/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4116040]

What writers would /Lit consider to be the LEAST pretentious?

One catch: 19th Century to present day only.
Hard mode: Last 50 years.

[Anonymous No.4116045]

Easy, Emily Dickinson,
"burn my poems after I die"

[Anonymous No.4116055]

No

[Anonymous No.4116064]

>>4116045

If the urge to destroy one's life work on one's death bed signifies a writer's unpretentiousness, than Kafka belongs in her company.

[Anonymous No.4116070]

I don't know whether to say Kurt Vonnegut or not.
Because his style itself could be kind of overly declarative and that reeks pretentious. But he was self-deprecating, and seemed sincere in interviews.

Then again he is loved by a lot of pretentious people, But even so, I don't think it's fair to fault him for how he's received.

[Anonymous No.4116080]

>>4116064

They'd've made a charmingly morose pair.

[Anonymous No.4116098]

If self deprecation equals sincerity, then Stephen King might count. But on the other hand, he wrote a book about writing, and it is a little pretentious to think you can tell others how to write.

Although, he was an English teacher when writing Carrie.

[Anonymous No.4116122]

>>4116098
On writing is easily one of his best books though, and king knows he's not really that amazing.

[Anonymous No.4116126]

Elmore Leonard never seemed pretentious.

[Anonymous No.4116127]

Chuck Palahniuk

[Anonymous No.4116137]

>>4116098
That quote is really very noble of Stephen King, I respect him a lot now

[Anonymous No.4116146]

>>4116070
lmao

[Anonymous No.4116147]

>>4116040
I would say that I am.

[Anonymous No.4116186]

“I can’t change overnight into a serious literary author. You can’t compare apples to oranges. William Faulkner was a great literary genius. I am not.” — John Grisham

[Anonymous No.4116195]

bukowski

[Anonymous No.4116196]

Charles Bukowski

[Anonymous No.4116205]

>>4116196
Until you listen to him being interviewed, then all that shit goes out the window

[Anonymous No.4116226]

Worrying about being pretentious is a sign of being pretentious.

[Anonymous No.4116231]

>>4116226
no it's not

[Anonymous No.4116237]

>>4116226
Honestly one of the best things I've read on this board. This statement has so many layers it's truly a work of art in itself. I am not even kidding or being sarcastic. I hope the author intentionally wrote it in this specific way.

[Anonymous No.4116240]

>>4116226
Suggesting that you know that worrying about being pretentious is a sign of being pretentious - is a sign of being pretentious.

[Anonymous No.4116248]

>>4116226
common misconception,
mindfulness and deliberation do not equal pretentiousness.
That falls under the same line of thinking that erroneously equates random chance with fairness, and ignorance with innocence.

[Anonymous No.4116250]

>>4116240
We must go deeper.

[Anonymous No.4116249]

>>4116237
No, sorry, I'm kind of a retard.

[Anonymous No.4116256]

Joseph Heller

[Anonymous No.4116257]

>>4116249
It continues!

[Anonymous No.4116273]

>>4116248
If you think your writing could be pretentious then you must assume your writing skills are good enough for a reader to decipher it as you being pretentious. Thus being mindful of your writing coming off as pretentious to a reader means you're pretentious in assuming your writing skills to be at such a high level to leave your reader with a feeling of pretension on your part even if it weren't your intention.

[Anonymous No.4116283]

>>4116273
Yeah, that's totally what I was getting at. You get me.

[Anonymous No.4116288]

>>4116283
Which makes me realize,

Misinterpreting idiocy as brilliance is what literature is all about.

[Anonymous No.4116292]

>>4116273
Nah,
and you're in tenuous territory when you try to ascribe any adverb to an act that we know so little about. Namely consciousness.
Without a good model of how thought works, we should stick to calling pretense on what people do and say, and not the thoughts that we project on them.

[Anonymous No.4116303]

>>4116292
I don't necessarily believe what I wrote. I myself have no problem with a writer being caring in not coming off as pretentious, though I don't believe myself to even posses the skill to even intentionally come off that way. Which I suppose could be pretentious in itself in a "gritty, common man devoid of fluff and excess" kind of way. I just like playing Devil's advocate, not that I'm any good at it. That's why I think out loud, so other smarter people than me can school me on how I'm wrong.

