Hunter S Thompson

[Anonymous No.4311448]

What did you think of his work /lit/? Overrated? Interesting?

[Anonymous No.4311455]

A guy who models his life after someone else who came before is always a faggot.

[Anonymous No.4311454]

>>4311448

[Anonymous No.4311456]

It's K. Rum diaries was good.

[Anonymous No.4311462]

>>4311455

[Anonymous No.4311487]

>>4311448
>What did you think of his work /lit/? Overrated?
Yes, I read it COMPLETELY without considering the hype surrounding it since it has nothing to do with his writing, and I decided the text and content was definitely overrated.

[Anonymous No.4311489]

They're good books.

But too many kids try to model themselves after HST who was a royal fucking moron in just about every sense besides his writing. He was the definitive idiot savant.

[Anonymous No.4312694]

Whether his books are vastly overrated or underrated depends on what company you're in, he's accessible for non-readers and overlooked by literati because of it

[Anonymous No.4312716]

>>4311462

the sets in that film are just gorgeous.

[Anonymous No.4312732]

Probably my favorite writer of his time. He certainly wasn't the best writer, but he was the most entertaining.

Most people (mainly teenagers who are just getting into drugs) read or at least watch Fear and Loathing, because of how ingrained it is in American drug culture, but they never look at his other work, which is a real shame. I'd recommend Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72.

[Anonymous No.4312741]

Hemingway 2: The Narcissistic Ego Trip Goes Post-modern and Self-Concious

Wrote plenty of decent stuff, was very funny at times, but very much overrated and sort of a tragic clown.

[Anonymous No.4312792]

>reading people who have killed themselves

Why would I allow that deranged anti-life poison into my brain?

[Anonymous No.4312799]

>>4312741

sort of like kramer

[Anonymous No.4312906]

>>4312792
How is "dying later from accident or illness and hate every day until it happens" better than "kill myself painlessly now since I hate every day"?

[Anonymous No.4312921]

never liked him, thought he was simple and expressed poorly

[Anonymous No.4312941]

>>4312906
>"take the easy way out now since I hate every day because i'm a disgusting junky that has wrecked himself prematurely and will bail on my family the moment it's not all fun and games anymore"

fixed

[Anonymous No.4312973]

>>4312941
>a bloo bloo dun make what you want of ur lyf bcause some ppl will b sad :(

[Anonymous No.4313004]

he's something different, which is goodl. I wouldn't put him in the same category as Kafka or Dostoyevsky but he's entertaining. I JUST FUCKING HATE the hipster tumblr pleb following he's accumulated over the years that seem to think he's the epitome of modern literature

[Anonymous No.4313011]

Overrated, yes.
Interesting, yes.

[Anonymous No.4313016]

>>4313004
Its a shame he didn't tell Johnny Depp to fuck off.
Then the tumblr crowd wouldn't be following him around.

[Anonymous No.4313025]

>>4312973
Just pointing out that he was an irresponsible cunt.

That's not unforgivable in the case of most writers, but HST made a career out of indignation and being an epic 420 social justice warrior.

[Anonymous No.4313024]

>>4311448
I think he's fun, free-wheeling and wild. The amount you enjoy him depends on where you are in life. I think he's good before or during a roadtrip, especially if it is the drug-fueled kind.

[Anonymous No.4313031]

>>4313016
He kind of needed that movie for coke money.

[Anonymous No.4313042]

>>4313031
Yes, I guess he deserves it after all then.

Considering he was all about being rebellious, he should have gone full Rimbaud and started gun running.

[Anonymous No.4313201]

HST hammered down and finalized the danger of unthinking authorial hero worship for me. The masterstroke of it all is - he took me the whole way through from awestruck to a discrete view of the writings verses the writer.

Started with F&L, and was blown away, not an uncommon reaction from first timers. Then moved though his other works, some of his early journalism, '72, and others.

'72 is a gold mine.

Then I stumbled on his article, "Strange Rumblings in Aztlan", and was stunned again. This prompted me to reread F&L and I see it now in a much different light. I, too, am one of those who is exasperated by those who give it a shallow a meaning and relegate it simplistically to the category of "BLAZE IT FAGGOT!" propaganda.

