So I just read pic related, and I think it was a fantastic book.
However, it really made me realize how much I dislike realism in lit. The writing style is really good, but at the same time it's terse to the point of making you forget you are even reading a book; almost as if I'm just seeing scenes from the book in my head in sequence.
Does anyone know what I mean? I really loved the book though.
Depends what books you are talking about to be honest, because it's not that I hate it, it's just that I prefer other things, like more avant-garde stuff, and maybe more magical realism in a sense.
What do you mean by
> making you forget you are even reading a book; almost as if I'm just seeing scenes from the book in my head in sequence.
since that's essentially what a book is. Do you define/think of books as escapism or something?
>since that's essentially what a book is
Not necessarily. When I read literary fiction, I get the feeling that the author intended the reader to read the story, but also pay attention to the prose and language he uses, which is not something I thought of at all when I read Stoner for example.
he seems like a genuine guy asking questions, no need to be mean. there's no shame in not being super exposed/used to "high literature" and there are worse places to start than stoner, which OP apparently enjoyed
Yes, I am a "normie". I haven't read a lot in my life, but I want to, which is why I have bought a lot of books lately, especially books that /lit/ have recommended.
But I'll take my inquires elsewhere.
The writing was not simple,OP. It reminded me of Clapton's guitar style. Effortless yet very technical. Easy to play, hard to feel kind of thing.
The novel made me cry at the end but before that it was pretty underwhelming.I was mad at Stoner at some points.He acted like a complete coward. But maybe that's the point. Also, I was more interested in Mrs. Stoner. Edith was a beautifully tragic character. Someone needs to write a sequel- Mrs.Stoner. Is John Williams still alive?
> The writing style is really good, but at the same time it's terse to the point of making you forget you are even reading a book; almost as if I'm just seeing scenes from the book in my head in sequence.
I'm honestly confused. Would you rather read a book full of words that don't tell a story?
What do you normally see in books?
It is just the backwash from /his/. Give it a week or two and everything should calm down.
But anyways, Stoner is a masterpiece. Williams created one of the most human characters that I have ever seen put to paper. The tension between his wife over his daughter was a great conflict. I mean I know I sound like a faggot, but I love this book and its critique of life, the university, and nihilism.
Do you mean that it plays like a movie in your head, whereas literature that focuses on interesting prose and/or surrealism doesn't, like a very rigid image vs a more vague one?
I can agree if that's what you're saying, but i kind of like the realistic way too.
And stoner had beautiful prose.
This article ironically proves the necessity of books like Stoner.
>But I am not a fan of “Stoner.” First, along with other women readers, I am put off by Williams’s misogyny. Second, as a professor of English, I am dismayed by the pedantry and narrow-mindedness of his teaching and his treatment of a dissenting student.
the plebbery is unreal
Someone posted a Stoner thread a few days ago and something similar popped up. I'll just repeat myself-
Just remember that Williams didn't view Stoner as a tragic figure. He had sadness and hardships and disappointment, but he wasn't pathetic. And in the end, Stoner lived life. That's what matters.