Originally posted by wormwoodHow do you mean?
writing has evolved so incredibly much in the last 30-40 years that it's not even funny. and the best stuff is ignored by the academia. I'm not saying palahniuk is necessarily smooth with his words, but he can draw the reader in like no russian master ever will.
What I actually like about Dostoyevsky is that I find his style still pretty fresh, if you get a good translation. Same goes for Kafka, I guess...The first time I read Metamorphosis I couldn't finish, it was turgid and opaque...the second time, it was, like, the funniest thing I'd ever read, lol...
Originally posted by wormwoodAgreed regarding the stereotype of 'cultivated' according to how many
heh, yeah. I read mostly pulp & poetry now. and no I haven't tried cooper, looks interesting. I'll have to check him out..
there's nothing wrong with long books, only long-winded. when I was younger, I had this crazy notion of what should be read. I crawled through horribly obscure philosophy, russian classics and religious texts with stubborn resolve. i ...[text shortened]... mooth with his words, but he can draw the reader in like no russian master ever will.
of the 'big books' appear on the social-chat list of "look what I've read"
It is a rush of fresh wind to achieve that age (chronological or mental)
when one gives a rat's arse about what others think regarding reading
habits, and then the reading can go from a microwave manual to some
obscure German monk of the XIII Century.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nagepeople read dostojevsky like health food. tastes bad, but it's still good for you. -on the other hand, people who can't stomach any literature, pick up palahniuk and can't put the book down until the last page.
How do you mean?
almost all older writing is very abstract and detached from 'gut expressions', that is, using words that access directly your senses. smell, taste, touch. if dostojevski had a reading today, it wouldn't cause very strong emotions in the audience. mild euforia perhaps. palahniuk's bodycount on people fainting is somewhere around 70 I think. -sensational? yes. trying to shock readers? of course. effective? extremely.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nagecraig clevenger, stephen graham jones (I like him very much, incredible short stories http://stephengrahamjones.net/), will christopher baer... maybe alex garland.
Nicely put.
So, who else do you put in the Palahniuk bracket?
and of course chuck's teacher tom spanbauer, from which he got basically all the technique he uses, but they're completely different otherwise. spanbauer writes incredibly beautiful, poetic semi-autobiographical bricks of fiction, and his 'in the city of shy hunters' is my favourite book by far.
Originally posted by wormwoodHaven't heard of any of them...Fantastic!
craig clevenger, stephen graham jones (I like him very much, incredible short stories http://stephengrahamjones.net/), will christopher baer... maybe alex garland.
and of course chuck's teacher tom spanbauer, from which he got basically all the technique he uses, but they're completely different otherwise. spanbauer writes incredibly beautiful, po ...[text shortened]... aphical bricks of fiction, and his 'in the city of shy hunters' is my favourite book by far.
Originally posted by Seitseexactly.
Agreed regarding the stereotype of 'cultivated' according to how many
of the 'big books' appear on the social-chat list of "look what I've read"
It is a rush of fresh wind to achieve that age (chronological or mental)
when one gives a rat's arse about what others think regarding reading
habits, and then the reading can go from a microwave manual to some
obscure German monk of the XIII Century.
during the time I've been checking out this 'physical writing', I finally picked up my first raymond chandler. now, I've never been a fan of crime fiction, so that's why I never read his books. but now that I finally did, WOW that guy wrote well! he's like the paul morphy of writing! it's like liquid god pouring from the lips of salma hayek. messy, juicy, excellent!
1 edit
Originally posted by wormwoodYou might like Georges Bataille...Blue of Noon is a good visceral read. Dennis Cooper used to be compared to him a lot, although excess is all they really have in common.
messy, juicy, excellent!
Also Richard Hell, from the last generation or so...here's him reading some fairly queasy stuff: http://www.writing.upenn.edu/pennsound/x/Hell.html
2 edits
Originally posted by Seitsecops & robbers:
Perhaps Henry Miller with a vengeance, worm?
Sounds sweet!
Edit. Hey, recommend one from Stephen Graham Jones.
http://www.mississippireview.com/2005/Vol11No1-Jan05/1101-010805-jones.html
bestiary
http://www.wordriot.org/template.php?ID=701
southern gothic:
http://stephengrahamjones.net/?p=128
zombie sharks:
http://juked.com/2005/09/zombiesharks.asp
domestic man:
http://www.southernhum.com/stephen-graham-jones/
Originally posted by wormwoodAlthough I generally agree with you on this view of why some/most people read classics, in no way I feel that Dostoevsky fits the bill. Crime and Punishment is as absorbing as they come and reads like a breeze even if I find its depth quite staggering. One thing does not necessarily mean the other (as you probably know)
people read dostojevsky like health food. tastes bad, but it's still good for you. -on the other hand, people who can't stomach any literature, pick up palahniuk and can't put the book down until the last page.
Bosse may be right, translations can be key (unless you read it in Russian). I remember that when I was buying the book, the guy on the bookstore recommended me a specific translation and I loved it. I've never understood why a few of my friends with similar tastes found it slow and over-pretentious, so that might be it.
Originally posted by wormwoodWell put Wormwood. But I do think some of the classics are worth reading..OR what I consider classics. like Chandler SMOOTH writer..
heh, yeah. I read mostly pulp & poetry now. and no I haven't tried cooper, looks interesting. I'll have to check him out..
there's nothing wrong with long books, only long-winded. when I was younger, I had this crazy notion of what should be read. I crawled through horribly obscure philosophy, russian classics and religious texts with stubborn resolve. i ...[text shortened]... mooth with his words, but he can draw the reader in like no russian master ever will.
I have read Dostoyevski in Russian. Please dont puke on me yet. He is great but..he is not easy to read in Russian either.
but I would Put Knut Hamsun's The Hunger as a great old read
Plus:
The great Gatsby: by Fitzgerald
The Grifters by Jim Thompson
No longer Human by Osamai Dasai
The woman in the dunes by Abe Kobo
Silence by Endo Shusako
To name a few