What are the main problems of New Sincerity? What are the more

I think some might argue that New Sincerity might place an upper limit on the amount of depth a work can have--that irony is somehow necessary for nuanced thought.

I of course disagree with that contention a lot though, and identify strongly with New Sincerity, as well as other post-postmodern, or post-ironic, movements.

>>7654983
Its dumb shit that only merica college kids like.

For all talks of sincerity it seems to still operate on the inescapable epistemological basis of post-modernism which necessarily begets working with and through irony. I feel like the true spectrum people work on nowadays isn't sincerity-irony but awareness from the outsider savant to the hyper (self) aware

>>7655037
this pretty much sums it up really nice for me.
Plus it leaves you with this vague unexplored landscape at the end.

No place for God, which of course is the problem with Modernism and Post-Modernism, as well.

>>7655194
We're too cynical for God

>>7654983
>New Sincerity
I don't even think it is a thing yet, if ever.

>What are the more recent literary/art movements that you identify with?

None. I've read a few contemporary literary magazines including N+1 and they all sucked. I fucking wish I could find something like this, God damn I do.

>>7655284
Ya I'm sure you do, kid.

>>7655290
Why else would I be on /lit/?

It ain't just for the memes.

>>7655284
There are a bunch of interesting music scenes going but basically all of the alt-lit disaffected twitter/tumblr crowd is nauseating to me. It's like a caricature of the coffee shop literati. I guess it comes with the ostensible barrier of entry to the form or I'm not looking at the right places but 95% of the time I'd rather consult the canon as far as my /lit/ consumption goes.

is that a tarkovsky polaroid?

What is sincere about it? Doesn't Bukowski have more sincere style, prose, themes and narrative? The New Sincerity strikes me as a worse attempt at what Pynchon and DeLillo were doing in the 60s/70s/80s (& in Franzen's case, he's a wannabe neo-Tolstoy).

I could care less about Harold Bloom but he's right: there are better living writers. In America, the aforementioned. Abroad, and off the top of my head, Houellebecq and Krasznahorkai. In DFW's short life, I would take Garcia Marquez or Saramago any day over his work.

I think between periods where there is really great writing there is a second generation that follows and tries to mimic it and fails. A good example to me is the modernists, and then in the 30s these late-modernists come around like Malcolm Lowry who have none of the creativity or prescience and some of the talent. Its ok, the next great American generation is coming soon.

>>7655284
Just look harder. There are so many now that you can find a niche for anything. The big names are fairly worthless though, with maybe the exception of The Paris Review, which has published interviews with Knausgaard and Houellebecq.

>>7654983
The people who come out from hiding behind irony were beta hacks in the first place.

what in the fucking hell are you going to be sincere about that is around today, or informed by anything around today of the past?