[Anonymous No.4116324]

Let me clarify.
Trying to appear sincere is insincere.
But worrying about seeming insincere is not insincere.
In order for that to work you would have to segment the mind into some kind of Freudian model, with an id, ego and superego, or some kind of Platonic model, with the a charioteer for the soul, etc.
Basically a model that cuts up consciousness and assumes that there is an impulsive first responder, in the mix, and for no reason giving it a Medal and dubbing it "The true self"

Now you're going to have a hard enough time arguing hard line division of consciousness, without throwing the philosophical challenge of proving that the id is somehow the true self, on top.

In the end the brain is like...
Birdshit.
That old joke, "what is the white stuff in bird shit?"
Answer: "That is also bird shit."

We consider self to be the complete thing, even if it can be broken into parts.
"What is that stuff inside the self that reacts automatically upon stimulation?" "That is also self."

[Anonymous No.4116331]

>>4116303
That's cool, any attempts to provoke thoughtful debate are always welcome on /lit.

[Anonymous No.4116342]

Tao Lin.

[Anonymous No.4116371]

Bertrand Russell

[Anonymous No.4116374]

>>4116371

>not pretentious
>writes a book about the history of western philosophy

[Anonymous No.4116384]

>>4116374
but admitted to his own bias.

[Anonymous No.4116389]

>>4116384
>>4116374
>>4116371
anyone remember that comic where russel and kierkegaard were roommates?

russel was a stern, grumpy killjoy, and soren was like this carefree, mischievous and childlike imp. it was much like the odd couple

>Bertrand opens fridge
>SOREN! DID YOU TAKE A BITE OUT OF THE FUCKING BLOCK OF CHEESE AND PUT IT BACK?!

[Anonymous No.4116390]

My writing is called pretentious by some, and called genuine by others.
Same goes for authors that I like.
I don't believe in the word.

[Anonymous No.4116396]

>>4116390
Definitely pretentious

[Anonymous No.4116398]

>>4116390
post it

[Anonymous No.4116399]

>>4116396
no u

[Anonymous No.4116402]

>>4116398
An excerpt of my writing?
The context of me posting it here is already going to skew how the reader reads it.

[Anonymous No.4116408]

>>4116402
Just do it.

[Anonymous No.4116410]

>pretentious
This is a word people use when they hate a piece of art but don't have the vocabulary to tell you why.

[Anonymous No.4116413]

>>4116408
Fine, one sec. Let me find a piece I hate the least.

>>4116410
Bingo.

[Anonymous No.4116420]

>>4116413
I was the outcast of outcasts, “that guy” in every situation he wandered in, whoever he was. I’m not sure if anyone ever really knew. Whenever I wasn’t busy being socially incompetent, I was busy scorning myself for it in the security of isolation. Often, this self-loathing overlapped, developing an excruciating inferiority complex that reveled in churning my spirit into a parody of what it wanted to be. I became a recyclable source of ridicule and pity for civilized beasts penetrating one another’s egos like blood-thirsty lizards. I was the tarnished group spittoon, their lovable Eeyore piñata.
On the other hand, when my posse wasn’t concerned with dressing to impress, and pretending like they weren’t, I was their impromptu, open-eared, armed, and hearted counselor, along with spiritual bullshit artist: a fellow mangled brother attempting to aid their minds in the navigation of their soul’s torment. A part of me felt like a mad doctor intensely scrutinizing their curdled brains, ravenously disassembling the maladaptive defense mechanisms for a succulent synaptic-pattern to extract and consume as data for later endeavors. It was done out of love, but I’ve discovered love to be ultimately rooted in selfish desire. In either case, I was never certain about the effectiveness of my techniques. They appeared to remain entrenched in their dispositions, often characterizing me as a creepy spider-vulture-robot thing. And, at times, it felt more like I was dissecting my own brain in a mirror.

[Anonymous No.4116418]

If you want an irony,
when I write, I use a lot of jargon and big words when I'm working out the concepts as I'm writing.
It's only on editing that I think about the audience and clean up the prose and structure out the arguments, as well as review the syntax to check to see that the big words I used are justified.
But which is pretentious, the draft that throws around big words and Jargon and asserts things without support? or the draft that is polished with the audiences reception of it in mind?

