'Writers go wrong, according to Coelho, when they focus

>>8525627
That's he's a hack, a cretin and a pseud of course.

isnt it extremely embarrassing to be an anti-intellectual writer

I don't agree with him that Ulysses is like that.

But I see his overall point, and it's the same point DFW also had in one of his interviews. Some people are overly educated and are writing to impress other overly educated people, which is fine of course, but they shouldn't whine if most people find their stuff inaccessible or downright shit.

Or be like Gass who has style and content

>content
>actually just ideology

>>8525660
>ideology
>actually just religion

>>8525627
He infuriates the pretentious because he is correct

>>8525627
funny, his books have neither.

and he doesn't even come up with the damn PLOT himself.

>>8525644
I bet Twain, Orwell, and Hemingway are all just sick from this burn

Just today's?
Dickens, for example, is also like this.

>>8525644

his comment isnt anti-intellectual

Coelho´s literature is trash, but writers who think the best way of writing is doing it in the clearest way possible, with the least numbers of words possible, arent anti-intellectuals.

He is just accusing Joyce of being all style no substance.

>>8525627
>caring about anything uttered by this plebeian, worthless facebook quote-tier author

>>8525627
Yo, you mentioned one of my favourite books man :)
What y'all think of my review?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH0IVh5YOLY

>>8525627

This man, in my country, he is nothing.

I disagree abo Ulysses. It's filled with content and if you fail to see that that's your own fault. Also Coelho has neither form, nor content that is remotely interesting in any way, so he should shut the fuck up.

>>8526154
Holy...I want more...

>>8525627
>There is nothing there. Stripped down, Ulysses is a twit
Well, you can't expect a fly to appreciate the Sistine Chapel either.

See da white man always be usin den big words so that normal people can't be reedin dem.

They don't rite reel shit about people from the community.

And they got all da prizes so us Latin American brothers can't get ahead

huehue hack

>>8525674
>>8525696
both true

>thinking form and content are separable when you're talking about words on a page.

>>8526221
Many Latin americans got the literature Nobel prize. Bolano would have gotten it had he not died of cancer so young in 2003.


Although they were all Spanish speakers, not Brazilians.

>>8525714
Orwell and Hemingway loved Joyce and Ulysses, Twain wasn't anti-intellectual but rather anti-moralist, a cynic.

-1000/10 post, try again.

>>8525627
There's nothing wrong, I don't think, about writing for other writers. Not necessarily to impress them, but for it to be kind of an exchange.

>>8525660
ideology ≠ idealism

>>8526862
I just finished the savage detectives.
It's great. Still most SA's in general are retards.

>>8525627
His books might be trash, but he's not wrong.

>>8525627
Form is IMMENSLY important in alluding to the point of the whole novel. Only stupid people can't figure out why authors experiment. It's essentially syntactic metaphor.

>implying content isn't an extension of form

The novel itself is a form. Why not tell your stories by calling people up on the phone?

The form/content duality is the dumbest argument in literature that only gets worse when big blubbering babies pretend that content is somehow the master category. "Plot" only arises from the arrangement of words in a text, that is, from the form. Come see me, Coelho.

>>8525627

I'd say it's a never ending tug of war between the moralists, who see writing as propaganda for the 'correct' social causes; the aesthetes who see it as an end to itself; and the expressionists, who aim for intensity and clarity of emotion and expression.

These aren't remotely separate categories, but they do tend to track at cross purposes.