HST cared, and had plenty of other things to say.

Perhaps ironically, I read his biography and many anecdotes and observations of people who knew him. While I love much of his work I am certain that I would have not enjoyed meeting him in person.

His work though, yeah, wow.

[Anonymous No.4313216]

>>4313024

what if you don't like drugs

[Anonymous No.4313262]

>>4313201
Killing the author has done me a lot of good as well, especially if I like them too much. Nothing like a thorough dose of character assassination (for which reading about the actual lives of larger-than-life figures often is more than enough) to get a new appreciation for their work. And for them as people as well, actually. Ultimately.

[Anonymous No.4313342]

I haven´t read anything by him, but the kind of people that like him seems to either be in high school or a drug fanatic.

[Anonymous No.4313344]

>>4313342
> I haven´t read anything by him, but the kind of people that like him seems to either be in high school or a drug fanatic.

It's true. Which is a shame because he's actually a decent writer.

[Anonymous No.4313417]

>>4313216
Do you know how druggies, when telling you a story, constantly inform you what they were on and how much and how zany the drugs made everything throughout the story?

That, but with more competence.

[Anonymous No.4313419]

>>4313417
Not in his more political reporting.

I hate to point everyone to Strange Rumblings In Aztlan constantly, but Strange Rumblings In Aztlan.

[Anonymous No.4313427]

>>4313419
That's true, but most of his more political work requires a heavy interest in the American politics of that era. It's not really worth reading on it's own if you simply don't care about that.

[Anonymous No.4313434]

>>4313427
That's definitely fair.

[Anonymous No.4313519]

>>4311448
I found my way to Thompson after reading through Kerouac (inb4 lel edgy beats). While Thompson cannot exactly be pigeonholed with Kerouac, they both attempt to explore the concept of the "American dream" and what America represents conceptually.

[Anonymous No.4313539]

I thought Fear and Loathing was entertaining but it was ultimately just a drug story. He tried to redeem it with the last chapter or so where he talked about the 60's passing by. I thought that bit was interesting.

I'd like to read Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail in the future, since I like politics and I'd be interested in hearing his thoughts on it.

[Anonymous No.4314762]

Really interesting guy and love most of his stuff, especially on hippies which has always been an interest of mine.

[Anonymous No.4314773]

Overrated and self-aggrandizing tendencies at their worst and sheep who are stockholm-syndrome-style attracted to a pathological narcissistic writer. Happens a lot, and I could give many other examples of writes who do this. I consider his work pulp fiction.

[Anonymous No.4316909]

>>4314773
Name some more. Hemingway is obvious. Bukowski loved his little cult. Who else?

[Anonymous No.4316917]

His work stands on it's own two feet.
Never mind what you may think about his audience.

[Anonymous No.4316963]

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas was a fun trip but I have little desire to read anything else he wrote.

[Anonymous No.4317064]

>>4313016
They were bretty good friends. Here they are with a matched pair of .454 Casull pistols.

[Anonymous No.4317070]

Never read F&L but The Great Shark Hunt is pretty amazing. Some of the most entertaining essays I've read. Not particularly edifying but you can see why his Gonzo style is so famous.

[Anonymous No.4317131]

>>4313216
Who doesn't like drugs?

[Anonymous No.4317909]

>>4317131
nobody does in the long run except complete idiots

[Anonymous No.4317932]

>>4316909
Ellis

[Anonymous No.4317986]

>>4312732
Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72 was amazing for me when I read it. I'm not entirely certain about how it holds up though, in terms of rereads and depth. But it is an entertaining and well-written story.

[Anonymous No.4318189]

I do like HST and have read my fair share, I always find it a bit depressing mixed with humor and crazyness. And that's what makes it good.

Among who have read him he seem to be overrated because they worship him and think he's the next messiah.

But I do wish more people would read things he wrote.

[Anonymous No.4318228]

>>4311448

His poetry is fantastic from what I've heard, I loved his novels when I was younger and some of the secondary literature was pretty good, too. The fact that his style is so simple and unadorned gives the books a really great flow when reading.

