|
Earwicker posted:maybe you should grow out of your "baby tier level" mindset and just read his poems and decide for yourself if you like them or not? I have read them, and I like them. I was just wondering what you think because he gets paired with Robert Frost for banality Smoking Crow fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Mar 28, 2015 |
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
I have only read a few of them and it was many years ago but I enjoyed them. I've enjoyed a few of Frost's poems as well though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
Edit: Nevermind wrong thread.
Borneo Jimmy fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
ulvir posted:i'm reading inherent vice now, and I kinda regret this not being my first pynchon book. I'm only 1/4th in, but it feels a lot better than the crying of lot 49. not that the latter's bad, just if things continue as they do, a lesser book than inherent vice
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
I've got like 14% left and I still dig it, but pynchon really loves sex scenes and blazing it. probably would've finished it yesterday but sadly this flue has left me a bit under the weather
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
I didn't like Inherent Vice much and still think V. is the best one, had more memorable scenes and more human characters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Grimson posted:imo the first half of inherent vice is fun and charming and interesting enough, but by around the halfway point you've more or less figured out the broad strokes of how things are going to end up, but it just kinda keeps trundling on for a couple hundred more pages, throwing together more set pieces i guess just because pynchon wanted to use up all the goofy character names he'd thought of recently That's our Pynchon!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 12:33
|
|
|
The book Inherent Vice is better than the movie right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:I have read them, and I like them. I was just wondering what you think because he gets paired with Robert Frost for banality he's a premodernist poet he's not supposed to be profound gently caress, at least he's less pointlessly verbose than shakespeare's poetry
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
Borneo Jimmy posted:The book Inherent Vice is better than the movie right? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
you know who i really like in anglophone poetry? rudyard kipling best anglophone poet imo, horrifying racism and all come at me
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:he's a premodernist poet he's not supposed to be profound Shakespeare's poetry is good, actually.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
CestMoi posted:Shakespeare's poetry is good, actually. a popular stance, and one i will not fault you for holding but not, i am afraid, a correct stance
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:he's a premodernist poet he's not supposed to be profound virgil is pre modernist and his poetry is profound
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:a popular stance, and one i will not fault you for holding That time of year thou mayst in me behold is better than anything Kipling did, unless you can count having the "I don't know I've never Kippled" joke being based on him as a thing he did.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
ok he's a premodernist not literally trying to capture he essence of divinity through his poems, i'll grant you a certain measure of profoundness when you aim for that but even that is pretty much borrowed profoundness as he tries to make poetic sense of a ton of jumbled theological dogma, i am legit uncertain if i accept that the depth of virgil's poetry (at least in divina comedia, haven't read anything else) stems from the poetic form he uses or if it's just a function of the subject matter also, chinese poets etc from this period may very well be profound, i wouldn't know, so i'm limiting myself specifically to the western tradition here vilain, skallagrimson, shakespeare, homer, banalities abroad from the lot of them
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:ok he's a premodernist not literally trying to capture he essence of divinity through his poems, i'll grant you a certain measure of profoundness when you aim for that You are confusing Virgil the Roman poet with Dante the Italian (actually Florentine) poet. & what do you mean with banalities? What is more banal than Kipling's If—?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Where is Shel Silverstein on the profound - - - banal axis, now that we know Shakespeare and Virgil are banal
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:ok he's a premodernist not literally trying to capture he essence of divinity through his poems, i'll grant you a certain measure of profoundness when you aim for that Everybody is laughing at you
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
'If' was Ayn Rand's favourite poem, enough said
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:ok he's a premodernist not literally trying to capture he essence of divinity through his poems, i'll grant you a certain measure of profoundness when you aim for that Virgil was a character in the first third of the Divine Comedy, he didn't write it Virgil wrote a poem about farming and it's more profound than most of the poetry from the past 100 years
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:ok he's a premodernist not literally trying to capture he essence of divinity through his poems, i'll grant you a certain measure of profoundness when you aim for that i really need to know what level of irony you're operating on before i can reply to this post chernobyl kinsman fucked around with this message at 05:52 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
Boatswain posted:You are confusing Virgil the Roman poet with Dante the Italian (actually Florentine) poet. oh my how embarassing yes of course kipling is also a premodernist poet so banality is expected and, indeed, applaudable End Of Worlds posted:i really need to know what level of irony you're operating on before i can reply to this post i'm being mostly ironic, but with a kernel of sincerity. the virgil thing was an honest mistake born from posting too late in the night, though, gonna cop to that like, don't get me wrong, i really like poetry, but i think a lot of people approach the classics in a silly way, looking for grand truths where someone really just wanted to express some concept in a good way through text and rhythm (that's the sincere part). also i don't like shakespeare's poetry, which i think is much weaker than his plays. so, when someone disses Burns for being "banal" it's just that his style is more simple than that of some of the other greats - he does an excellent job of writing about e.g. love in a captivating way
