TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Well-written sci-fi?
Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]

Well, you can't argue with the books he likes, but dismissing Conrad as a writer of romantic seafaring fiction for young boys is a bit off.

People who read literature with an intellectual score card probably annoy me as much as those who stubbornly insist that there's never any "hidden meaning", just pretentious over-analysis.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Who's "insisting?"

I often am. I don't see why I'd ever read literature for its own sake again, if all experiences I've had thus far were far from rewarding... but I always end up giving literature a second, a third, and then a fourth chance

quote:

quote: Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Exactly why I said he's doing it wrong. People who think literature has no worth, or is "masturbatory" if it doesn't contain some philosophical conclusion or statement on the human condition do not understand the joy of text. quote: Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles It just seems like philosophically oriented people sometimes have a narrow idea about what fiction is "for," like there has to be some kind of "argument" or "philosophical conclusion" in there for it to be worth the read, or else they have to justify their reading of it with some kind of intellectual superstructure about "social critique" as with Kafka. If that's what fiction is for, why not just read bullet-point summaries of the "ideas" each work contains and save the time?

Because the context matters.

There's a very good reason why I do like books: they give the author an idea to expand a thought as much as he wants. There's a lot of room to argue, debate, give counter-examples and, if you're writing fiction, it's an awesome way to showcase your ideas and how they could apply to the real world. Like the narrator of Dosto's "Notes from Underground" talking throughout the book about his life: It does feel like a guy spitefully grumbling about his misery, and giving good well-written insights one after another. And, the best of all - it feels real. Osamu Dazai, one of the few authors I like, is the same. He makes you get in touch with your inner pathetic insecure self in a way no one I know has been able to imitate. That's the sort of fiction I like, because reading a book is an investment, time wise. If I'm going to spend a few hours doing something, I want to get something out of it that I can truly enjoy. I don't even need to agree with the author, as long as I keep an enlightening thought lingering in the back of my head.

That doesn't mean I think non-philosophical/non-scientific fiction is worthless, however. I just happen to belong to a different target audience: if I want to chill out and just enjoy a story for its own sake, I'd rather watch a film.

The last film I watched and that I really enjoyed was very empty. "Live Free or Die Hard" has no philosophical ideas behind it, no scientific insight, no nothing. It was just pure escapism, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I just can't bear to spend too much time on escapism.

There you go again. No philosophical musing = escapism? You're missing the point massively.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J There you go again. No philosophical musing = escapism? You're missing the point massively.

Mind you, I think art in general is essentially escapist... and I wouldn't say all of philosophy is devoid of escapism either.

But, I think it is your turn now: what point am I missing?

Edit: It's kind of amusing that, while I'm criticising literature, no one noticed I've got the portrait of a famous poet in my avatar

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Mind you, I think art in general is essentially escapist... and I wouldn't say all of philosophy is devoid of escapism either. But, I think it is your turn now: what point am I missing?

Well, I called it the "joy of text" earlier, which basically means an appreciation and enjoyment of the skill and power of literary writing.

I think the big problem is treating a piece of literature as a gigantic signifier serving only to denote a signified, where what is signified is the important part. That's a very linguistic way of treating art in general.

If you actually appreciate literature you don't necessarily treat it as a mere intellectual puzzle, or as a roundabout way of getting a point across. You have an appreciation for skillful and intelligent storytelling, characterisation, portrayal and evocation, and the ability to move you emotionally. One of the books I mentioned - Use Of Weapons - doesn't necessarily have a profound statement about any Big Issue, but I think it's a brilliant piece of literature because the ending was so powerful. It absolutely floored me - there was a period of minutes afterwards like I'd been hit by a hammer, unable to think about anything else. The many techniques and the skill of their deployment that went into creating that effect are worth savouring and appreciating. It's like appreciating how and why a great piece of music moves you.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J dismissing Conrad as a writer of romantic seafaring fiction for young boys is a bit off.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Well, I called it the "joy of text" earlier, which basically means an appreciation and enjoyment of the skill and power of literary writing. I think the big problem is treating a piece of literature as a gigantic signifier serving only to denote a signified, where what is signified is the important part. That's a very linguistic way of treating art in general. If you actually appreciate literature you don't necessarily treat it as a mere intellectual puzzle, or as a roundabout way of getting a point across. You have an appreciation for skillful and intelligent storytelling, characterisation, portrayal and evocation, and the ability to move you emotionally. One of the books I mentioned - Use Of Weapons - doesn't necessarily have a profound statement about any Big Issue, but I think it's a brilliant piece of literature because the ending was so powerful. It absolutely floored me - there was a period of minutes afterwards like I'd been hit by a hammer, unable to think about anything else. The many techniques and the skill of their deployment that went into creating that effect are worth savouring and appreciating. It's like appreciating how and why a great piece of music moves you.

