ITT: Pitt two famous writers, with some discernible relation to each other and choose the better of them. Also, discuss. (Huxley Vs Orwell not allowed.)

File: 224 KB, 810x506, VidalFitz.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Aug 19 23:50:43 2010 No.1057667 [Reply] [Original]

ITT: Pitt two famous writers, with some discernible relation to each other and choose the better of them.

Also, discuss.

(Huxley Vs Orwell not allowed.)

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 19 23:53:43 2010 No.1057670 morrison > moore

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 19 23:56:43 2010 No.1057676 >>1057667 But the real question here is Fitzgerald vs. Hemmingway.

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 19 23:57:43 2010 No.1057680 >>1057676 Banal.

>>	None !UyhAEqbnp. Thu Aug 19 23:57:43 2010 No.1057679 File: 12 KB, 270x250, artist_me.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Huxley Vs Orwell not allowed Well then, why not Orwell Vs Huxley?

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 19 23:58:43 2010 No.1057683 Wilde v. Nabokov. WHO WILL WIN?

>>	Flying M !!jt5L4vX8VrA Thu Aug 19 23:58:43 2010 No.1057684 Herman Melville vs Charles Dickens See who can write the longest book.

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 19 23:58:43 2010 No.1057682 Meyer over King

>>	Anonymous Thu Aug 19 23:59:43 2010 No.1057687 bataille>breton bergson>wittgenstein

>>	Flying M !!jt5L4vX8VrA Fri Aug 20 00:01:43 2010 No.1057694 >>1057676 You mean Hemmingway vs Steinbeck

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:01:43 2010 No.1057695
File: 31 KB, 533x350, gore-vidal-533.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Gore Vidal is the superior to Fitzgerald in every way, I have read everything ever published by Vidal and I can assure you that even Vidal's lesser know works are better in every conceivable notion then "the 'GREAT' gatsby".

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:04:43 2010 No.1057700 File: 40 KB, 562x437, 123112.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1057687 >bergson>wittgenstein

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:05:43 2010 No.1057704 >>1057700 >implying ohwow.jpg is an argument

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:07:43 2010 No.1057708 Pynchon > Joyce

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:07:43 2010 No.1057711 File: 336 KB, 200x155, 1278318721770.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1057704 >implying there is even a need for argument

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:07:43 2010 No.1057709 What the fuck? Gore Vidal is hardly even a writer.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:08:43 2010 No.1057714 >>1057695 gore vidal is a delightful personality and a kinda shit writer why did i respond to this troll

(Anonymouse Fri Aug 20 00:10:43 2010 No.1057720

>>1057676
Fitzgerald took Hemingway into a closet one time and pulled out his dick, he told Hemingway that Zelda complained that his dick was to small and that he agreed. Hemingway told him that his dick was actually about average. Scott did not believe him and accused him of just being nice. Hemingway pulled out his own dick to show him that the size was not dissimilar, but when he did this both man immediantly noticed the differance in size, Hemingway being noticably bigger. Still Hemingway maintained that Scotts was normal size. To prove his point Hemingway took Fitzgerald to a muesum to look at the penises on statues. In my own experiences I've alway noticed that penises on statues are quite small. It seems odd for Hemingway with his observant personality to never notice this. The point being, Fitzgerald vs. Hemingway is literally a dick matching contest, with Hemingway coming out on top.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:11:43 2010 No.1057723 >>1057720 best slash fic setup ever

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:11:43 2010 No.1057724 >>1057711 a. you don't even know who bergson is b. you have no argument for your assertion c. you are a dickriding analyticfag with no sense d. all of the above i'm going with d.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:12:43 2010 No.1057726 >>1057714 And how much of Vidal's work have you read? F. Scott was the Persona of Personality.

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:14:43 2010 No.1057734
File: 446 KB, 300x225, 4dd1e262ec8ea870eaf8f88e.jpg.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>1057724
a proves the dismissal of bergson, which leads to the irrelevancy of b as it is not needed, and of course c is wrong as well.

also,
>evaluating wittgenstein without understanding analytic philosophy

you are the baby, in case you don't know

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:15:43 2010 No.1057737 >>1057720 I refuse to believe this.

