>Dostoevsky, Fyodor. Dislike him. A cheap sensationalist, clumsy and vulgar. A prophet, a claptrap journalist and a slapdash comedian. Some of his scenes are extraordinarily amusing. Nobody takes his reactionary journalism seriously.
Male authors of romances are attacked. Nicholas Sparks is pretty intensely disliked.
I've never read them so I don't feel strongly about it, but I think most people criticizing them are criticizing them because of their quality, not because of the fact they're romances.
The Twilight fans should be savagely ridiculed until they're forced to actually think. But the last person who should be blamed is Stephanie Meyer. Her success is a symptom of a much larger problem. If anything, thank her.
>I've been reading Infinite Jest all day, which has been totally enjoyable and I'm thinking about how easy it becomes to dehumanize the creator or fans of something extremely popular. I've done this, too. I made fun of Infinite Jest without even having read it. I'm sorry for that, and embarrased.
>When we make fun of Infinite Jest, we're ridiculing the enthusiasm people have for new sincerety. Have we nothing better to satirize? Yes, you can read no discernible talent into the writing, but tens of millions of people have also proven you don't HAVE to. Do we really believe that tens of millions of people who found themselves comforted and inspired by these stories are merely wrong? Isn't our disdain FAR more insincere than anything in the stories?
>Art that is entertaining and useful to people is a good thing to have in this world. And I'm grateful for it and celebrate it. So big ups to the Infinite Jest fandom, and to David Foster Wallace, who has been relentlessly attacked professionally and personally over Infinite Jest in ways that authors of bloated period pieces never are. I'm gonna go back to reading books now.
Pretty much. I went through the Twilight Saga once and the most interesting part was watching Meyer try to grow as an author. Like Shakespeare quotes being sprinkled throughout New Moon because that's what literary people do.
No, John Green in a man who never feels for himself. It's obvious watching his videos, watching him perform his lectures with that monotone voice which is supposed to be quirky, I think, but just sounds lifeless. You can read it in his dead eyes in every picture taken of him. And of course you can read it in his books, in which the protagonists don't feel like the creations of a unique individual at all but are perfectly designed to appeal to the self proclaimed precocious, sensitive teenagers/teenagers-at-heart which comprise most of his fanbase. John Green is a man who lets marketability infuse every one of his actions, and I find it hard to believe he is even capable of a single inward thought.
>I've been reading Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum all day, which has been totally enjoyable and I'm thinking about how easy it becomes to dehumanize the creator or fans of something popular in the past. I've done this, too. I made fun of Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum without even having read it. I'm sorry for that, and embarrased.
>When we make fun of Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum, we're ridiculing the enthusiasm people have for individualism. Have we nothing better to satirize? Yes, you can read Hegelian changelings into the writing, but a remarkably small number of people have also proven you don't HAVE to. Do we really believe that a remarkably small number of people who found themselves comforted and inspired by this philosophy are merely wrong? Isn't our disdain FAR more spooky than anything in this philosophy?
>Philosophy that is entertaining and useful to people is a good thing to have in this world. And I'm grateful for it and celebrate it. So big ups to Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum fandom, and to Max Stirner, who has been relentlessly attacked professionally and personally over Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum in ways that philosophers of bloated economic pieces never are. I'm gonna go back to reading books now.
Possibly but he sold out and acted like a retard for the wrong kind of fanbase. Now he has to live with it and if he hasn't regretted it already, which I think he sorta has, he will eventually.
It'll be very hard for him to come back from this if he ever wants to be taken seriously as a writer by serious people.
>It'll be very hard for him to come back from this if he ever wants to be taken seriously as a writer by serious people.
why would this ever happen
he's made enough money that he never needs to work/write anything again, he can just coast life out OR continue churning out YA best-sellers until he gets bored and maybe 20 years later jump into some 'mature' sort of best seller. Do you really think famous plebs go through some deathbed conversion where they suddenly wish they were Joyce? They (and Green) probably find literary works pretentious or boring and feel some fulfillment in their easy writing; he's never going to feel any sort of shame or regret you jealous faggot, he'll just grow more and more self-assured as he watches his empire grow
John Green is an evil genius trying to attract teen girls and its working
He's dying. God damn....This makes me strangely upset.
Look how thin he is. You can see the outline of his skull almost. His skin is stretched so tightly against his withering bones. God this is depressing.
He's got some neck fat, but look at him. Where's the fatty talent-discerner I know and love? He must know he's dying. How do you guys think he's handling this.
This was actually written by Nabokov, who loved Tolstoy Something interesting about Tolstoy is he couldn't stand Shakespeare, Nabokov loved shakespeare. Opinions vary, but it is obvious he is wrong.
>Adolescents love to talk about masks and fronts, "that's not the real you."
ah, that explains this board's obsession with sincerity. i guess wallace is just a confused adolescent at heart.
What a shitstain of a human being. First movie made even less sense than the book, which is a terrible way to make a movie for an audience who is mixed with both non readers and readers.
Absolute trash. Hope he gets assaulted and ends up in hospital.
I wouldn't say so. I don't see any statistical indication that is so, from looking at his youtube channel views, but that was just some kerfuffle on tumblr where some faggot was saying some bullshit about how because he wrote stories for young audiences (not just weak-willed, idealistic women, but this was their implication) and then interacted with them directly on tumblr, in an odd, quirky, weird, uncharacteristic-of-a-middle-aged-man fashion, he somehow 1. wished to be of a younger age, so 2. he could get that prime teen audience pussy.
>criticizing people for enjoying absolute shit is...
>Yes, you can read misogynistic gender dynamics into the stories, but tens of millions of people have also proven that you don't HAVE to
This seems like a very dangerous argument for a tumblr SJW-type person to make?
>you can read racism into Heart of Darkness, but you don't HAVE to
>you can read misogyny and patriarchy into Hemingway, but you don't HAVE to
>you can find <work of classic literature> "problematic", but you don't HAVE to
The Brothers Karamozov gives a more accurate and useful description of youth and growing up than any of Green's novels. Of course he has to bash it, otherwise a book that's a century younger than his would be selling more.
what in the fuck is this does his chin have balls
Yeah but Joseph Conrad and Hemmingway are white males. Stephanie Meyer is a female and is impervious to that criticism because she is just expressing herself as a woman or something.
It's like they're building some kind of privilege social hierarchy.
We might as well start putting on weight and start faking mental disorders because that is what will get you ahead in the future.