[Anonymous No.4318231]

>>4317909
that doesn't even mean anything

[Anonymous No.4318233]

>>4312741

What exactly is post-modern about Hunter Stockton's work?

[Anonymous No.4318253]

>>4317909
What is the long run? A decade? two? three?
One isn't that much, just 15-25 for example. two? Not that long if I'm honest?

Three?
What is in the long run?
What about all those people that die before they get old?
And what if you use some drugs for a few years then switch?
Actually, what about all the older people who still enjoy the occasional psychedelic trip, weed or opiate now and then?

I DON'T UNDERSTAND!!!
HOW DID YOUR BRAIN COME UP WITH THIS?

[Anonymous No.4318256]

>>4317909
Yes drugs became boring, wait they don't...
fucktard

[Anonymous No.4318271]

>>4318256
No, but they do. They only stay interesting, at least downers do, to brains that have given up their essential vitalistic principle and now dwell purely on bare base instinct. Survive. Don't live. Just. Survive.

[Anonymous No.4318279]

>>4318256
Maybe amphetamines are interesting, because they make your thoughts dynamic and fast paced and learning becomes like, a communion with the god-in-reality..

[Anonymous No.4318286]

>>4313519
OOh like Slavoj Zizek! Slavs say the most fun insightful stuff about America, huh?

[Anonymous No.4318287]

>>4318256
They actually do. Those diminishing returns diminish so rapidly after a while it isn't even funny.

[Anonymous No.4318298]

>>4318271
That's why people stop doing psychedelics, like the Shulgins, Hoffman, mckenna, thompson.
Yes yes it's all so very boring to them now.
And opiates don't feel at all nice after a while, even if you take a break you won't feel it.

[Anonymous No.4318299]

>>4318256
>still being a druggy after your early twenties
>not having moved onto healthy vitalism supplemented with meditation and lucid dreaming

[Anonymous No.4318314]

>>4318299

>not doing both

[Anonymous No.4318313]

>>4318299
>Not going to uni
>Not having a good time
>Hating all drugs
>keeping my mind clean
>Being edgy...
>Straight edgy...

[Anonymous No.4318312]

>>4318298
Shulgin is sick, demented and broke, McKenna was a deranged hack, Thompson died a sick depressed junky suicide. Hoffman was a pretty cool guy but tripped very, very moderately.

[Anonymous No.4318322]

>>4318313
>going to uni after your late twenties

late bloomer m8?

[Anonymous No.4318329]

>>4318322
*early

[Anonymous No.4318330]

>>4318312

not the guy you were replying to but you seem to know your shit

what about ernst jünger tho?

[Anonymous No.4318332]

>>4318312
And moderately over a long time is not a long time?
So now we are talking about how much drugs you do? Not during how long?
So you can have fun with drugs if you use them now and then? Seems like the arguments then relies on stereotypes.

Shulgin is sick but he still finished The shulgin index a few years ago.

Thompson, he died, he killed himself. But didn't he enjoy the drugs up until then? If not, when did it stop being fun? A year before? 10? 20 years? He was 67 when he killed himself, so it stopped being fun at the age of 47? Seems kinda late.

Hoffman: What I wrote before.

McKenna: Can't argue.

[Anonymous No.4318338]

>>4318322
>Growing up in a poor family
>take a job after "highschool" to avoid having as much debt as the rest
>Go to uni
>People assume that you are a losers
>Seems about right

[Anonymous No.4318345]

>>4318330
Experimented for a while but hung up the phone when he got the message. I'm all for people experimenting, but it's the sad cunts that stay stuck in a cycle of drug use well into adulthood.

[Anonymous No.4318361]

>>4318332
I would argue against Thompson having much fun at all. He was a drunk and a speed freak in his twenties and never got out of that. His life is basically a trainwreck of poly addiction behind a mask of zany fun living up to a self-created image that he was too narcissistic to abandon.

