Wow. This was fantastic.

>Don DeLillo
Dropped.

>>8186286
no it wasn't. your your a pleb

>>8186306
Why's that?
>>8186290
Why do you dislike DeLillo?

I haven't read this one but the cover is cool.

>>8186290
>>8186306
>2016
>not recognizing DeLillo as the greatest American writer in the last 50 years

>>8186393
It's a good one. The structure of it is absolutely fantastic, easily my favorite thing about the novel.

>>8186286
Delillo is the greatest at describing films.

Point Omega is The Names: Lite Edition

someone rank delillo for me, I've only read White Noise and I don't want to read the baseball one or the jfk one
is falling man good?

>>8186502
Libra
Underworld
The Names
Mao II
White Noise
Point Omega

Libra and Underworld are his best.

>>8186502
The baseball one is the best.

>>8186519
Libra is more perfect than Underworld but Underworld is amazing.

>>8186519
how much baseball is in it though

probably going to read some of his shorter works first then underworld eventually

>>8186286
the first lines of this novel are simply 10/10

if you want something similar go read The Body Artist, also really short and amazing.

>>8186374
I think he has bad prose and the themes he deal with don't interest me as well.

>>8186545
>I think he has bad prose

You're gonna have to be more specific than that.

>>8186286
I didn't like it. It was average at best.

>>8186554
No, I don't.
> This was fantastic.
>The structure of it is absolutely fantastic
>Libra is more perfect than Underworld but Underworld is amazing.
>the first lines of this novel are simply 10/10

Fuck you.

>>8186531
The only actual 'baseball' is in the epilogue, but the novel loosely follows the structure of how that ball got passed around.

>>8186545
>>8186560
These are paid shills. In every single Delillo thread they try to meme that it's cool to hate on Delillo but they have absolutely nothing to say. You can tell they haven't read his books.

Read George Will's review of Libra and you'll understand why they're here.

Go ahead and check the archive.

Every single Delillo thread.

They'd shill the food out of their daughter's mouth.

>>8186572
Yeah, paid shills. Do you believe jews control the world too? Back to /pol/.

>>8186581
If you'd read Delillo you'd know that's not quite the case.

You can't stop people from learning.

>>8186581
No one feels that strongly about Delillo without getting paid.

Fuck off.

>thinking there are shills for a mummy writer like it'll make a difference

C'mon you fucking tinselhats. get a grip.

>>8186597
Good, you're learning.

>>8186597
> shill realizes his occupation is futile

Delillo is canon. Deal with it.

>>8186592
if serious please look into if you're developing schizophrenia

>>8186592
>paid for shilling
>at the literature board of a ethiopian carving seminar
Yankees are funny. Go read something decent, Christ.

>>8186616
OK, I give up!

I hate Delillo!

Read Tom Wolfe! Praise George Will!

>>8186623
I'd rather not read contemporary fiction at all.

"Will also said I blamed America for Lee Harvey Oswald. But I don't blame America for Lee Harvey Oswald, I blame America for George Will" --DeLillo

#shotsfired

>>8186629
> Gotta pretend like I actually read books
> I-I h-hate Delillo because I read the ancients!

Delillo. Is. Canon.

File: gwill.jpg (28KB, 478x269px)

28KB, 478x269px

The famous George Will article appeared in the Washington Post, Sept 22, 1988 (p.A25). Here are a few choice snippets of Will's feelings about DeLillo and Libra:

...the book ... is an act of literary vandalism and bad citizenship.

DeLillo says he is just filling in "some of the blank spaces in the known record." But there is no blank space large enough to accommodate, and not a particle of evidence for, DeLillo's lunatic conspiracy theory. In the book's weaselly afterword, he says he has made "no attempt to furnish factual answers." But in a New York Times interview he says, "I purposely chose the most obvious theory because I wanted to do justice to historical likelihood."

History, says a DeLillo character, is "the sum total of all the things they aren't telling us." Of course. "They." That antecedentless pronoun hants the fevered imaginations of paranoiacs. For conspiracy addicts like DeLillo, the utter absence of evidence, after 25 years of search, proves not that there was no conspiracy but that the conspiracy was diabolically clever.

It is well to be reminded by books like this of the virulence of the loathing some intellectuals feel for American society, and of the frivolous thinking that fuels it.

What was unfairly said of a far greater writer (T.S. Eliot, born in St. Louis 100 years ago this Monday) must be said of DeLillo: he is a good writer and a bad influence.

>>8186634
>19, 20th century
>ancient
Get a load of this guy!

File: Screenshot_2016-06-20-14-04-18.png (515KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

515KB, 1440x2560px

>3.4 on goodreads
>fantastic book

weeeeeeeeew

>>8186643
ok no one's arguing with that, it's the schizo red flag of jumping to people being paid to shit on delillo on this very board
>>8186651
>caring about the morons on there

>>8186658
I know right?

George Will's review is spot-on. Fuck Delillo. What a hack.

File: Screen shot 2016-06-20 at 2.10.10 PM.png (83KB, 577x420px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 577x420px

>>8186651
lol all the one star reviews are from terrible dudes who all look the same jerking themselves off in their reviews

>>8186560
The structure is interesting because the opening chapter (Anonymity) and ending chapter (Anonymity 2) mirror the goings-on in the middle of the book while being removed from them in a way. I really enjoyed how he did that and think it's very smart.

I haven't read Underworld though I will say Libra is great. the pacing is great, how the story progresses and the increasing sense of paranoia one gets while reading. Oswald was a very well-developed character. I was able to empathize with him.

>>8186545
> He doesn't interest me. Don't read him.

>>8186374
Because those two clowns have sticks up their asses

>>8186643
this dude sounds like a fucking fascist.

>>8186374

Not that guy, but I don't like how bad DeLillo is with characters. Literature, for me, is about understanding other people. His books are devoid of other people's voices. It's all him. I'm only gaining understanding of a single guy, a guy who I find pedantic and long-winded.

>>8186651
wow this is the most poorly reviewed book I've ever seen you guys say you like. maybe your taste is shit after all

>>8187937
Which characters did you dislike, or find that they are stand-ins for Delillo?

I'm genuinely curious.

>>8186286

>Jonathan Franzen blurb on the back cover

so embarrasing. he definitely thought it was going to be DeLillo's last

>>8187937

There are definitely worse writers than donnydel at writing character, but you have a point. However, he is very good at tying together characters, and is good to excellent in plotting. His prose at its best pleases me as well. He's a good writer, but doesn't address your personal prioritized criteria. No probz. DonnyD is superb at massaging the boundaries between syuzhet and fabula.

>>8187991

Yeah, the latter. Everyone's dialogue sounds like lines from a philosophy essay.

>>8186460
This. The meat of the book was meh, but the ekphrasis was especially well done.

>>8188032
Oh, so you can't actually name any characters because you haven't read Delillo.

Fucking shill.

>>8188159
we got it man, you are the #1 dellillo fan and anyone that dislikes him is a shill

ok

>>8188181
> damage control

>>8188250
You don't even know how to greentext, stop.
Plus: There are 18 posters in this thread.
Stop samefagging too.