PRETENTIOUSLY BAD

[Anonymous No.5226903]

What shitty writer is praised as a great and is insufferably pretentious about how bad they are, much like how Monk was. A fucking horrible pianist, who is a fucking horrible writer who is considered one of the greats?

[Anonymous No.5226928]

Ayn Rand

[Anonymous No.5226932]

>>5226903
none, because /lit/erature isn't a joke like >>>/mu/sic

[Anonymous No.5226942]

>>5226903
>A fucking horrible pianist . . .
Who solved a shitton of mysteries.
>>5226928
This.

[Anonymous No.5226945]

Fuck you faggot thelonious sphere monk is cooler than cool

[Anonymous No.5226950]

>>5226945
>style and reputation is greatest than talent

and into the trash goes your opinion

[Anonymous No.5226991]

Fuck you and your shitty thread

[Anonymous No.5226994]

>>5226928
>>5226942
You are both idiots.

[Anonymous No.5227023]

>>5226945
>thelonious sphere monk

Wait a sec.
>McClintic Sphere

Waaaaait a sec!

[Anonymous No.5227029]

>>5226903

Joyce, Proust, Kafka, Beckett, Pynchon, DFW, the list can go on

[Anonymous No.5227033]

>>5227029
Just wondering who you think is a good author?

[Anonymous No.5227040]

>>5227023
that character was based more on ornette coleman though, but monk too. read a fucking jazz history book

[Anonymous No.5227079]

>>5227029

Joyce devised styles necessary to portraying the characters in a way previously unimaginable. His reputation is deserved. That said, Finnegans Wake is up in the air; I'm not sure anyone has actually dissected it fully.

Kafka's prose (or the translation, anyway) is eloquent, and his metaphoric imagery perfectly suited to the conveyance of his ideas.

I can't comment too much on Proust since I've only read a bit for him. Same for Beckett.

Pynchon is good, but he's in his own one-man bubble; a guy who writes cartoons within cartoons whose prose is disjointed and irritatingly disjointed at times but who still pulls you happily along; I think his reputation precedes him and makes people hostile to his name. He is without a doubt just an upfront funny writer having a good time.

DFW is in the same boat, but because he spoke so lengthily on the purpose of literature, and what it should ideally achieve, he casts a shadow of expectancy over himself and his work--and fails to live up to it. Infinite Jest felt like style for the sake of style. I've read arguments as to what he was attempting and emulating, but they become thin when much of his work non-fiction and fiction encompassed similar habits and tics. I like him, I don't revere him, but I believe he's another writer whose success and position has sparked either envy or hatred.

I think labeling any writer as pretentious is silly. A writer is a person who sits down, composes a story, and creates varying personas, ideologies, and scenarios to craft a book--their book. They are expecting people to read it, dissect it, discuss it, understand it, or argue against it. Writing from the start is a bold act fueled by small vanities. Calling one writer pretentious and another not shows a willing denial of the type of personality which is compelled to write.

[Anonymous No.5227085]

>>5227033

Stephen King, George R.R. Martin, Tom Clancy, J.K. Rowling, John Barth, Chuck Palahnuik, the list can go on

[Anonymous No.5227090]

>>5227040
>read a fucking jazz history book

Just curious: why did you feel the need to add this insulting jab? Seems so pot-shotty and undignified, so I'm wondering.

[Yep No.5227383]

roughly half

[Anonymous No.5227392]

>>5227085

Barth doesn't deserve that

[Anonymous No.5227409]

>>5226903
>much like how Monk was.
>le edgy face
Guaranteed, fuckers you do r8 r8ted him. Such cunt, much meh

[Anonymous No.5227550]

>>5227085
obvious bait is oh so obvious

[Anonymous No.5227880]

>>5227085
What am I even looking at here

>Stephen King is cool though I guess

[Anonymous No.5228150]

>>5226903
Thelonious Monk was a great pianist, and could probably play anything. But seeing white America steal jazz made him sick. So he made it his mission to make music that white people couldn't steal. His mission was a success, he made a style of music that white people could'nt figure out (like OP).

So good job OP for having no fucking clue about what you're talking about. You're as pretentious as you claim Thelonious to be.

[Anonymous No.5228153]

>>5226994
oh no, you guys angered the randroid

[Anonymous No.5228593]

>>5226903
>who is a fucking horrible writer who is considered one of the greats?
James Joyce.