Yeah, I just can't see literature that way after the advent of cinema.

The way I see it, films tell histories, books give ideas. So, when you say the plot is interesting and whatnot, I can't help but think "Good, I'll wait for the movie to come out"

On the topic of SF writing as mediocre, I tend to agree with the statement that it's more about materialism than 'spirituality'. Writers tend to get bogged down in technical details which obviously interest them, such as "the ship had an ion engine which worked by such and such method..." which bores the shit out of everyone else.

However, this isn't confined wholly to SF. I also found Lord of the Rings painful in this respect; there is a whole chapter where Tolkien drones on about how old Bilbo is in hobbit years and how much that equals in other races' years. Military books by authors like Tom Clancy and Michael Crichton can also do this, wasting too much time on telling you what gun the character is using and how many rounds it shoots et cetera.

quote:

Originally posted by bas I always liked William Gibson's writing.

Why don't you like it anymore?

JBJ I would recommend Isaac Asimov. I've always liked his writing because it's a good story with a science fiction backdrop, not a science fiction geek fest with a story to carry it. As such, I've found his prose tends to be more accessible and pleasing.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Yeah, I just can't see literature that way after the advent of cinema. The way I see it, films tell histories, books give ideas. So, when you say the plot is interesting and whatnot, I can't help but think "Good, I'll wait for the movie to come out"

Pretty limited perspective, if you ask me. There's more than one way to tell a story.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Pretty limited perspective, if you ask me. There's more than one way to tell a story.

Indeed, that's what different directors are for

(It's just a matter of personal taste here, really, it shouldn't be read as a statement against different ways of seeing literature)

I appreciate that. But you're an intelligent guy, and you know a lot about language. I thought you'd realise the strength of written narrative, and the things it offers that cinema simply cannot. It's one thing to simply dislike the medium, but to imply that it's redundant because of cinema seems uninformed at best. And that's out of character.

Very good if you like cyber punk.


I enjoyed this alot more then Neuromancer. Then again, William Gibson has horride writing style in my opinion.

I definitely agree with Snow Crash.

"Well written" is such a subjective thing, most of the time. It's almost always clear when things are badly written, but the line between mediocre and good is too dependent on personal taste.

Another one i liked the style of was Stanislaw Lem's Memoirs Found In A Bathtub.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J If you actually appreciate literature you don't necessarily treat it as a mere intellectual puzzle, or as a roundabout way of getting a point across.

More Nabokov:

quote:

In reading, one should notice and fondle details. There is nothing wrong about the moonshine of generalization when it comes after the sunny trifles of the book have been lovingly collected. If one begins with a readymade generalization, one begins at the wrong end and travels away from the book before one has started to understand it. Nothing is more boring or more unfair to the author than starting to read, say, Madame Bovary, with the preconceived notion that it is a denunciation of the bourgeoisie. We should always remember that the work of art is invariably the creation of a new world, so that the first thing we should do is to study that new world as closely as possible, approaching it as something brand new, having no obvious connection with the worlds we already know. When this new world has been closely studied, then and only then let us examine its links with other worlds, other branches of knowledge.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J I appreciate that. But you're an intelligent guy, and you know a lot about language. I thought you'd realise the strength of written narrative, and the things it offers that cinema simply cannot. It's one thing to simply dislike the medium, but to imply that it's redundant because of cinema seems uninformed at best. And that's out of character.

Hmm... actually, it's a bit more than that. I'm going to start a thread about it later this week, because I think we've hijacked this one for too long

Ren� Barjavel. A sheer pleasure in French.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Hmm... actually, it's a bit more than that. I'm going to start a thread about it later this week, because I think we've hijacked this one for too long

I would like to read this as well.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.