>>	(Anonymouse Fri Aug 20 00:15:43 2010 No.1057736 File: 42 KB, 480x480, 1279321037190.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1057723 This is actually a true story, It would of been alot funnier if I had just made it up.

>>	(Anonymouse Fri Aug 20 00:19:43 2010 No.1057744 >>1057737 Ihttp://thebestamericanpoetry.typepad.com/the_best_american_poetry/2009/03/hemingway-reassures-fitzg erald-about-his-penis.html

>>	Stagolee !0Pey/QLK3E Fri Aug 20 00:27:43 2010 No.1057758 gore vidal wrote books i thought he was like a painter or something weirdlol

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:27:43 2010 No.1057759

>>1057734
what a lame way to divert attention from your ignorance. ''a proves the dismissal of bergson'' how is that exactly? you really don't know what you are talking about, and i understand analytic philosophy perfectly well. it's most notable characteristic is its self-imposed limitation ''pass over in silence''. I have read Tractatus, Brown and Blue books, and some of ''on certainty''. They were fine, in their own right, but they don't even qualify as philosophy. Wittgenstein is a philologist at best, and incapable of producing artistically. His writing is horrific, and anyone who reads Wittgenstein without concerning themselves only with German is fooling themselves. How can an analytic theory of language come across in translation? it can't. His cases and logic, are self-contained ''games'' (using his own phrasing) and hence not valuable beyond their own determinism. Bergson, to contrast, is capable of producing artistically, posits a truly radical ontology of the mind, whereas Wittgenstein suffers from an ignorance of human psychology (i could quote some particularly lulzy claims he made about the human mind, things which are entirely discredited now by natural science, but i won't waste my time)

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:29:43 2010 No.1057766 >>1057758 Everyone knows you masturbate to the "City and the Pillar",Stag.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:29:43 2010 No.1057768 File: 127 KB, 376x365, 1279742045793.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1057759 >some french guy thinks he understands wittgenstein

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:31:43 2010 No.1057775 >>1057768 ''2deep4u'' is a bullshit argument in this case. Wittgenstein made a point of writing in such a way that even a child could understand. He sucked off Bertrand Russel in the bathroom at university and Russel called him a genius.

>>	Stagolee !0Pey/QLK3E Fri Aug 20 00:31:43 2010 No.1057772 DUMAS VS HUGO LET'S GO GUYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:32:43 2010 No.1057776 Herbert > Asimov

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:32:43 2010 No.1057778 >>1057775 evidence that frenchfag cannot into philosophy

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:33:43 2010 No.1057779 >>1057772 This thread has already splintered into three seperate arguments, go fap to the "City and the Pillar"

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:34:43 2010 No.1057785 dohoho trolling is a art, eh? I really wish there was someone with a functioning brain to discuss this with.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:34:43 2010 No.1057786 Eminem vs. Dylan

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:38:43 2010 No.1057789 File: 87 KB, 344x615, Beach.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I find that story about Fitzgerald's penis rather entertaining. Vidal is one of the greatest penis exhibitionist of our time as shown in this photo. I wonder which was bigger.

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:40:43 2010 No.1057794

>>1057778
you really suck at this. you read wittgenstein so that you could appear intellectually talented, because someone told you he was ''brilliant'' or because of /lit/..and you didn't understand it even well enough to defend it. You don't know who bergson is, that much is clear. i know, it's hard work trying to look deep and edgy, and you're probably a bit worn down by so much effort. I'll let you cool off for a bit.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:43:43 2010 No.1057800 File: 17 KB, 220x236, 1280722601156.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1057794 keep going, you are keeping me amused.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 00:43:43 2010 No.1057802 File: 16 KB, 300x381, dylan2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1057786

(Anonymouse Fri Aug 20 00:49:43 2010 No.1057821

>>1057802
I think Dylan would appreciate the comparison. I personally think Dylan is the better of the two by far. But Dylan himself wrote in his autobiography that the kind of music he makes is basically archaic and that rap is the relevant music of the time.

