Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jessicathehun t1_j6b96rj wrote

Oh, and I’ll echo someone else’s comment that this style of writing is also just kind of bad. I consider it sort of abusive to the reader. After Pynchon, I decided I never again needed to read some white guy banging on and showing off all the words he knows (sorry David Foster Wallace)

Edit: lol I forgot a basic rule: never tell book people you don’t like DFW

−14

KieselguhrKid13 t1_j6d0x6u wrote

I think it's a common misconception that Pynchon talks down to the reader or is just trying to make himself look smart. On the contrary, I feel like he writes in a very challenging way, but he expects the reader to be able to get there, too, with a bit of effort. He trusts the reader's intelligence.

And he's clearly not writing for everybody - there's a specific type of reader who will pick up books like that and love them, and others who won't, any that's okay.

8

McGilla_Gorilla t1_j6d26tx wrote

I mean, Pynchon is totally readable for a lot of people. And I’d argue several of his novels are easily approachable for anyone reading above a high school level.

6

mmillington t1_j6icj0l wrote

Yeah, I think he’s very, very accessible, especially Vineland, which is like Pynchon smoked some weed and riffed on 1980s movies and daytime TV for 400 pages. It’s a pretty good hint at what Tommy was up to during his 17 gap between Gravity’s Rainbow and Vineland.

2

mmillington t1_j6icuhq wrote

It was probably the “some white guy” comment, not namedropping Wallace.

2

jessicathehun t1_j6iikgt wrote

Yeah, maybe I should have been more specific: “upper middle class 20th century white guy who had the privilege to gain a huge vocabulary and the opportunity to be paid to bang on and show off all the words he knows whether anyone wants to read them or not”

−1

mmillington t1_j6iisis wrote

You okay?

2

jessicathehun t1_j6il7yo wrote

I can’t be the first person to point out the preponderance of overeducated & overconfident white guys who got published in the 20th century, can I? Downvoting my opinion and implying I’m somehow unwell to hold it is a bit disrespectful. If you don’t agree, move on then.

−1

mmillington t1_j6in5l6 wrote

All I did was point out that I think you misdiagnosed the downvotes, so you responded with 10x more. That’s what we internetters call a smidge unhinged. But don’t worry, upvotes and downvotes have no real-world value.

1

jessicathehun t1_j6inhed wrote

Man, you’re taking this really personal.

0

mmillington t1_j6inr9v wrote

How so? Aren’t you and I just trading unpopular opinions?

1

jessicathehun t1_j6iqxrr wrote

You might need to beef up your rhetorical skills, friend. Come back when you’re interested in having a good faith debate! Until then, seriously, you can just move on with your day; this thread is a conversational dead end.

0

BringMeInfo t1_j6d9cvd wrote

I prefer not to read work by people of any race or gender who are just banging on and showing off all the words they know.

0

RVG990104 OP t1_j6dvs52 wrote

Thank you! Also, I wouldn't call it bad but to each his own, I don't really understand the downvotes, it's reasonable to have a negative opinion about any writer.

0

jessicathehun t1_j6e6p5g wrote

I’ve known for a long time that this is an unpopular opinion! People hold these authors in very high esteem, probably explicitly due to how challenging it is to read their work.

I read a lot of classics and various styles of literature, and for me there’s a stark difference between an author who’s able to move me with a powerful story vs. one who seems to be writing mostly for themselves. I’m glad literature seems to have mostly gotten over that style. It was an interesting trend but thankfully an ephemeral one.

−1

mooimafish33 t1_j6cqnch wrote

Yea I wouldn't want to read something that doesn't allow me to follow it. I can understand if something is beyond my reading level or vocabulary, but if its purposely incomprehensible I think it's dumb and pretentious.

−2