[Anonymous No.5228613]

Dolphy > *

[Anonymous No.5228755]

>>5226903
Monk was an absolute genius, and his 'off' technique was exactly what it needed to be to get the intended effect. his unpredictable timing was all very intentional

[Anonymous No.5228761]

>>5228150
>Because I am better than all of these white people who have mastered jazz, I am going to make my own jazz that's so incredibly terrible nobody will ever want play or hear it
>Then I will pretend that my new jazz is complex when in fact it is just racist and obnoxious to listen to

sounds pretentious to me

[Anonymous No.5228763]

>>5228761
you are the lowest. why do you even bother?

[Anonymous No.5228770]

>>5226903

>much like how Monk was. A fucking horrible pianist

You've no understanding of dissonance in jazz. The man was a genius.

Not even riled, you're just another simple pleb.

[Anonymous No.5228772]

>>5228763
Because people need to know the truth. I know that the truth sometimes makes us uncomfortable, but I hold no brief for fiction

[Anonymous No.5228778]

>>5228761

>>all of these white people who have mastered jazz

/pol/ this lack of subtlety is middle school tier

[Anonymous No.5228787]

>muh awkward, pretentious jazz you just don't understand it
same shit with hart crane.
you can make something as deliberately and cryptic as you want. but if it sounds like shit without looking into the specific reasons as to why it sounds like shit, then sorry, but it's shit.

if you have to literally spout 2deep4u, then it's just pretentious shit.

[Anonymous No.5228788]

>>5226903
john steinberg springs to mind.

faulkner is another one, can't stand his quaint old-timers, profound retards, and ramshackle prose.

[Anonymous No.5228792]

Why is terrible-sounding music excusable when the performer claims it was on purpose, but terrible writing isn't?

[Anonymous No.5228795]

>>5228787

Hi OP. Epin maymay of a samefriend post there.

I think you're starting to get people really mad now. Please stick with it.

[Anonymous No.5228796]

>>5228778
>implying Bill Evans didn't serve as a eternal reminder to Monk of what he would never achieve melodically, technically, tonally, etc

[Anonymous No.5228797]

>>5228792

>subjectivity is inconvenient to my angst, i'd rather disregard it altogether

[Anonymous No.5228806]

>>5228787
>smashing hart crane

know that video with the injun who sheds a single tear? that's harold bloom right now.

[Anonymous No.5228813]

>>5228796

Evans was one of the most lyrical players, but if you're actually comparing the two you've a fundamental misunderstanding not only of each pianist but also their own attitude towards their craft.

They were both consciously trying to do very different things with jazz, and they would both laugh at you for being such a clown as to compare them.

[Anonymous No.5228824]

>>5228796

>thinking evans achieved more tonally than monk

do you even know what tonality in jazz is?

[Anonymous No.5228836]

>>5228813
>They were both consciously trying to do very different things with jazz

Yeah, Monk was slamming on his keyboard like an angry child, dancing on stage whenever he ran out of ideas, posing for Time Magazine, generally just being a self-important douche with zero musical skill while Evans was pushing boundaries of jazz music to unapproachable heights and teaching Miles Davis proper theory

[Anonymous No.5228839]

>>5228836

>le i am so mad face

[Anonymous No.5228841]

>>5228824
Do you? Listen to this and explain to me what you thought the tone was because something tells you're a fucking idiot

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Daa-Hj84eo

[Anonymous No.5228855]

>>5228788
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Anonymous No.5228859]

>>5228836

>Yeah, Monk was slamming on his keyboard like an angry child

What an epin ruse, friend.

This whole thread has been you trying very hard with little to no emotional response from people.

I bet you get this a lot.

[Anonymous No.5228865]

>>5228859
>lol what a troll
Not an argument, try again

[Anonymous No.5228869]

>>5228865

>arguing with a troll

Truly a ruse master.

[Anonymous No.5228873]

>>5228836
sorry you will never drink from the well I guess

[Anonymous No.5228880]

>>5227090
because you're a retarded faggot

[Anonymous No.5228914]

Murakami
Sherwood Anderson
Rich Moody
Jonathan Franzen
Dave Eggers
Palahniuk
Robert M. Pirsig
Camus
Most African writers praised by western critics

[Anonymous No.5228922]

OP probably listens to Dream Theater

[Anonymous No.5228939]

>>5228914

>Sherwood Anderson
>pretentious

In what way?

[Anonymous No.5228956]

>>5227079
nice post

[Anonymous No.5228987]

>>5228855
i'm guessing you like faulkner.

help me understand him. what is it that makes him so good?