Is pretentiousness antithetical from authenticity?

[Anonymous No.4116422]

>>4116420
>I was the outcast of outcasts
You're just asking for it aren't you?

[Anonymous No.4116425]

"DFW was asked ‘what is the greatest obstacle facing young writers today?’ and his answer surprised people. Perhaps they were expecting some diegesis on the state of the book industry or something, but instead he argued that the greatest obstacle for talented young writers was ‘the fear;’ the fear that somehow someone would read what they had to say and they would not find it intelligent. The fear that it would not instantly radiate charm and / or the desired emotional response. The fear that their voice would not be heard or made distinct. The fear that they would tune out. The fear that they would simply be regarded as ordinary."

[Anonymous No.4116426]

>>4116422
Asking for what?

[Anonymous No.4116429]

>>4116422
I write what I know.

[Anonymous No.4116431]

>>4116427
Explain yourself.
sibriaus travels

[Anonymous No.4116427]

>>4116426
You definitely are.

[Anonymous No.4116435]

>>4116431
Loosen the hatband on your fedora, it's cutting off circulation

[Anonymous No.4116437]

>>4116420
Not pretentious, but awkward as hell and rough.
You need to work on keeping consistent verb tenses and pronoun to antecedent relation.
Your clauses are messy, if the reader has to slow down to figure out the sentence structure you're going to lose all sense of flow and rhythm.
Read your work out loud to get a sense of the rhythm of the piece, and try to stick to one concept per paragraph. The old method of transition sentence, main idea and supporting sentences, and transition sentence out, is not obsolete just because it's formulaic.

[Anonymous No.4116443]

>>4116420
not pretentious but shit

[Anonymous No.4116444]

>>4116435
I don't get it.

>>4116437
Yeah, I can see that. Thanks for the constructive criticism.

[Anonymous No.4116446]

>>4116420
>“that guy” in every situation he wandered in, whoever he was
'Whoever' seems to be referring to 'every situation'.

>Whenever I wasn’t busy ..., I was busy
Omit the last busy.

>this self-loathing overlapped, developing an excruciating inferiority complex
The self-loathing developed the inferiority complex? Same problem as the first quote.

>civilized beasts penetrating one another’s egos like blood-thirsty lizards
What. Also, use 'each other' since you're presumably referring to many beasts.

>my posse
So it's the story of someone who acts like a lone-wolf but actually has friends.

"Big feelios don't come from big words"
-Hemingway

[Anonymous No.4116453]

>>4116444
You're asking for rape is what he meant.

[Anonymous No.4116457]

>>4116453
Oh, yeah, well I'm sure it comes full circle more often than not.
Fucking werewolves, I swear.

[Anonymous No.4116460]

Seems like a cool guy

[Anonymous No.4116474]

>>4116460
Can you give me a rough tier list of his works, anon?

I've only read Waiting for the Barbarians and i think i enjoyed it enough to read a few more.

[Anonymous No.4116475]

I for one believe any piece is pretentious by definition. Just by creating it and wanting to share it you are being pretentious, because you pretend something out of it.
I believe what we're discussing here as pretentiousness is just what an author pretends exactly, not whether it does or not.

[Anonymous No.4116479]

>>4116446
"I believe my quotes are worthy of mentioning"
- Hemingway

[Anonymous No.4116482]

>>4116474
lol

[Anonymous No.4116487]

maybe the best defence against pretentiousness is not bothering about pretentiousness

[Anonymous No.4116504]

>>4116475
A spectrum then,
If merely by expressing an opinion you are being pretentious in thinking that your unsolicited opinion is worth being expressed, than surely it must follow that some works are more pretentious and some less.

[Anonymous No.4116521]

It has to be a measurement of two things, the piece itself and the author's opinion of it, and themselves.
Imagine if someone was very self-deprecating about their writing, and tried to suppress it, and then it gets published after they're gone and it's arrogant, derivative and opinionated?
Then it would be pretentious.
But if the piece were sincere, tried to avoid bias, covering it's subject with a multifaceted approach and tried to ask questions and provoke meditation instead of declaring truth.... but the author went around acting like the work was a masterpiece and he was a genius, then it would also be considered pretentious.