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 13:26
|
|
|
My favourite poets are the selfpublished ones.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Modernism seems like an odd choice to place this barrier since many imagists were allowed to both write and publish as they shaped Modernism as a movement, rather than being lined up and shot. Or is the simile you're going for here that pre-modern poetry is like of a bunch of interchangeable portraits of madonna and child and it is only after the rise of secularism that poetry is permitted new subjects and techniques.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
no i'm going for the point that poetry is far too often taken as a "serious" art form and judged by those measures, i.e. how it approaches the sublime or whatever, rather than what it very often is, which is a way of effectively and attractively expressing some aspect of the human condition. shakespeare, since i seem obsessed with him these days, is a particular victim of this attitude - especially his plays, which are often positively bawdy, are taken by many (in my cultural sphere) as "high art" in the same vein as your great classical composers or painters (arguably this is even a Thing in painting, with certain of the flemish primitives being prime examples, but y'know). so the objection of banality as a reason not to appreciate art is not valid, because a ton of great art is banal as all hell poetry-as-high-art is another Thing entirely. homer's writing, for example, isn't very profound - it's basically a way of recounting a story, which it is really good at. it is also a very valuable insight into the mindset of his/their culture, which is also quite fascinating. the point being that we have these weird criteria where anything good becomes deeply meaningful, and where the "profoundness" of a work is a direct measure of its value as a work of art. ionnescu et al pretty much demonstrated why this is false imo, but the attitudes still remain. the bar being set at modernity is completely arbitrary, that part was mostly polemic V. Illych L. fucked around with this message at 14:22 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:no i'm going for the point that poetry is far too often taken as a "serious" art form and judged by those measures, i.e. how it approaches the sublime or whatever, rather than what it very often is, which is a way of effectively and attractively expressing some aspect of the human condition. shakespeare, since i seem obsessed with him these days, is a particular victim of this attitude - especially his plays, which are often positively bawdy, are taken by many (in my cultural sphere) as "high art" in the same vein as your great classical composers or painters (arguably this is even a Thing in painting, with certain of the flemish primitives being prime examples, but y'know). so the objection of banality as a reason not to appreciate art is not valid, because a ton of great art is banal as all hell understood, carry on Wayne Gretzky posted:See, what I'm going to do, right, is communicate via text, except in this special way that only certain people will get. I don't want to just like... you know, type it out as if we were speaking, or tell you a story, or whatever because like... I just have this special like... mind-space, right, or mind-cloud, like ok picture a regular mind, and then picture one that's slightly bigger and better, but kind of like tragic? Anyway, its good to type stupid poo poo like a fag. In short sentences. Recapitulating each unparsable moment. Waves crash on a crying Mexican woman. Corrito guandalte she cries to the sun. Mechanical bird
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Such a good Gretzky post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
gonna cement my dunce reputation itt by admitting that i don't get it
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
Tree Goat posted:Everybody is laughing at you
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
no, i got that, i don't get the gretzky thing
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:no, i got that, i don't get the gretzky thing It's a post from FYAD, the Latino subforum that is mostly people posting monkey chease bullshit like "jope" and "brulpus". You can safely ignore it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:Here are some Russian Futurist poets to soothe your pain I was going back through this thread and this guy is so cool quote:One time we met people who held themselves together with buttons. Really. Their insides were accessible through a flap of skin, buttoned down by little round hornlike protuberances. Whenever they ate, a furnace of thoughts glowed through this flap. That’s really true.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
What's the best book Will Self ever wrote.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:What's the best book Will Self ever wrote. His poo diary. In all seriousness I tried to get through Umbrella and it was awful. Just awful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
I have no where else to post this so it'll go here http://www.theparisreview.org/karl-ove-knausgaard-advice
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
I just started Zadie Smith's NW and I'm really into it. I liked White Teeth a lot but felt the ending was really week, and I couldn't get into Autograph Man at all.. hope this lives up to the start
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:What's the best book Will Self ever wrote. His short story collections are the best. The quantity theory of insanity and Tough tough toys... are both quite good. His long form stuff is weaker, but my favourite is The book of dave . Haven't read umbrella yet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
If you guys haven't read David Vann yet quit being useless shitfuckers and read David Vann
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
What's yall's opinion on William Golding? I just bought The Scorpion God and The Paper Men based solely on the covers/historical setting/vague fond memories of Lord of the Flies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 05:27
|
|
