/lit/ - Literature

>>19426458
>trendy to hate Kerouac
It's more about recognizing certain types of young men go through a Kerouac phase the same way as certain other types of young men go through an Ayn Rand phase. The longer they remain fixated within it the more likely they're completely retarded and there's no hope for them intellectually or socially. Also, "young" men but it should be something passed through in the teen years--the further you are into your 20s when it happens the more likely your going to be stuck with a contrived personality and be someone who is annoying to talk to...

Out of all the beats Burroughs is the only one who remains interesting as you get older. He was more introspective than the others and never fully resorted to preachiness which always ages poorly. There's nothing more pathetic than an aged boho preaching vapid "universal" platitudes through geriatric slang, still investing themselves in what should be a youth culture. There comes a time to leave the party.

>>19426581
I'll give you kerouac losing the charm as he gets older (I think thats expected with the property), but but say he's a writer only for young men is reductive. He'll, even Pynchon himself claimed On the Road to be one of (if not, THE) best American novels. I went to college for English, I couchsurfed across the state, hell... I even lived in a camper for an extended period of time. I've been real close to the life described in the book, conversed with tons of people living similarly, and not a single person has ever brought it up. Most I've mentioned it to havent even read it. The idea that it's some pervasive piece of art for the youths is outdated. Beyond that, it's just a fine work of literature. Themes of patrilineage, escape, addiction, the decline of American freedom-- its all exceptionally thoughtful.

Not to mention the way it advances language. That jazz-style, improvisational writing, whether you like it or not, is freshly executed. ESPECIALLY if you read the original scroll. There's a reason all the biggest writers since kerouac have liked kerouac, it's only a very modern thing to write him off as some proto YA garbage. His later stuff, while having some merit (and perhaps too much fallacio of Jamie joyce), dips a little too much into the white-guy-getting-into-eastern-religions cliche for my taste. I like how Salinger kinda parodies that idea later. Anyways. Im off track, it's a great book. Don't knock it

>>19426610
>I related to it really deeply! See, I did these things just like in the book! The idea that it's a phase that appeals to youthful midwits is false because other people can appreciate it and it has THEMES. (Opps, I probably shouldn't have let on how much I personally related to it). You're saying it's proto YA! His...his prose rhythm was inspired by jazz! That's innovative!
Kerouac's work can't be divorced from the movement he represented and it's why he ended up a pathetic drunk who died because of a bar fight--he was LARPing as if he were a younger man and paid the price. I'm not going to argue every single person who reads the book is a boho hipster/vagabond LARPer (i.e. the strawman you just made) but I will say it's a continuous source of inspiration for that mentality. Just be thankful he didn't live long enough to join NAMBLA.

>>19426913
>claims strawman
>types paragraph quoting me on things I didn't say

>>19426961
>filtered by parody
>claims not all Kerouac fans are midwits
Some certainly are.

>>19426961
You literally said all that. The beats are pseud-bait for people who want to seem more interesting than they actually are like Waldun.

>>19427089
No, I literally did not say that. That was the point. Learn the definition of literally chump. And this is exactly what I'm talking about. Post a book by a beat, and immediately the comments devolve into spewing semantic shit water about a completely different beat writer. Say something about the book I posted you half-brain

>>19426458
>The book is 75% drug-induced body horror and extreme sexual degeneracy. This is not a criticism, just an observation. The tone is wicked, vile. Way wore than I ever thought it would be.
How did you not expect this? The book's reputation is well known

>>19427089
I know he did. He's a retard.

>>19427117
>I--I didn't say that! My point was much more refined! You can't just--just point out how shallow my take is by making fun of it! Talk about Burroughs! But not because I was BTFO'd regarding Kerouac! Because...because you need to take their work as seriously as someone as literary and informed as me!
Fuck off pseud.

>>19426581
Based.

>>19426458
>I guess it aims to convey a feeling
why is this such a strange idea on /lit/? this should be the starting point, not the exceptional alternative to ideology with makeup.

anyways good summary of your impression. some parts do feel like howl on overdrive, but theres so much more creativity that it doesnt feel very right to compare. i personally found there to be an ecstatic feel to it too in the wild comedy and the sheer freedom of the structure, like heroin or ejaculation or even something mystical and transcendent. but its the high contrast and simultaneity of the funny and disturbing that makes the hellishness worse. everything becomes more amplified

>>19426581
i dont like the smug condescention of this post but i agree with it fully -.- burroughs was on another level while the others were kinda larping as romantic adventurers

>>19427169
>why is this such a strange idea on /lit/?
I think it makes sense from a developmental standpoint. Growing up, books exist to convey plot, then as you get older, there's often a switch so characters. Most primary school analysis ends with the purpose being something along the lines of social commentary. Feeling is a little more abstract

>>19427252
>Most primary school analysis ends with the purpose being something along the lines of social commentary
this is exactly the problem. i wish it was different in uni :(

>>19427267
I dont know if you're American, but for the works they choose, it actually makes decent sense. Take Gatsby for example. That book has a clear purpose, something concrete it's criticizing.

