Is /lit/'s hatred of David Foster Wallace like /tv/'s

>>9654041

He was a talented hack.

I feel sorry for people who understand culture only through these vague and pointless analogies. I feel even more sorry for people who don't understand that memes aren't literal.

He was the greatest writer who ever lived. It's nothing more than a meme

>>9654045
>non-answer
>>9654046
>pants-on-head retarded non-answer
>>9654049
>"it's nothing more than a meme and he's talented" answer
So he's talented? Is that what I should get from this?

>>9654052
>please, please tell me what to think

>>9654052
Read him and decide for yourself. His short stories should be a good place to start (Good Old Neon).

The tug-of-war between anons regarding the praise and slander of DFW reflects firstly the pervasive ambiguity of hivemind patterns here, secondly the tendency for morons here to bicker over poorly substantiated opinions, and lastly the remora like propensity of anons to either cling on to writers like DFW who they think represent highbrow literary prestige or tryhard highfalutin prevaricators

>>9654041

/lit/ doesn't actually hate DFW, but memeing Infinite Jest into the /lit/ mainstream was intentional, mainly to figure out who the true pseuds of the board were. His other work is actually okay. Not great, but okay.

>>9654052
He's honest to goodness pretty fucking shite and everything he tried to do was done better by guys like Delilo, Roth, Pynchon, etc.

>>9654059
I have read him. I just want to know what /lit/ thinks about him, and I can't tell if it's a /tv/ hatred they believe is deserved or a /mu/ hatred that's more of a joke.

>>9654054
>I refuse to state my own opinion and calling inquiries into it just people asking me how to think
Just kill yourself. In real life, you are shit. Die now.

>>9654080
>I have read him
well then share your thoughts or fuck off

solicitations for unreciprocated opinions not welcome

>>9654080
>/lit/ is a single entity
>/tv/ is a single entity
>/mu/ is a single entity
>I'm too autistic to tell when people are joking
>I need the approval of these boards to regulate my thinking

holy shit lad if you don't see the problem you're beyond help

>>9654080
If you've read him and still can't tell you should neck yourself. Form your own opinions and stick to them. Unless they're retarded.

>>9654076

Don't forget Barthelme and to a lesser extent Carver.

>>9654076
>Delillo
Fucking lol. The most overrated of all the pomo fucks.

The Beetles weren't good this can be proven by simple mathematics.

>>9654117
are you saying DFW was better than DeLillo at the whole "modern life is so odd and let me make a biting satire of it" thing? because if not delete your worthless post, because like your existence, it's totally irrelevant

>>9654041
His fiction is an atrocious mess of "dude vocabulary lmao"
His nonfiction isn't terrible, but reads like a 15-year-old HST fanboy's first assignment for journalism class
Also the Beatles were never good

>>9654117
lol. form your own opinions man

>>9654041
I think the trend across all fan boards is to be bored by or aggressively against the mainstream fluff (beatles, harry potter, comic book movies, farmville). When you delve deeply into an area you generally find a lot of stuff that's a lot more interesting than whatever reaches the front pages of magazines or prime-time tv. And it's not just contrarians bored by the beatles these days. That's music for old people and has little to do with what's happening in music now or for the last few decades. When either Paul or Ringo die, most kids won't care, because they won't know who either of them are. Popular music is shaped by what the kids listen to and create, not by what old people reminisce about.

The DFW stuff has a lot to do with him being an awkward young guy in dorky clothing, so a lot of us are looking into a mirror when we see him. He's certainly a lot closer to being like us than most authors.

>>9654041
>or is it like /mu/'s hatred of The Beatles, in that they're incredibly talented and influential people but the board is full of edgy contrarians?
>Beatles
>good
Okay fine
>influential
There was a lot of Beatles contemporary bands that had greater impact. /mu/ screechs because bands like TVU or Beach Boys don't get the praise they should because they were a lot more influential.

>>9654041
Tarantino is fine. To say that he's talentless is just mindlessly being contrarian.
>>9655132
The Beatles were way way more influential and had a greater impact than those two bands you mentioned. I like all three bands a lot, but those two don't compare

>>9655255
You're really bad at this :/

What does it mean to have talent? How do I know if someone is or is not a "talentless hack" do I just trust your opinion?

>>9655261
At what? At being a contrarian with no real opinion?

>>9655255
>The Beatles were way way more influential and had a greater impact than those two bands you mentioned
C'mon TVU&Nico spawned more genres alone than the whole of Beatles discog.

Also Tarantino is talented yeah but he is kind of a hack. He borrows too much from his inspirations. Fuck, Lady Snowblood anyone?

>>9655132
You're missing The Kinks, they're barely brought up compared to the Beatles, yet they were just as influential

>>9654041

Head-and-shoulders above every criticism against Wallace is the fact that his fiction is boring. People feel the need to intellectualize their hatred of him just because he was such a raging pseud. They're trying to pre-empt the "oh you just don't understand it" argument, which is completely irrelevant if his writing is so bland and tiresome to slog through.

inb4 the classic "it's supposed to be bad that's the point" pseud gambit

>>9654052
>pants-on-head-retarded

you sound like a faggot

>>9654041
>/mu/ hates The Beatles
>He fell for the copypasta meme
Lol you're such a fucking smoothbrain anon

File: what.gif (241KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 400x300px

>>9655032
I don't know if I have ever seen a post more stupid than this one. Congrats on your (You)

>>9654125
In no aspect is DFW better than DeLillo.

>>9654045
this is true

File: 1497528105098.gif (2MB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x300px

>>9654041
>beatles
>incredibly talented and influential

File: le tricky hook.png (8KB, 363x364px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 363x364px

>>9655421
nice pasta faggot

>>9654041
But Tarantino actually was talented and the Beatles, while not total hacks, aren't too special.

