He is not relate to /lit/ for me at all, apart from the fact that he at least once visited. He was known and sort of internet famous before this board was made... if you cared about literature back then, that is...
>>7622996 What the fuck do you even think you're talking about when you call an author a "meme," that they're not actually good, but that people just talk about the author because other people did? Are you saying that the author is a joke? That they are not actually worth reading? That the idea of trolling people with the author is pervasive?
>>7622929 I post this in pretty much every Tao Lin thread, I should just make pasta:
He is very insightful, especially in his literary criticism. His essay on Almost Transparent Blue (Ryu Murakami's best work by far) is very good. (http://thoughtcatalog.com/tao-lin/2011/02/almost-transparent-blue-ryu-murakami/)
His work is generally less so. I would say all of his books other than Taipei are varying levels of bad. Taipei is okay. If you visit his website you can find various articles he's written for various sites and many of those are okay too.
I think that he is improving and has the most potential of any American author under 35. The thing is that, he's still developing his style, and that people have a lot of negativity geared toward him because unlike a lot of "great" authors, he didn't start off with a huge success. Instead, he published his crap right off the bat (and his crap was still better than almost anything any motherfucker on /lit/ can put out), and has continued to just publish whatever he wants as he creates it. Any why shouldn't he have? Anyway, I'm not saying anything he's written (other than the ATB essay if you've actually read ATB) is necessary reading, but it's interesting to see an author with a voice that I find familiar.
A lot of people, and on /lit/ especially, remind me of an observation from Bernhard's The Woodcutters. How people who think highly of themselves, like they have good taste, often have a bunch of antique furniture and old books and old this and that. But it's easy to have good taste, when all of that old stuff has already been vetted by generations of people who came before. Who looked it over and decided that it was good enough to be passed on. The antique furniture is what survived, so it must be good, and it represents nothing special to declare that you have good taste when you're really just depending on the taste of others in the past. It's much more difficult to look at the present and discern what will survive.
I guess that’s a relatively cynical view – that people generally either like or dislike works not on the merits of the work, but to aggrandize their own ego.
>>7627204 She is, but he more so. They used to be on the outs with one another, after he pulled some unnecessary publicity stunts. I believe she works for Gawker and he threw up a bunch of Brittney Spears promo stickers on their office doors.
>>7623442 Tao Lin has stated in interviews he doesn't think he's a meme. He also uses the word meme frequently, in the sense as described by Terence McKenna: "the smallest unit of an idea that still has coherency."
>>7623477 You use the phrases "bad" and "okay," but you don't back them up with anything. I know this is /lit/, but what specifically about Tao Lin's early books can be considered objectively "bad?" Could it be that you just don't like, in terms of personal preference, the way his books are written?
All authors are always developing their style. The thing that I find so interesting about Tao Lin is that his style between works changes completely and utterly. It almost sometimes feels like I'm reading a different author when I compare, say, his short story collection "Bed" to "Eeee Eee Eeee."
He's said himself that he's always amused to look back at his poetry collections, because they're in a style he no longer really writes in.
I highly recommend you read "Bed." You categorize his early stuff as "crap," but I think you'd change your opinion after "Bed."
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.