[Anonymous No.4116533]

Mitchell Heisman, no contest.

[Anonymous No.4116580]

>>4116226
Every writer, regardless of their pretentiousness probably will ask themselves whether they are pretentious or not at some moment of their lives. Sometimes it's pure curiosity, not a desperate need to appear intelligent.

[Anonymous No.4116620]

>>4116237
Kill yourself.

[Anonymous No.4116630]

>>4116420
Give up.

[Anonymous No.4116631]

>implying pretension is bad

[Anonymous No.4116639]

John Williams.

[Anonymous No.4116640]

>>4116620
wor

[Anonymous No.4116644]

d

[Anonymous No.4116662]

Hunter S Thompson

[Anonymous No.4116675]

>>4116631
>pretension
>not just pretense

[Anonymous No.4116676]

>>4116631
but it is. it means you don't know anything even though you think you do. acting like that is never good.

[Anonymous No.4116683]

>>4116676
why not kid? i always act like i know more than i do, and it's working swell for me. how about you keep your naive ideas for yourself

[Anonymous No.4116699]

>>4116683
>and it's working swell for me.

It sure is.

[Anonymous No.4116715]

>>4116699
aww you've already given up supporting your fragile argument i thought we gonna have some more fun together

[Anonymous No.4116724]

>>4116040
Norman Mailer
John Updike
Sigmund Freud
Nietzsche
Norman Mailer
William Faulkner
Nabokov
Norman Mailer

[Anonymous No.4116726]

>>4116724
he said "least"

[Anonymous No.4116730]

>>4116715
Not even that guy. But yeah, you won it fair and square. You totally convinced me you know more than you do.

[Anonymous No.4116737]

>>4116730
ohhhh now it's time to play the 'not even the same guy' game. let me help you - next step you apply some wiki psychology about psychological projection or sumthing, and then you call me mad. go go

[Anonymous No.4116742]

>>4116676
>it means you don't know anything

No it doesn't, you idiot.

[Anonymous No.4116745]

>>4116737
You can stop now. If you can't detect samefagging, it's not my problem. But either way I already told you, you convinced me you know more than you actually do. I mean, if someone asked me, I'd never figure out how much of a lard ass you actually are.

[Anonymous No.4116749]

>>4116676
>acting like that is never good.
He said "implying pretension is bad" and you basically responded with "because it's bad." Fuckin' great argument.

[Anonymous No.4116766]

>least pretentious
>not a total imbecil

pick one

[Anonymous No.4116856]

>>4116676
Caveat Emptor
Who's more foolish the fool or the fool who follows him?
Pretentiousness is inevitable, put the shame on the guy who buys into someone else's pretense.

[Anonymous No.4116866]

>>4116396
Yeah. Even that post was pretentious. Why does every sentence need a new line?

[Anonymous No.4116867]

Vonnegut

[Anonymous No.4116868]

>>4116856
>Who's more foolish
Obi-Wan an hero'd. Good one.

[Anonymous No.4117048]

>>4116040
When discussing pretentiousness in any form you need to discern the difference between FORM and CONTENT.

If an author writes great content with little form, they would be very unpretentious, everymen.

If an author writes purely form and little content, they are pretentious.

What authors hope to achieve is a nice mix of the two, but I personally don't give a shit what they do. I like what I like, ya know?

[Anonymous No.4117075]

>>4117048
I think this is in keeping with what the anon said
>implying pretentiousness is a bad thing
I imagine it's hard to get a lot of experimentation and artistry with style without running the risk of being pretentious.

If you try, and succeed, you're then hailed as a genius.
If you try, and the work fails, you're denounced as pretentious.
Yet I think it is likely the same attitude was taken in creating both works.

[Anonymous No.4117392]

You are very self-conscious. Only assholes pity themselves.

Self-criticism is an effective way to cope with yourself being an ass. Personally I'm satisfied with how people express themselves even if they're obviously in love with their language. I want natural thoughts and wilful deeds. You can admit mistakes, but don't make it whiny and self-centered.
Yes, self-centered is probably the word. Literature has become increasingly narcissistic and nihilistic. Let it be less about navel-gazing and promotional self-debasement, and more about DEEDS and stuff you'd want to have people think about.

[Anonymous No.4117426]

J-J.K. Rowling?

