because he was basically a short story writer
i mean that's what he liked to read / write / do
at least that's what he says in a couple of interviews
i read only a bit of 2666 (got derailed by easier fish like calvino & eco) but seems like it follows the short story format of the author more than his novels I peeked into
but then again i might just be talking out of my ass
who has time to read fiction? 🙁
anyway thanks for keeping his memory alive; he's probably the last great hot-blooded author
>because he was basically a short story writer >i mean that's what he liked to read / write / do
This is not true. He read everything. Poetry, novels, essays, criticism, etc.
did I say that he didn't read anything?
or you assumed he only read what he liked best?
8 months ago
Anonymous
>did I say that he didn't read anything?
I said everything not anything. You claimed he was "basically a short story writer". That is not true. He wrote more pages of novels than pages of short stories. >or you assumed he only read what he liked best?
I'm telling you he read every type of literature. What he liked best was poetry but didn't only read that.
He was not a short story writer. He was a failed novelist. Half of his published ouvre comes from unfinished manuscripts found by his editors. Hence the "postmodern" aspect of his narratives.
2666 is a compilation of novels. Each part was going to be its own thing in a series. Most of which would have been 2nd rate t b f h
Also there was supposed to be one final book/part to end it all rip
>compilation of novels
in English the word is "novella" like "compilation of novellas" but it's kind of outdated and today they use "short story" for works even 100 to 150 pages long
Do you ~~*need*~~ more?
Why did he write so many second-rate novels until 2666?
he was training
Maybe he wasn't really in control of his talent and wan't trying hard enough or wasn't ambitious enough
A dying man leaves his best for last
because he was basically a short story writer
i mean that's what he liked to read / write / do
at least that's what he says in a couple of interviews
i read only a bit of 2666 (got derailed by easier fish like calvino & eco) but seems like it follows the short story format of the author more than his novels I peeked into
but then again i might just be talking out of my ass
who has time to read fiction? 🙁
anyway thanks for keeping his memory alive; he's probably the last great hot-blooded author
>because he was basically a short story writer
>i mean that's what he liked to read / write / do
This is not true. He read everything. Poetry, novels, essays, criticism, etc.
did I say that he didn't read anything?
or you assumed he only read what he liked best?
>did I say that he didn't read anything?
I said everything not anything. You claimed he was "basically a short story writer". That is not true. He wrote more pages of novels than pages of short stories.
>or you assumed he only read what he liked best?
I'm telling you he read every type of literature. What he liked best was poetry but didn't only read that.
He was not a short story writer. He was a failed novelist. Half of his published ouvre comes from unfinished manuscripts found by his editors. Hence the "postmodern" aspect of his narratives.
2666 is a compilation of novels. Each part was going to be its own thing in a series. Most of which would have been 2nd rate t b f h
Also there was supposed to be one final book/part to end it all rip
>compilation of novels
in English the word is "novella" like "compilation of novellas" but it's kind of outdated and today they use "short story" for works even 100 to 150 pages long
>300 page novella
kys anon
Those are novels, not novellas. Novella is not outdated.
Why? Did someone hit you with this useless brick?
amlafitano is literally me wtf
it was interesting to read the phrase "the vegana was ripped" more than a thousand times.
Why