Riotbeard Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I hate J. D. Salinger. The protagonist in the Catcher in the Rye is amazingly annoying, and do we really need tragedies about self-involved, wealthy white kids? Slavoj Žižek is also quite annoying. I generally find annoying participatory democratic ideologies, who prize activity over substance and ideas. Don't get me wrong I am pro-democracy (generally speaking), but meeting up in a park and voting on stuff doesn't much matter if you aren't willing to organize around a specific ideology/platform, and turn that into an actual movement. I just find his fetishizing of the "protest event" obnoxious. A bit of a rant... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohgoodness Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I hate J. D. Salinger. The protagonist in the Catcher in the Rye is amazingly annoying, and do we really need tragedies about self-involved, wealthy white kids? Slavoj Žižek is also quite annoying. I generally find annoying participatory democratic ideologies, who prize activity over substance and ideas. Don't get me wrong I am pro-democracy (generally speaking), but meeting up in a park and voting on stuff doesn't much matter if you aren't willing to organize around a specific ideology/platform, and turn that into an actual movement. I just find his fetishizing of the "protest event" obnoxious. A bit of a rant... Dont knock participatory things. Zizek is an idiot but Boaventure de Sousa Santos is all-righty. There is far more going on with democracy movements than meeting-up in a park and voting on stuff in places outside of Zizek's viewpoint. (this is an ok-post since I am hating on riotbeards comment) And Pynchon may suck - gravity's rainbow was soo booring - but the crying of lot 49 is still a great book. Aubergine 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rems Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 So, I don't quotequote "hate" her, but I largely fail to see why everyone loves Woolf so much. I understand her importance in the genre and the canon, and whatever, but I honestly find her novels to be a chore with little pay off. I also think there are many female Modernists who are much better, but don't get as much credit in comparison to how much cred Woolf gets. Djuna Barnes comes to mind. Or HD (who gets some but not nearly enough). And I second the comments about Diaz and Austen. Especially Austen. blakeblake 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sebastiansteddy Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 So, I don't quotequote "hate" her, but I largely fail to see why everyone loves Woolf so much. I understand her importance in the genre and the canon, and whatever, but I honestly find her novels to be a chore with little pay off. I also think there are many female Modernists who are much better, but don't get as much credit in comparison to how much cred Woolf gets. Djuna Barnes comes to mind. Or HD (who gets some but not nearly enough). And I second the comments about Diaz and Austen. Especially Austen. Whaaaaat? I love Woolf AND Barnes! But especially Woolf! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
practical cat Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I actually see Woolf as the most straightforward of the modernists. Little work involved. But I'm an Americanist and won't take too much offense at this. Barnes is really chill though, love her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecheese Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Woolf is great. That said, I do get where rems is coming from given that I dislike the way she gets traded sometimes (especially by semi-conservative prose writers in creative writing departments). Also: Mina Loy, Gertrude Stein, Lorine Niedecker (so good), Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven (I haven't finished reading through the collected yet... but it is cray cray), etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rems Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I get the props deserved for Woolf, and I would never contend that she doesn't deserve it. I just get really bored reading her stuff -- like, really bored. I don't say this much because my department is Woolf CRAZY. Can I also admit I don't get what people see in Zadie Smith either? I can't get into her stuff -- maybe I'm just really bored easily or something But I also really like Pynchon and Wallace. So maybe I'm the one with bad taste ohgoodness 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DontHate Posted January 14, 2013 Author Share Posted January 14, 2013 Taste cannot be bad, that's the whole point of taste. It just is what it is. The problem with Zadie Smith, for me, is similar to the problem with Junot Diaz (though I think Smith is a far superior prose stylist). She got a lot of praise for her ethnic background, at the expense of the structure of her plots. Her plots are a total mess. The ending of White Teeth was completely awful and sloppy and rushed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skybythelight Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 DFW is on my list: I recently gave Infinite Jest a try and just could. not. do it.I'll also second whoever mentioned Butler early in the thread, and for the same reasons. Her concepts are interesting, her writing style infuriating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IG-88 Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Taste cannot be bad, that's the whole point of taste. It just is what it is. Saying that a particular text or an author's body of work doesn't happen to conform to your interests or preferences, or creates an unpleasant experience for you when you try to read it -- sure, I don't think you can really argue about that. However, claiming that something is "aimless" or "pretentious" or that someone is an "idiot" or "hack" -- these are value judgements, and they can be debated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riotbeard Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Dont knock participatory things. Zizek is an idiot but Boaventure de Sousa Santos is all-righty. There is far more going on with democracy movements than meeting-up in a park and voting on stuff in places