>>	Talk Show Host !!8XHbInrIRoU Fri Aug 20 01:01:43 2010 No.1057854 Bronte>Bronte

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:02:43 2010 No.1057858 Thought this one would already be covered... Sartre > Camus also... Atwood > Plath Barthelme > Borges Henry Miller > Arthur Miller Steinbeck > Hemingway Ballard > Dick

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:11:43 2010 No.1057883 roth > delillo (> franzen?)

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:13:43 2010 No.1057893

>>1057858
whoa i'm going to need more info on this Barthelme guy. I love Borges, dont get my wrong he's one of my favourite authors. I dont want to start an arguement with this, i just want to know what of his writing i should read so i can compare the two myself. Because honestly I didnt think id find a comparison to Borges, I've heard Kafka and Jocye being compared but i didnt really see their writing as all to similar to his. Like i know why Huxley and Orwell would be compared (famous dystopian societies and novels) but what about Barthelme and Borges is similar? Suddenly i'm interested, like is it his prose, themes, plot types, philosophical ideas, allusions, blindness, surprisingly ugly face?

tl;dr what of Barthelmes writings should i pick up?

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:20:43 2010 No.1057918

>>1057893
I love Borges, too.

I compared them because they're two of the century's major short story writers. I guess they both have elements of surrealism and play linguistic games in their work. Get the Sixty Stories collection from Penguin and jump in. He has a novella called The Dead Father which is also excellent, and packed with meaning and subtext.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:31:43 2010 No.1057945 Dostoevsky>Tolstoy

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:32:43 2010 No.1057950 >>1057858 >Sartre > Camus Not when it comes to writing. >Ballard > Dick Don't be gay.

>>	MTK RMH Fri Aug 20 01:33:43 2010 No.1057952 WILLIAM GIBSON > BRUCE STERLING X999

>>	Flying M !!jt5L4vX8VrA Fri Aug 20 01:34:43 2010 No.1057954 >>1057858 >Steinbeck > Hemingway I already mentioned that one, no one commented. It's a close call, but I think I'd go for Hemingway

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:34:43 2010 No.1057956 >Ballard > Dick >Steinbeck > Hemingway >Barthelme > Borges ...

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:37:43 2010 No.1057964 >>1057945 Someones a hipster..

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:39:43 2010 No.1057971 william faulkner > cormac mccarthy

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:44:43 2010 No.1057984

>>1057950
>Not when it comes to writing.

Eh, neither of them are that impressive, in my opinion. Sartre can be mind-numbingly boring sometimes, but then you have tidy little masterpieces like No Exit.

>Don't be a dick.
Giving it to Dick would have been too boring. If Ballard had never wrote Unlimited Dream Company, then he might have been the lesser. I have to admit that I'm strongly biased against genre stuff... and Dick has a little too much corny sci-fi stuff for me.

>>1057954
It's very close. Another interesting match up would be East of Eden vs Sometimes a Great Notion (Kesey).

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:46:43 2010 No.1057990 You're all idiots for having this conversation, but some of you are particularly stupid. In particular, I'm talking about those of you who think it makes sense to compare Camus to Sartre. Eat shit and die.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:47:43 2010 No.1057993 >>1057984 Freudian slip there when I was quoting =x

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:49:43 2010 No.1057996

>>1057954
Having read most of both of their works, I'd have to go with Steinbeck.
Hemingway's style was genius, but a lot of his stories were formulaic and he never really branched out of heroic tragedies. All of his lesser-known novels still exude that same gritty but elegant style, but what hampers them is that they ultimately give you nothing much new.
Steinbeck on the other hand was as widely varied as he was prolific. From weighty, heavy-handed tomes of misery and perseverance like The Grapes of Wrath and East of Eden, to light-hearted tales like Tortilla Flat and Cannery Row. In fact I would say Steinbeck's The Pearl reveals all of the flaws that come about when constructing narratives like Hemingway did - what you're left with is a very staid and almost maudlin lump of half-assed folktale/fable. If you can see why you don't like The Pearl, you can see why people don't like The Old Man and the Sea, it's very clear, and it's one of the reasons the two authors are sometimes compared.
Steinbeck also, to me, had a very elegant style of his own that didn't require the iceberg method - he brought you to the locales of his stories through his characters' eyes. You'll notice as you read him that very often his descriptions will coincide - in a way many, many authors now imitate, it's almost ubiquitous in fiction - with the sentiments or opinions of his characters.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:50:35 2010 No.1058000 File: 34 KB, 993x448, BATTLE_OF_THE_TROLLS_(FAGS).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 01:51:43 2010 No.1058004

