did DeLillo write anything good besides Underworld and White Noise?

>>9602714

I enjoyed Great Jones Street recently.

Underworld wasn't something I'd recommend. He did it better in White Noise on fewer pages. His sentences are beautiful in Underworld but the story is shit.

>>9602714
Rattner Star, Point Omega, Libra

>>9602732
This is dead on, and therefore an indication of reliability. To GJS I'd add Libra and Mao ii. Just checked Zero K out of the city library..

why don't you find out for yourself

>>9603253
because 17 books are a lot?

>>9603103
reading Ratner's star right now. Extremely well written, although dragging a bit.
>>9602714
Outside of Americana almost everything he writes is good although he seems to write 25% more than he probably should have. He also sometimes tends to get lost in the music of his sentence when he's actually said the same thing five different ways, which can be annoying. I think he commits this sin most often in White Noise. Mao II is probably my favorite book of his that I've read so far; brisk, worldly, and cerebral.

I recently watched an Interview with DeLillo where he said he primarily views himself as a writer of sentences and that he is willing to sacrifice meaning in his work for the sake of the aesthetic or for what he sees as the right conclusion to the sentence. I can't help but find this distasteful I'm an admirer of his writing and am all for writing as a craft but this attitude is a cop out surely? The great works and great writers are great because they manage both simultaneously, the art is finding the synthesis between them.

>>9603515
How about you actually read his books and discern for yourself if there isn't an overarching meaning. He complains all the time that the people who write about him in the academy only focus on his social criticisms rather than focusing on his language and how he gets there; this is probably what he means by his statement.

>>9602714
Underworld's not that great tho
not bad but
eh

>>9603515
This is why is more of a poet than novelist. Bloom himself called him a transcendental poet.

>>9603594

I have though, not all because his oeuvre is quite large, but enough that I think that quote from his is telling. I'm not saying his books are devoid of meaning, certainly not but I think his emphasis on style and preference for a snappy sentence over meaningful content is palpable even to the casual reader and is my personal criticism of him and why I don't consider him a true great, even though I do by and large enjoy his work and appreciate his artistry.

>>9602732
completely disagree

underworld and libra are his best

>>9603627
except your opinion is discounted by the fact that it was only developed after the hearing the artist's opinion of his own work. How do you reconcile
>I recently watched an Interview with DeLillo where he said he primarily views himself as a writer of sentences and that he is willing to sacrifice meaning in his work for the sake of the aesthetic or for what he sees as the right conclusion to the sentence
with
>I recently watched an Interview with DeLillo where he said he primarily views himself as a writer of sentences and that he is willing to sacrifice meaning in his work for the sake of the aesthetic or for what he sees as the right conclusion to the sentence
Is it your idea or his? You sound like an idiot, and you're not helping yourself by unironically ranking writers in terms of greatness.
>The great works and great writers are great because they manage both simultaneously, the art is finding the synthesis between them.
Also what kind of fucking platitude is this?

>>9603734
t. Delilo

You sound butt blasted friend. I don't even know what you were trying to say there, how do I reconcile one sentence with the exact same one? Quite easily by virtue of them being identical and requiring no reconciliation.

it's his idea, the give away being I told you he said it himself but the general preference for style over content being a criticism I personally had while reading his works and then was quite surprised to hear him admit that it's something he's aware of and in fact at times consciously chooses to do.

If you're having a fit about people ranking writers by greatness whether intended subjectively or objectively what are you even doing on 4chan?

>>9602732
literally the opposite of blooms opinion so youre wrong

underworld>white noise

>>9603734

Jesus christ you autist lit theory 101 shits

The quote by the author expresses a truth about the work, namely that this sentence-by-sentence approach creates a core fuzziness to many of the books that many people fine pleasing but that ultimately makes it feel hollow compared to work that has a much tighter focus and greater degree of fidelity.

People aren't appealing to intention, they're appealing to the aptness of the author's statement and using it to provide an ADDITIONAL and satisfying casual explanation.

Go read your aristotle again on "causes." A good critic provides EVERY KIND OF CAUSE. Of COURSE the technical is fundamental, but the other things interest too.

End Zone is quite fun.

If you're thinking of picking up Libra, stop, wait for a little while and then pick up Ellroy's American Tabloid instead.