How fucking stupid is this guy to find the recognitions hard? How has he ever published a novel if he has trouble reading that book? It's not hard. Every so often when a major event goes down Gaddis just gets a bit vague.
>>25238711>even reading FranzenStop listening to Oprah Winfrey, OP.
>>25238711I used Google to translate stuff and look up few painters and names. I assume that is what he found hard. But it doesn't even happen that often.
>>25238713Who said anyone read him.
>>25238711OK, explain the use of dialogue in TR.
>>25238711Yeah yeah we all get it you're very smart and don't find any of the "difficult" books actually difficult. You got all the references without looking them up and were always aware of the character's disguises and the plot was as simple to follow for you as a children's book. You understood why Gaddis was doing everything he did and all the stylistic choices because you're such a genius and that's why you're with all the other highly successful geniuses here on /lit/, good for you anon
>>25238717>I used Google to translate stuff and look up few painters and namesNow imagine doing all of that pre-internet
>>25238732This. I've read OPs book and assessed his societal contributions and he's ten times the man Franzen is
>>25238720Not OP, just a retard with self awareness of being a retard, will you explain after OP fails to answer?
>>25238720Dialog is dialog. What is there to explain.
>>25238732Thanks
This book is a crazy takedown of Hipsters and artsy fartsy types. When he describes the one girls look from her vintage dress down to her vintage mickey mouse watch that no longer tells time lmfao. I'VE MET THAT CHICK IN REAL LIFE. or the art show where the art is so retarded they hang it upside down and backwards and no one notices. I'VE BEEN TO THAT SHOW. Just like in the book we were there for free drinks abs l and snacks
>>25238755Sure, at least as much as I can explain in retard in 3000 characters or less. I will make a post after work, assuming no one meets the challenge, which is a safe assumption. >>25238768If you understood the book you should be able to tell us. >>25238781>t. plotfag
>>25238781I like for wyatts life is ruined by not paying for that first review
>>25238720To me it was to show how fake, pretentious and retarded everyone is. Try finding something original in ask that muddled talk.
>>25238711this guy thinks moby dick is shit and is unable to finish it.
>>25238720you mean JR? lmao
>>25238894TR has dialogue, and since it also has a good deal of narration he is able to leverage the dialogue in ways he can't in JR. There is not much to say about the use of dialogue in JR, going to almost pure dialogue greatly limits the use of the dialogue itself for much other than dialogue.
>>25238768Explain how the dialogue structure interplays with the major theme(s) in the book, for instance. Shouldn't be too hard for someone who found the book easy
>>25238994You can't tell who's talking sometimes like you can't tell who painted something. No one's authentic. No one genuine.
the corrections wasn't a chore to read that's pretty dope literature doesn't have to suck to be good
>>25238711Better character writing in Franzen than Pynchon, that's for fucking sure
>>25238803He's right The Corrections is unironically better
>>25239252characters are ass i read for ideas
>>25239256You should just be reading philosophy then. "Ideas" in fiction are second if not third rate.
>>25238801You are going too far to the extreme, Wyatt becomes 100% authentic and he becomes completely incomprehensible to others. To put TR into reductive terms, we live in a society where authenticity has been corrupted and become synonymous with originality, which is why the novel's two true artists are forgers. Authenticity and originality became marketing terms to sell art which puts the artist in the impossible situation of trying be authentic. Gaddis takes this well beyond just art and develops authenticity and originality well beyond their dictionary definitions, religion is most obvious and there we see pretty much the same thing, Gynn's faith is incomprehensible once it becomes authentic, Stanley is the opposite extreme and strives to cultivate authenticity, he is the trad larper. Being a part of a society or community requires a middle ground between the extremes, as a society we have lost the ability to see the middle ground and the reasons for this and the consequences of it are numerous and complex, so we get a 1000 page doorstopper.>>25238755The dialogue is in opposition to the narrative. The narrative is absolute and objective but the dialogue is the character's own words and subject to character; we have inside information and this creates a subtextual dialogue between who the character is and the image they present along with dialogues between these aspects of other characters. This might seem like normal dialogue and character interpretation at first but it is far more intimately tied to theme than normal dialogue and character interpretation, they are one in the same here and direct exposition on the idea of authenticity.This is the only thing remotely postmodern about TR but he uses it in the same way many modernist used stream of consciousness, he just uses old fashioned dialogue instead of new and exciting technique. >>25239240You probably could have gotten it if you had put in a little more effort. >>25239252Franzen most likely was heavily influence by Pynchon for character, character in The Corrections is almost identical to character in GR, the difference is that in The Corrections the characters are going through things that we can relate too and understand, they become more relatable as the novel progresses instead of less relatable, and this is intimately tied to theme. The Corrections has a great deal of GR influence, it is pretty much GR but the war at home.
>>25240893>as a society we have lost the ability to see the middle groundThat is not quite right, we can still see it but our relation to it has changed because our relation to authenticity has changed, we find it pathetic and weirdly offensive, we instinctively recoil from it; Mr Privner.
>>25239370some ideas can't be systematized into autistic puzzles tho
>>25239256It’s always good to come across someone else who prefers reading the wikipedia summary and not the book. We are summarychads.
summarychadnoun1. Retarded.2 . Having the qualities of being retarded.3. Corruption of summerychad.
>>25239256>>25241217so you two dont read the books just the summaries?
>>25240934Yes they can, most literary writers simply aren't intelligent enough.
>>25241217>>25241234>>25241261summaries are for plotoids not ideaists
>>25241261Yeah, basically, as I mentioned characters are ass, but also plot, theme, and prose. All that matters is ideas.
>>25241569ya but the ideas ooze out of the spaces between story beats and characters. you step back and look at the whole thing and you're like woah what the fuck is back there?
>>25241565False, plotchads experience the literary work in a way that can't be reduced to an explanation. A summary for an ideaist will suffice because the only content they care about can be impersonally summarized
If you guys really want to prove who is best you could ante up and discuss literature instead of having a limp wristed pissing contest.
