opinion on the guy.
There doesn't really seem to be a major consensus here.

>> No.4174925

Does anyone happen to have a download link for one of Lin's books?
Any will do, I'd just like to form my own opinion on the guy.
Reactions seem pretty mixed on this thread.

>> No.4174978

>>4174925
I think Lin matured before writing Taipei.

>> No.4174997

>>4172416
There is a reason why they call them recreational drug users, because it is fun to take drugs just like its fun to drink with friends.

>> No.4175996

>>4173468
Well, did he?

>> No.4176040
File: 125 KB, 1099x1035, CYBERNATOR.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4176040

>>4174997
Actually they call them that because they're addicted and their life in shambles, anon

>inb4 9999 heroin addicts come rushing out to defend their dirty needles
>inb5 psychadelics kiddies start crying bloody murder because it turns out being a useless tripping pile of shit really won't make you deep
>inb6 weedawana users start smokin le dope 'cause their so edgy j.like alan watts xDDDd lololOLO LEGALIZE IT

T.Lin is a shit author. Just listen to yourselves

>> No.4176063

>>4176040
this post just made me remember that i spent a sizable amount of time pretending to be a heroin addict on an online forum when i was a teenager