What I mean by coincide is that the setting will be described in such a way as to obviously relate to the character. Either using diction, or what he's describing, the character and the description often have the same mood or tone. This adds a very distinct level of reality to his scenes in a completely different way than Hemingway's method.
Which brings me to my final point about why I personally prefer Steinbeck to Hemingway, he always presented a much fuller breadth of feelings. Hemingway expected you to feel, Steinbeck supplied the feelings. In this way they are very different and any comparison that brings "quality" into it is just going to digress into useless squabbling. But I really loved how Steinbeck could make moments and characters just ooze out despair, grief, bewilderment, confusion, happiness, humor, and even, rarely, hope. Hemingway was always bleak, Bukowski had him right there, "He never danced." Steinbeck shimmied, tangoed, waltzed, and could be the pallbearer marching in stately step. I love his work, and Hemingway's as well, but if asked to choose: John Steinbeck was a better writer to me.

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 02:28:43 2010 No.1058062

>>1057794
Not the guy who made fun of you but I have to correct you.
While Bergson was kind of important in his time and for his influences on Deleuze, his ideas and metaphysics are pretty much dead right now, while Wittgenstein continues to be widely read. Plus, Wittgenstein made far less grandiose claims that he was better able to justify.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 02:37:43 2010 No.1058077 Chaucer > Boccaccio

>>	Flying M !!jt5L4vX8VrA Fri Aug 20 03:27:43 2010 No.1058188 Heinlein vs Clarke vs Asimov vs Herbert Jack London vs Richard Adams I don't even know who you'd compare Lovecraft to. o-o Moses vs Mohammed?

>>	Flying M !!jt5L4vX8VrA Fri Aug 20 03:36:43 2010 No.1058206 Lucas vs Paolini. XD Not even a competition

Anonymous Fri Aug 20 03:43:43 2010 No.1058215
File: 100 KB, 468x370, Albert Camus (4).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>1057667
Fitzgerald

>>1057676
Hemingway

>>1057679
Orwell

>>1057682
King

>>1057683
Wilde

>>1057684
Dickens

>>1057694
Steinbeck

>>1057708
Pynchon - I agree.

>>1057772
Hugo

>>1057971
Faulkner - I agree

Now, please let me suggest some:
Camus or Sartre (personally, I'd say Camus)
Kafka or Dostoevsky (undecided)
Twain or Vonnegut (I'd say Vonnegut)
Sinclair Lewis or F. Scott Fitzgerald (I'd say Sinclair Lewis)
Thomas Mann or Hermann Hesse (I'd say Hesse)

>>	Flying M !!jt5L4vX8VrA Fri Aug 20 04:05:43 2010 No.1058249 Nietzsche vs Kant

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 05:31:43 2010 No.1058359 >>1058249 Kant

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 05:44:43 2010 No.1058372 >>1058249 kant

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 06:01:43 2010 No.1058387 >>1058249 I kant decide.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 06:24:43 2010 No.1058406 I love how the vast majority of these are substantiated by absolutely nothing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 06:27:43 2010 No.1058409 >>1058359 >>1058372 >synthetic a priori >AFTER HUME So, no.

>>	Flying M !!jt5L4vX8VrA Fri Aug 20 07:01:43 2010 No.1058435 >>1058387 Nietzsche may have been an Alcoholic Gynophobe, but at least he didn't believe in all that self evident truth bullshit. I don't really like either of them, though.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 07:22:43 2010 No.1058446 >>1058387 i laughed at this

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 07:56:43 2010 No.1058497 >>1057695 The 'Great' in 'The Great Gatsby' is meant to be ironic. Way to emphasize your point..

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 11:01:43 2010 No.1058705 >>1058188 Lovecraft vs Ligotti maybe

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 20 11:38:43 2010 No.1058747 Lord Dunsany > Tolkien Hell, Lord Dunsany > any fantasy writer

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature