It's just a literary snuff film. How is this regarded as good?
>>9743431
Evidently you did not read the entire thing. A snuff film centers around, and in fact the only plot is, the killing of a person/people. Which tells me you didn't read much of this book, or didn't understand much of it.
>>9743441
What is there to understand besides violent, abhorrent, random scenairos?
>>9743448
>They don't understand the plot of naked lunch
It would probably help if you read Junky, Queer, and Yage first, I'm guessing. But if you don't like the style, some people just don't care for the cut-up method, or Burrough's sense of humor. Because the thing is, most of this book is comedy.satire, which, if you have the edition in the OP pic, there should be plenty of material explaining this, both from editors and Burroughs himself. But again, it's not for everyone.
>>9743460
I've completed Infinite Jest so I'm certainly no stranger to the cut up, fractal style, but how the fuck is this comedy? Dismembered, blood discharging cocks? Are you Fucking kidding me?
>>9743475
>>9743431
Yeah I agree, this book fucking sucked. Scene after scene of buttfucking, murder, random diseases, and heroin with no discernible direction was absolutely exhausting to read. I read some of the afterwords because I wanted to understand why this book has any place next to other classics and Burroughs outright states that he does not remember writing most of it. The shock value wears off like 40 pages in, and beyond that there's really nothing this book has to offer.
>>9743523
THANK YOU
Its high modernist satire
its not one of the cut-ups
>>9743523
Well you didn't read it very well, because he says basically "we have to remember there are different types of memory, and when I say I don't remember writing any of it I don't necessarily mean it literally, but emotional memory," blah blah blah neither of you read it very thoroughly. Not saying you have to like it, but you have both betrayed lack of having actually read the book.
I thought this was /lit/, where we blindly hate on all things Beat related.
>>9743562no one asked what genre it was dingus
>>9744125
Did they imply anyone did? Because typically people will know the genre of a book, therefore be able to hate on said book because of this, without having to be reassured on 4chan. Ya dingus.
Interesting to see what you all think of Naked Lunch. I was told to read it so I'm glad there was a thread up about it.
>>9744125
It was people claiming that Burroughs used the cut up method in Naked Lunch that triggers people who know better.
>>9746005
He is right you know.
>>9743562
>>9746005
Naked Lunch is not cut-up the way the nova trilogy is, but to be fair, it's a mesh of selected but independent 'routines' written over years, picked, put together and editied with the help of Ginsberg and Kerouack (Who gave up and left after a week because the manuscripts gave him nightmares).
The resulting non-coherence and confusion one feels as a reader is similar to that of reading his later cut-up works.
>>9743460
>It would probably help if you read Junky, Queer, and Yage first
This is good advice. Burroughs is best read chronologically. Junkie and Queer and to some extend Yage are steps towards the style he fully developed in Naked Lunch. The Yage letters are just that tho: letters to Ginsberg.
>>9743448
The gist of it: The world is run by powerhungry control addicts. The control sickness (read power structures) deform them and render them depraved and dehumanized. Junk is used as an example or all encompassing metaphor to illustrate the mechanics of these power structures. Bradley the buyer is a good example. The man who taught is asshole to talk is another. So called "Factualists" are infiltrating fractions of power play, like A.J. pranking the uppity upper class at their fancy cocktail parties or more importantly Hassan I Sabbah exposing the truth about the death orgasm trick. Naked Lunch itself is a violent attack on oppresive power structures with two main metods: Satire (A.J.s pranks) and blunt exposure.
The really interesting thing here is that Burroughs warbled visions of power dynamics predates that of the post structuralists with a decade and spells it out clearer than those french farts ever managed to do.
You are welcome