[Anonymous No.4117432]

Murakami

[Anonymous No.4117530]

>>4116324
But how do you diffrentiate the notion of trying to be sincere and being sincere?
Would one's awareness of being sincere not result in continuing in 'being' sincere by trying to do so? Where do we draw the line of difference between 'trying' and 'being'?

[Anonymous No.4117532]

>>4116040
Chad Kultgen
Mattew Reilly
Tom Clancy

[Anonymous No.4117541]

I've worried about coming off as pretentious a lot. It's kind of shit because I question everything I do. "oh, I'm not going to wear this because people might think I'm pretentious".
I'm quite insecure about myself also, so I think that makes it worse.
I also tend to call out anything 'edgy' as pretentious, thereby placing a huge gap between me and it.
It's a shit word and I wish I'd never learnt the meaning of it.

[Anonymous No.4117560]

Heinrich von Kleist

[Anonymous No.4117567]

>>4117541
The only answer is to kill yourself you fucking coward. (Me too.)

[Anonymous No.4117578]

Pretension is an "other man's accusation."

It's not really something we see for ourselves, it's something we identify through empathy for a general point of view.

In our mind, we don't usually say, "God, that's pretentious."

We say, "Someone else would probably think this is pretentious."

We've even gone so far as to calling THINGS pretentious through their association with pretentious people, as if it's some sort of contagion which one cannot help but to be infected by.

In my mind, exaggeration of tone, style and meaning (which is usually what excites people into using this word) can actually be enormously useful in expression.

The internet has teased us into seeing all words as possible arguments waiting to happen, and all arguments as competitions to see who can read Wikipedia most effectively.

No one seems interested in being understood, or even aware of what that really means. They just want to be correct - and when you call someone pretentious, there's no way for someone to prove you wrong, so it's an automatic point for the WIN column.

This fact itself doesn't bother me, I never got into the habit of calling out or looking down on people for participating in behaviors I didn't understand the point of.

What bothers me is that this endless focus on the concepts which surround authenticity, like pretension, are making people more and more afraid to engage in real conversation.

They're so certain that every conversation is going to progress in the form of an argument, or that someone is going to pounce on every opportunity to call them out, that they walk around in constant fear of breaching certain topics, or having certain types of conversation.

There just... doesn't seem to be anyone around to talk to anymore. Frankly, I'm not even sure most people would even know what that looks like.

[Anonymous No.4117893]

>>4117075
>Yet I think it is likely the same attitude was taken in creating both works.

Yeah, I guess you're right. Watch interviews with Lars von Trier and then watch interviews with Nicolas Winding Refn. They're both cunts, yet Trier is miles and miles above a more competent artist.

Maybe pretentiousness stems from the idea that *you* know best. It's a refusal of timeless traditions for no reason other than thinking that you know better than 1,000 years of artists. Or a refusal to acknowledge your influences. Or placing yourself among the ranks of your influences.

So maybe pretentiousness is the same thing as hubris.

[Anonymous No.4117894]

>>4117578
You're right on every count, if the internet was all there was to life.

>There just... doesn't seem to be anyone around to talk to anymore.

There are plenty of people to talk to. Just leave your dungeon :)

[Anonymous No.4117908]

Stephen King

he ain't got no time to write pretentiously

[Anonymous No.4117974]

>>4116040
James Joyce

[Anonymous No.4117975]

>>4116098
He states in that book that he's writing his own opinions and that he will try not to be a "pretentious bastard" even though he may.
It was a nice and entertaining reading, I recommend it.

[Anonymous No.4117977]

>>4116080
It would've been beautiful and short

[Anonymous No.4117981]

kazuo ishiguro

[Anonymous No.4118042]

>ctrl+f
>'Richard Yates'
>no results

That's kind of surprising, given that he's renowned in literary circles for the clarity, simplicity and veracity of his prose. And yet people invariably refer to him as a 'writer's writer'. Extraordinary writer, really. One of the best.

But strangely neglected on here these days. He used to be /lit/'s God, about three years ago.

[Anonymous No.4118101]

>>4116504
This. It's obviously relative and can be represented as a "spectrum", like most determinate things.

[Anonymous No.4118105]

>>4116745
In his defense, acting like an assclown such as him is most beneficial when interacting with others. If you don't give a shit about philosophical concepts such as "truth".

