Here's a challenge: try watching this entire video.
Hard mode: Don't insult the asshat.
I was making this comparison between GR & SH5 while I was lying in bed this morning. GR is achingly beautiful throughout. My heart just came and came while I read it. SH5 has a great structure and some beautiful ideas but the book isn't a dense jungle of sweaty sexy lexical exuberance. I wish there was a combination of the two.
Also: I like Slothrop/Mexico/Tchitcherine/etc. better than SH5's cast.
>there's no music to his writing
>tfw multiple foxtrot asides that are actual fucking songs
So, a writer who didn't like Gravity's Rainbow. Is this supposed to be raging or hilarious?
He just didn't like it. A lot of us happen to love it, or at least pretend to. Not a big deal. A different opinion.
Or are we supposed to hate Nabokov because he disliked Faulkner, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man or Thomas Mann?
We are no special snowflakes for being Papa Pinecone's most obnoxious fangirls.
By the way, when I finished GR I started a couple of threads here and nobody posted nothing but stale dank memes.
>le banana man
>it's all a nonsense ruse lol
May be we should stop spouting pretentious-Starbucks-flirting-lines and start reading more.
>Slaughter House 5 is one of the greatest
>Vonnegut was Mark Twain of 20th cent
Well I certainly hadn't written him off for attacking Pynchon but he just gave his legitimacy the ol' Penn Jillette with that line
sry, already have a literary qt3.14 who reads me Chimamanda short stories to me as I drift into that false death, that quasi-zero...that every whitening north, into and through the canvas itself until suddenly---again---consciousness.
Lotta strange things in your post. Anyways, this video is triggering for multiple reasons, the most obvious and shallow being that he is a nobody who is criticizing one of the most acclaimed authors in all of academia. However, what gets me is the fact that he makes very, very audacious claims and provides no evidence, like when he says that GR has no plot, which is factually wrong, or when he says Pynchon has bad prose (that really got me).
So, he is what we call a 'pleb', right? That's not very rage inducing. (I find more hilarious/nauseating the Goodreads threads, for instance, but may be it's a matter of taste)
Besides, I didn't watch the full video. His main points are the usual shallow criticism that "pretentious" writers often get, so it's quite obvious what's he going to say.
Also, what was so strange in my post? It's quite evident that English is not my mother tongue, but I don't think I expressed myself in a weird fashion.
After I read The Ego and His Own, I tried posting about it and it became dissapointingly apparent that no one here had actually read it. What little responses my serious questions got were pure memery. Its sad but this board is a meme.