>>19426458
>I guess it aims to convey a feeling
It aims at being honest, and it is the greatest comedy since Quixote
Most people are such prudes and pissants going through life, closing their eyes to the abattoirs and death camps that are everywhere, and instead indulging in mediocre fantasies

>>19427282
i recognize that its accepted as part of art to criticize or make statements or have a two way relationship with life instead of only using whatevers external as the material to create something new, but im so instinctively opposed to it that i cant even express it properly sometimes. it feels very much against the artistic spirit. beauty is going to be used for functional purposes because of the power it has, so stairs are decorated, and ideas are allegorized to make them seem better, but all of that taints the work for me. there is no clear line between art art and propaganda, but the more propaganda it is, the less beautiful. beauty has value on its own that shines best on its own, you know? and i wouldnt even ruminate on this issue at this fundemental a level if it wasn't so obvious in the selection of the works we are studying and discussion on art everywhere being so focused to how the work "gives back" to the real world. its the experience it provides that gives the work any value at all and yet we throw it away because we've been conditioned to look for things that are irrelevant in an artistic context. i wish we could talk about literature the same way we talked about music, even if most possible disussions on music are either formalistic autism having to do with frequency ratios or completely subjective experiences that are hard to express with the language we have. maybe a middle ground is necessary, or something completely new, but for now it would be enough to not talk about a book like naked lunch that is brimming with creative images, forms, unlikely vocabulary, an attitude a hundred years ahead, rare feelings, interesting characters... and ask "what is it trying to say?" it would be stupid to ask that about an insturmental song or a coaster ride, and while i do get why people do it, it feels stupid here to me too.

not american

>>19427466
I think you make a sound point, its just one that's impossible to swallow, especially for most visitors on the board

>>19427525
thanks anon. even if that isnt the case, youve made me feel understood and i appreciate it

>>19427547
Sure thing anon. Might want to look into laocoon, which while it might not be as sentimental, considers the way each art form is processed by the recipient

>>19426458
All vignettes are linked by their satire of control of any kind. I don't doubt keroac's blurb where he says it's the next step after swift and pope.
I loved it, it just reads like ass.
This is 100% an observation of control, but he criticizes every avenue it can be exercised - medical, substance abuse, capital punishment, political, etc.

If you like pynchon's v., gr and the black hole of calcutta prts of mason and dixon you'll love this. You'll also see burroughs all over pynchon

>>19426581
>There's nothing more pathetic than an aged boho preaching vapid "universal" platitudes through geriatric slang, still investing themselves in what should be a youth culture
Not trying to nit pick, but can you point to any example of this in his writing?

>>19427578
nice rec

I want to love Burroughs but his sentences just put me off ... I love the Kerouac of the Scroll and Visions of Cody and Big Sur.

>>19427749
I meant that in general and not specifically of Kerouac. However, just watch his later interviews or listen to the album he made with Steve Allen if you want examples of it.

As far as his writing goes--I'm not going to go through his books to find it and it's also much more forgivable in that specific context; he's iconic for a reason. However, you can't tell me a quick search doesn't yield dozens of quotes that could be easily mistaken for those affirmation things you see stenciled in cursive on stupid people's walls.

>>19428171
I'm not sure looking at interviews in which he was hammered or taking singular sentences out of context, which in the case of kerouac is pretty damn important, is appropriate. Sounds like you're reaching bud

>>19428195
>He's drunk in the interviews and, uh [oh wait, that is kind of pathetic like what you were saying--the bloat was really coming on by that point]...those sentences are out of context and that's why they seem like vapid platitudes [I'll just ignore the fact you said they're forgivable in context]
You're a fucking retard "bud." It's probably time you grew up and stopped idolizing dead drunks.

>>19428222
Damn, bud. Seethe and dilate

>>19428684
>seethe
Am I supposedly angry because I said "fucking" retard instead of just "retard?" Either way, people who get all uppity because I called them out for LARPing a LARPer are pretty pathetic and (fucking) retarded.

Cope.

>>19426581
hmm...who should I listen to when it comes to Kerouac? Based Pynchon or some anonymous troglodyte who is seething on 4chan?

>>19428728
seethe

>>19428941
>hmm...who should I listen to when it comes to Kerouac?
I'd say your own judgement but you're obviously too much of a retard for someone to suggest that.
>>19428964
>In..muh...my mind, ya-your...seething...SO...H A R D! aaarrrgggghhAAAAHHHHHH [imagined validation has lead to intense coom]
Someone tried that one already faggot. (Cope).

>>19428941
Exactly

>>19429065
Get help

>>19429316
>>19430101
>you

>>19426458
>Out of all the beats Burroughs is the only one who remains interesting as you get older.
Yep

>>19430690
I'm better looking than you

>>19426581
>Out of all the beats Burroughs is the only one who remains interesting as you get older.
How are Big Sur, Vanity of Duluoz, Satori in Paris not interesting books to read when you get older?

>>19426458
I've read this, Junky, and Port of Saints and hated all three of them. I despise irony and people who glorify drugs with a passion.

>>19426610
>I'll give you kerouac losing the charm as he gets older
and that's when he gets good

>Pynchon
>On the Road
Both are terrible, the other anon >>19426581 is completely right in talking about the massive turds that are On the Road, Tristessa, Dharma Bums, Mexico City Blues, Doctor Sax, etc. I just would like to hear his thoughts on the 3 I listed when Kerouac is a broken man.

>>19427908
Big Sur is a good novel desu, I was completely shocked reading it after the absolute piece of shit that is Dharma Bums.

>>19431844
>people who glorify drugs
We read different books, anon

>>19431878
It's disgusting and perverted. I'd much rather read a comfy detective story like Farewell My Lovely or The Big Sleep. By writing about it in that way he glorifies it. Same with Ginsberg, both repulsive and stylistically un-interesting. I can't help but think the people who like them are mentally teenagers.

>>19431901
>It's disgusting and perverted.
Agreed, so how does it glorify it? Just by making it a point of focus? Surely that's not what you mean

>>19431912
Have you not read Junky?