outside of Zizek's viewpoint. (this is an ok-post since I am hating on riotbeards comment) And Pynchon may suck - gravity's rainbow was soo booring - but the crying of lot 49 is still a great book. To be fair, I didn't knock participation per se. I knocked fetishizing participation over substantive ideas. Its the idea democracy or participation are good without specifying what participation is for or having a strong ideological orientation and set of goals. In short, I am denigrating Occupy Wall St., not all participatory movements. ohgoodness 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rems Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Saying that a particular text or an author's body of work doesn't happen to conform to your interests or preferences, or creates an unpleasant experience for you when you try to read it -- sure, I don't think you can really argue about that. However, claiming that something is "aimless" or "pretentious" or that someone is an "idiot" or "hack" -- these are value judgements, and they can be debated. AW shit -- thems fighting words. Sounds like a Canon-Off is bout to go down. I'll start: I think graphic novels are better literature than Jane Austen. sebastiansteddy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sebastiansteddy Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 (edited) AW shit -- thems fighting words. Sounds like a Canon-Off is bout to go down. I'll start: I think graphic novels are better literature than Jane Austen. Stephenie Meyer is better than Austen. (Exaggeration, but...) Edited January 14, 2013 by sebastiansteddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecheese Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Northanger Abbey as a gothic parody is brilliant. I don't know, I find the properness and sentimentality of the novels to be like rubbing my face on a cheese grater, but I see why people study it. I definitely don't hate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisajay Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I have a tumultuous but ultimately wonderful relationship with Hemingway. If bullfighting or fishing/boating plays a major part in the work, I probably despise it, so much so that I cannot stand to read or discuss it. If it's another of his works, I just might appreciate it quite a bit - For Whom the Bell Tolls is fantastic and I have much to say! I don't think there is any writer/thinker that I really hate completely; I prefer these confusing relationships. i'm nearly the exact opposite. i could read/re-read/talk about TSAR until the cows come home & never ever tire of it. FWTBT, on the other hand... not so much. 14-year-old me read it & hated it, & i've avoided it ever since, until now since it's assigned for one of my seminars next semester. just finished reading it again for the first time, & contemporary me appears to have warmed to it. kairos 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DontHate Posted January 14, 2013 Author Share Posted January 14, 2013 I have a lot trouble figuring out your Hemingway acronyms, lisajay. I guess that just makes me not a very Internet-savvy Hemingway scholar? In any case, I can explain how and why Diaz is a hack, ANY DAY. This is an absolutely true fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisajay Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 nah, it just makes me a lazy typist this morning. TSAR = The Sun Also Rises FWTBT = For Whom the Bell Tolls The Sun Also Rises is on my desert island top 5 list, while For Whom the Bell Tolls i absolutely could not stand the first time i read it. glad i read it again though, cos i got a lot more out of it this time around. still... nowhere near my desert island top 5. i'll also second the henry james comment made earlier. i've got a love-hate relationship with that man. love his glorious syntax & beautiful sentence structure... absolutely hate his plots & writing overall. not for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DontHate Posted January 14, 2013 Author Share Posted January 14, 2013 I've got to say, I can understand people who find James painfully boring, but I think if you focus on the plot you're missing the point. He is all about psychological weirdness, plot has very little to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waparys Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Fun fact: TSAR is known as F in the UK.(The Sun Also Rises is known as Fiesta in the UK). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecheese Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Fun fact: TSAR is known as F in the UK. In my head I inserted a C and subtracted "in the"? (and then I assumed we were talking about early 20th eastern european political revolt). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
practical cat Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 AW shit -- thems fighting words. Sounds like a Canon-Off is bout to go down. I'll start: I think graphic novels are better literature than Jane Austen. I think Jane Austen is better (whatever that means) and more enjoyable but I think graphic novels are more interesting, especially in the abstract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecheese Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I think Jane Austen is better (whatever that means) and more enjoyable but I think graphic novels are more interesting, especially in the abstract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DontHate Posted January 14, 2013 Author Share Posted January 14, 2013 Jane Austen is so f'ing hilarious! I find her super entertaining. She's like an olden-timey Seinfeld or something. It's a shame that you guys don't get that from her the way I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisajay Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 confession: i've never read jane austen. i did, however, read pride & prejudice & zombies, & it was delightful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecheese Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 confession: i've never read jane austen. i did, however, read pride & prejudice & zombies, & it was delightful. I have a strange desire to read Fifty Shades of Dorian Gray. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now