Is What We Talk about When We Talk About Love good?

Why don't you read it? Its less than 200 pages long
>but but I need my 4chan validation first bawww bawww

i thought it was good

>>7660644
>but but I need my 4chan validation first bawww bawww
/lit/ in a nutshell

itt: what we talk about when we talk about what we talk about when we talk about love

>>7660654
What are you talking about, what we talk about when we talk about what we talk about when we talk about love is love, that's what we talk about, my love

>>7660662
what

>>7660644
>>7660651

I've seen this twice, in as many days.

People make it sound like it's unreasonable, coming to a book board to get opinions on books. That's the whole point of this board. I'm sorry some people can't see that at all.

Is What I Talk About When I Talk About Running good?

>>7660673
>Needs validation from 4chan to start reading a fucking short story collection that is less than 200 pages long, not even a 'hard' book
Kill yourself

>>7660638

Read Beginners instead, it's unabridged version of What We Talk About When We Talk About Love.

>>7660638
I love that collection, but it leaves me feeling raw and melancholic. Definitely worth dedicating an afternoon to.

I recommend following it up with Cathedral, another short story collection of his that has more...hope, I guess?

>>7660700
Try baby powder.

>>7660700

you sound like a right shit

I'm a huge fan of Raymond Carver. I definitely suggest reading either What We Talk About When We Talk About Love or Cathedral. Since they're short stories, you could always just try a couple and if you don't like em then don't finish the collection.

Make sure you look for the symbolism, I really like Carver's use of symbolism to connect the details of the story with the story's main theme(s).

The stories are a lot easier to get into if you relate to Carver's general themes as well. Some of these are alcoholism, distrust, affairs, isolation, etc.

>>7660711
You sound illiterate

No mention of his editor yet? Surprising

>>7660728
I'm going to piggyback off of this post.

OP if, when reading it, you find that what you enjoy most of all is the writing style, definitely hop over to Gordon Lish. He was Carver's editor, and a very big reason why there's such a (imo fantastic) stripped-down prose.

>>7660740
>>7660749

Damn, as if on cue.

>>7660754
>>7660749
Anyone know where I can find a pdf or epub of an unedited short story? I want to compare.

>>7660673
Yeah after you've fucking read it
God you people are insufferable

>>7660758
"Beginners" is the unedited version of "What We Talk About..."

My fault m8, I should have stated that

>>7660758
Nevermind, I just found this that shows the edits Lish made to "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love"
http://courses.unt.edu/mpenkov/carver%20-%20beginners.pdf

>>7660773
>start reading this and think "huh, it doesn't look like the editor did that much work. I'm not sure why people keep saying he pretty much wrote Carver's books for him
>get to the 8th page
>he is literally writing Carver's book for him
Holy shit lol

any further recommendations for a fellow carver fanboy? much appreciated

>>7660638
This picture is hot and I desire something, maybe a movie, where a situation like this occurs.

>>7660773
I would have signed something to make sure this was never released. It's rather embarrassing.

>>7661060
Here you go, matey

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/house_of_pleasures/

>>7660959
I would also like recommendations.
also, I suggest Dubliners by Joyce. I really liked that and I am a fellow Carver fan.

>>7660959
i really like 'eleven kinds of loneliness' by yates which i read at a similar time
i mean i guess they're pretty different, but they're weirdly intertwined in my mind as really neat american short stories about the depressive alcoholic middle classes

>>7660638
What is the source OP?

>>7660638
Read it on a rainy weekend afternoon with the lights off. Maximum melancholy and unexpected comfy.

The reason this sticks with me is because the subject matter of Updike tales often intersect with those of Raymond Carver- a contemporary whose writing is far superior to Updike’s. Yes, carver has his faults. When he writes a bad short story- about one in five- they are really bad: ill-formed, witless, with no narrative arc, and banal ends, not to mention a penchant for having his characters drink their troubles away. Drink also inhabits the good and great stories, many of which inhabit the recent carver anthology I picked up- Where I’m Calling From. In a great Carver tale the characters are self-aware, they have humor, they speak like real people do, and relate to each other in the odd, yet familiar, ways our family and friends do. Yes, they drink too much, more than the average, but that’s a minor quibble, also considering Carver’s tales end with a bang, a memorable image or action that leaves a reader to think long afterwards. Such is not true with Updike. Perhaps it is the Northeastern vs. Northwestern thing? More likely it’s just that Carver was a flat-out far superior fictionist to Updike, at least in the short story form, although Updike’s book leaves me not eager to engage any of his longer fiction, since the short stories are so excruciating.