>>9656317
Wtf I hate the beatles now

>>9654041

/lit/ is filled with edgy atheists who believe in irony above all else

/lit/ is the anti-DFW

>>9656317
Paul was an exceptional bass player with a great vocal range, and was a great songwriter. Harrison was a phenomenal guitar player, especially on the slide, he later proved to be a great songwriter as well. (Look into the All Things Must Pass Album). And Ringo, although, not the most technical drummer, had perfect timing and a distinct sound. You could easily identity Ringo's drumming from other drummers. Lennon was an excellent songwriter and wasn't too shabby on the guitar either, (nowhere near as good as Harrison on the guitar, but still good).

The Beatles are Godly, and your bait is weak.

>>9656531
are people this deluded that they cant imagine their favorite band being disliked?

File: scaruffi_on_the_beatles.png (1MB, 803x7825px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 803x7825px

>>9656531
Yet all they produced was simple, predictable pop rock. Not that they weren't good at that; they were. But good isn't great.

>>9656537
No, it's when people make asinine statements like "The Beatles aren't incredibly talented and influential", are people perplexed.

>>9656560
You say good, I say great, but what I am not saying is greatest. I simply recognize them for what I, and many other believe them to be. Do I understand that there were many other more technically proficient groups, and musicians? Of course. But, they don't take away from the greatness of the Beatles.

>>9655284
TVU was taking tricks from the beatles. The Beatles invented the deliberate use of feedback in a rock record. The Beatles invented the TVU.

>>9656561
>"The Beatles aren't incredibly talented and influential"
they were influential, they ruined all pop music.

and if anyone can defend glass onion, please do so.

>>9656602
dude what lol ther was no pop music to ruin, if anything they invented it

>>9656578
>The Beatles invented the deliberate use of feedback in a rock record. The Beatles invented the TVU.
>White Album came out in '68
>TVU&Nico came out in '67
Sure thing bud. Their first mianstream experimental album that created TVU came after TVU started, yeah sure thing.

Why do so many old people stagnate and just listen to the same music for decades? Doesn't it get boring listening to the same playlist on repeat on the local classic rock station?

As early as a couple years ago people were worshipping him. If lit hates him now then it's just a dialectic reaction

>>9656800
I Feel Fine came out in 1965, dumbass. While John Lennon was bringing guitar music to heights that would influence the course of history and art, Lou Reed was writing novelty jingles for little kids

File: original.jpg (10KB, 322x214px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 322x214px

He was bold, edgy, and unpredictable. It was like a meteor hitting landing on the bottom of the ocean, creating a large literary wave of brilliance that was felt by everyone intelligent enough to understand his message. He redefined what it meant to be a writer. Not only was his style verbose, it was also deep. Every word - and I mean EVERY WORD - was there for a reason, making the reader feel a certain je ne sais quoi. I'd put him right up there with Faulkner, Joyce, and Tolstoy.

Seriously, the man was on another level. I can't believe he killed himself. Why did he do that? He had so much more to offer the world, like a 1000 page epic about the modern day political climate. Imagine what Wallace could've done with the craziness that has enveloped politics in 2017... it would have been insane.

Wallace had it all, really. He was smart, witty, experienced, and most of all, highly observant. The way he could make the most banal of situations seem like a once in a lifetime experience is something that will always impress me. How he could take the ordinary and point out the small details that differentiated it from other seemingly ordinary moments.

Wallace loved life, until he realized that life didn't love him back. His story, no, OUR story is one of false promises and misunderstood relations. As sad as it is to say, Wallace never reached his full potential. Sure, he wrote one of the greatest novels in history and cemented himself as one of the all time greats, but he never reached the lengths he could've. We will never get another David Foster Wallace.

Never read any of his shit though haha.

>>9654080
You're a robot. Not a human being. Maybe a parrot more like. Something that only consumes and regurgitates half understood things

>>9654041
why bother reading someone who couldn't even live with himself. the only sincere moment in the life of David Foster wallace was when he kicked away the chair. the rest of his life was a lie, the new sincerity was a joke whose punchline was the creaking of a leather belt around the rafter.
his literary career was a menagerie of self help lies told to keep his depression at bay. the audience pussy and drugs were the ghosts at that feast of hypocrisy. the depression was warranted because behind all the gimmicks and the self awareness and the bandannas was no discernible talent

>>9654041
/mu doesnt hate the Beatles

>>9654059
Wow What a litterate post MR author

>>9656898
>Never read any of his shit though haha.
LMAO

Well done

>>9656800
Are you seriously arguing that TVU is better than the Beatles? Lou Reed was a hack. If anything Ray Davies was the greatest pop songwriter of the period. Waterloo Sunset alone is much more beautiful than Jesus or Pale Blue Eyes for example.

>>9654041
Yes, that's actually spot on.

>>9656998
thank you, i pride myself on my literacy. did you like my use of the words remora and prevaricators? they're 'big' and obscure, but my usage of them unequivocally establishes the merit of my opinion. sesquipedalianism = legitimacy 100.1%

>>9654041
The Beatles fucking suck though. Tarantino is pure contrarians and kids trying to fit in.

>>9656864
>>9657154
>people assuming when I say TVU I mean Reed
I'm talking about John Cale you cockmunchers, Reed only assumed total control over the band after Loaded.

And yeah they put out a song with a twang in 65 but when did they started using it deliberately throughout a full album? White Album, '68.

>>9654041
The Beatles are actually shit and you know this so here is your (you)

2/10, made me reply

>>9654041
He could arrange letters like no other and took the game hangman to a new level.