[Anonymous No.4318440]

>>4318361
There's actually some great interviews out there with his friends and family where they talk about how much Hunter hated the character of Raol Duke, because that is what people wanted when they saw him.
Apparently the character got pretty out of hand and Hunter became real upset because people axpected him to be just like he seemed in the movies, even though he wasn't always like that. Apparently he was actually pretty reclusive and kind and gentle, but as soon as he was on television or radio or generally in public he had to become Raol Duke, just because people didn't care all that much for old Thompson.
Shame that such a great writer was ruined by his fans.

[Anonymous No.4318624]

>>4318440
He didn't have to do anything, there's no requirement to method act your characters. His own choices ruined him, not his fans.

[Anonymous No.4318689]

I think he was an incredibly honest and real writer. Being a freelance journalist can be hard. Living off your earnings and not taking on work you don't like. There was nothing fake about the guy. His honesty about his drug use shouldn't overshadow his great body of work. He may not be for everybody, but he is one of my favorite writers, being both cynical, funny, and always with a strong sense of the absurd.

[Anonymous No.4318729]

>>4318689
Are you serious? Most of his public life was a grand act. Any time he had visitors at the house he felt obliged to go through the whole blowing shit up act. He realised this himself.

[Anonymous No.4318745]

>>4311448
People tend to read him in a very shallow way because of the drug references, and they don't recognize the hyperbole. The the best of his journalism is fair literature and good American literature. A lot of his stuff hasn't aged well, though, and requires research into the politics of the time.
Read:
Fear an Loathing in Los Vegas
The Kentucky Derby Is Decadent and Depraved
Strange Rumblings in Aztlan
Freak Power in the Rockies
Doomed Love at the Taco Stand

There's also a great ode he wrote to riding motorcycles in The Great Shark Hunt I can't remember the name of.

[Anonymous No.4318833]

>>4311448
I've read a fair amount of his stuff. Hell's Angels was my favorite.

[Anonymous No.4319201]

>>4318440

There's also quite a few anecdotes and interviews out there, and even a few of his own rueful reflections, that paint him as being vicious and callous. Plenty of people got on his bad side in private, at work, or various not-so-public venues, and did not like him at all. They never claimed to have met Raoul Duke, they knew who he was, they knew the difference.

Given some of the social circles he wandered in he showed an incredible charm and was fun simply to sit down and talk to, and without any aggrandizement or showbiz on his part. Press credential carry one only so far, even the secret service and various people chasing power let him in. They knew he was more, and far better, than some simple flip-out artist. A strong, confident, personality who was more than willing to run over anything and almost anyone to get that story out.

Like the people in power he wrote about, knew how to take advantage of a public showing.

He was not Raoul Duke, and he was not a monster. He could be as arbitrary as some of the personalities and systems he railed against. He was not worthy of worship.

Very few of us could go the places he did and weave the truths of it into an engaging and entertaining story, something worth reading. Very few of us could even survive the process of trying and failing at it. All of us can, though, study his work.

His work brings with it a message and meaning. The problem with it, as I see it, is that it's too easy to get lost in the most garish displays and attribute that as the sum of it all.

His methods were the means to push through the immersive madness, not a goal. You can see that by comparing his serious journalistic writings to the popular ones.

That's why I always mention "Strange Rumblings in Aztlan" as a guide to "Fear and Loathing ...", best delivered after the rush of a first reading has cooled down.

[Anonymous No.4319282]

Reading King's "On Writing" helps a bit as he comes across as a bit of cheer leader. The struggle to write is so deeply personal that one may forget others faced the same as oneself.

A little cheer leading now and then helps. And ...

How much do you want to be a writer? At what cost?

You might try listening to a bit of cheering from Thompson, in his own way. Try speaking this out loud to yourself every day:

"As things stand now, I am going to be a writer. I’m not sure that I’m going to be a good one or even a self-supporting one, but until the dark thumb of fate presses me to the dust and says ‘you are nothing’, I will be a writer."

[Anonymous No.4320236]

nitrous bumpis

[Anonymous No.4321110]

>>4318729
You're probably right Anon. Silly old Hunter probably didn't enjoy blowing shit up at all. It was all part of the Grand act that was his life...Then one day he was on 4chan and someone told him to go kill himself..