[Anonymous No.4118419]

>>4118042
>He used to be /lit/'s God, about three years ago.
/Lit is fickle, and tough on its gods.

[Anonymous No.4118426]

>>4117530
That's my point, you can't draw the line. We can't say that things we do without thinking are sincere and things we do consciously are insincere, it's not that simple.

That's why I don't draw the line within the consciousness. I draw it outside. With actions one takes, not with the thoughts that go behind them. Actions we can more concretely call "insincere." Thoughts are a murkier territory

[Anonymous No.4118433]

I believe David Foster Wallace is one of the least pretentious writers I've ever read. Certainly not in his choice of words, but perhaps in his intentions.

I bet a serious case could be made against this argument though... It's more of a gut feeling I've got.

[Anonymous No.4118484]

>>4116410
Other words in this category include corny, tacky, cheesy, and dated.

[Anonymous No.4118496]

>>4116040
Tao Lin

[Anonymous No.4118501]

>>4116390
Pretentious.

[Anonymous No.4118508]

>>4118484
>>4116410
Usually true. Not always, I think.

[Anonymous No.4118510]

>>4116064

If Kafka wanted his manuscripts destroyed he would have done thing himself. I think a part of him wanted others to read his stories and publish his texts.

[Anonymous No.4118518]

>>4118510
Does that make him pretentious?

[Anonymous No.4118526]

>>4118518

It does if he only told Brod to destroy his manuscripts with the intention of looking like a deep, temperamental author when he really wanted them read and published.

[Anonymous No.4118530]

>>4116040
Me.

[Anonymous No.4118528]

>>4118526
We have literally no way of knowing, it's the most absurd psychoanalysis.

[Anonymous No.4118531]

>>4116420
This sounds like Catcher in the Rye. If Holden had been an autistic pothead that sat on 4chan all day.

I'm sure everyone will love it, Anon. Follow your dreams. lmao

[Anonymous No.4118533]

Dickens?

[Anonymous No.4118572]

>>4118533
I don't know, Dickens did a lot of asshole stuff in his life.

[Anonymous No.4118608]

Gore Vidal and Oscar Wilde.

[Anonymous No.4118791]

>>4118572
But, I mean. Asshole =/= pretentious

[Anonymous No.4118823]

>>4118791
Yeah, I suppose that's true, He did a lot to champion the working class and the less fortunate, and really most of the asshole things he did involved his ex-wife, and anybody can have a bad relationship.

[Anonymous No.4118866]

>>4118608
>Oscar Wilde.
heheheheheheheh

[Anonymous No.4119134]

>>4118866
Caught the ruse master at his own game . Did ya you nigger.

[Anonymous No.4119192]

ee cummings said that he only wrote a few good poems. That seems fairly modest, which is not exactly the same as unpretentious, but still. I like that he said it. It shows he had high standards.

[Anonymous No.4119241]

>>4116475
Exactly this.

[Anonymous No.4119351]

>>4116040
Don Delillo

[Anonymous No.4119364]

>>4117432
Hey-oo

[Anonymous No.4119382]

>>4117541
i know the feels. i dont even know who i am anymore for the fear of finding that there's a fedora on the inside.

[Anonymous No.4119397]

Mark Twain was a pretty cool guy. Certainly egotistical, but I don't think pretentious.

[Anonymous No.4119537]

Richard Brautigan

Humbly crazy

[Anonymous No.4119538]

>>4119351
Falling Man was the most pretentious piece of shit I've read.

[Anonymous No.4119541]

>>4118433
He's one of the most pretentious, in that he tries to keep up the pretense that he is Pynchon and therefore the great American novelist.

[Anonymous No.4119547]

Undergoing the act of writing means you feel the thoughts you put down are worth being read

If a text exists, there is a pretense of self importance behind it.

"The thoughts you could think in the time that it takes to read my text couldn't possibly be as worthwhile as the thoughts of mine you spend time dwelling on while reading"

[Anonymous No.4119573]

>>4119547
I don't see how this idea changes anything. The question was asking against a scale, that there is a minimum to the scale changes nothing

also wut if i published my grocery list which in fact was not intended to be read as anything more than a reminder