Ok /lit, let's settle the debate once and for all. Which is the better novel?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Ok?
Ok /lit, let's settle the debate once and for all. Which is the better novel?
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
|
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
I haven't read any of them yet but I own a copy of m&d
The Sot-Weed Factor. It's much more focused and well-written. It has a lot to say about identity and what it means to be (You) and how can you prove (You) are (You). Mason & Dixon suffers from Pynchon's penchant for Family Guy tier nonsequiturs.
>Mason & Dixon suffers from Pynchon's penchant for Family Guy tier nonsequiturs.
What does this mean? Can you give some examples for those of us who are not steeped in popular culture?
There is a nonsequitur about the Earl of Sandwich. He connects this back to a mechanical magical metal duck from an earlier nonsequitur. The details are fuzzy but I think the duck somehow becomes his chef and the duck invents THE sandwich. There's also a nonsequitur about a Gentleman Talking Dog (maybe it tells shaggy dog stories, I forget, details are fuzzy). There's another nonsequitur about Were-Gentlemen, roughians from the Heaths turn into Gentlemen every full moon much to the horror of the other roughians and prostitutes in the local pub. It's just full of Family Guy shit like that.
Those are not non-sequiturs. You just thought it was a story about a couple friends going on an adventure, didn't you?
Debunk it. Demonstrate how they aren't nonsequiturs.
Define nonsequiturs for all of us first.
No.
Learn to spell “nonsequitur” [sic] properly before trying to define it, moron
Not him homosexual.
I think his chosen spelling is fine. Etcetera is normal, why not that?
Hello, newbie.
That, indeed, constitutes a misspelling, you utter moron. Now define “nonsequiturs” [sic], you mental midget.
>Hello, newbie.
I accept your concession homosexual.
Post another shoop
>'now here' and 'nowhere' are le same! spaces don't affect spelling, it's all a white supremacist construct!
kys nigs
Nice false equivalence, redditor. Context MATTERS.
>nonsequitur
VS.
>non sequitur
Explain the difference, in detail, with peer-reviewed sources to back up your claims.
Saying "hurrrrrr da space izza deeeeefeeeereeeeeenzzzzz" is a concession to me being correct. Explain how those two words are semantically different in such an impactful way that the meaning is altered as in your false equivalence of "now here" vs. "nowhere".
I AM WAITING.
This is the most reddit post I have seen in weeks on this shithole
A space isn't a letter and therefore doesn't impact the spelling. Nice try you intellectually dishonest homosexual.
No he made a fine point. But I've asked him why it should be compared to Family Guy, since Pynchon actually develops the duck theme in interesting ways.
Part of M&D (as well as AtD and GR) is exploring our relation to technology and how technology affects our lives and culture, the duck is one of the many examples of this. Go through all the examples of technology in the book, should start to make sense. The clocks introduce this and start setting up theme fairly early on.
Talking dogs (dogs in general) are a part of the trilogy and are used to show our relation to the natural world and the unknown (the unknown being another big piece of the puzzle). Looking at dogs across all three books helps in understanding but not a must, the context is there.
Don't recall the were-gentlemen so I will leave that up to someone else unless someone provides enough context to dredge that out of memory.
M&D covers the time period when technology moved from a novelty/status symbol of the well off to having a real effect on the lives of the average person with Mason and Dixon's eponymous line being the major example. It is not war or natural features of the land defining the boundaries anymore, it is the burgeoning conspiracy and the stars.
By were-gentleman I imagine he’s referring to the guy who turns into a werebeaver when there’s a full moon.
I don't remember that either. Been a few years since I last read it. Either way I doubt it is a non-sequitur, Pynchon is pretty anal about everything serving a purpose. Maybe I will control-f the ebook later and refresh my memory.
I agree that Family Guy is mediocre, but I see these as Pynchon's humor and more than just Family Guy level, which definitely has a further disconnect. Were Pynchon's developments really so bad?
I waited.
That was unfortunate, but anon's silence indicates that Pynchon compares more highly than Family Guy shit. Pynchon isn't THAT deep but he can still make interesting scenes.
Did you think Pynchon was going to write a tradition plot structure where we go straight from point A to B to C ect.
lol when I read Mason and Dixon many years ago I thought it was the greatest shit ever, tried to reread it last month and realized how it has aged really badly. It’s full of lol so randumb millenial tier humor.
>for Family Guy tier nonsequiturs
Just frick right off back to Plebbit, you effeminate homosexual
Debunk the claims made in this post .
moron
christ, what a sad world you must live in being this stupid. any hint of novelty, exploration, humor, inventiveness, surprise and rumination is reduced to 'heckin family guy cut away gag'
please stop reading. TV is more your speed
Says more about you really, because in a thread about "Which book is better?", you assume the person arguing for one book believes the other book is a pile of shit.
Tells me all I need to know about you.
OK go back to your family guy
>"Been there, done that." -- Pynchon to Barth.
Pynchon is a c**tass, Sot-Weed is the genuine article.
Television - and its literary equivalent- is for [(You)] and that level of reading incomprehension.
>wall of text
There is greater & lesser in all things, most critically in Art. If you cant handle disputation log off.
>It has a lot to say about identity and what it means to be (You) and how can you prove (You) are (You)
like in a positive, humanist way? or is it one of those post-modern books where the moral is that nothing is true and you are not a "real" person, which I find to be a bit obtuse (probably because I think it's depressing)
TSWF is just a lame attempt at a campus novel
Do you mean Giles Goat-Boy? Because Sot-Weed Factor is not set on a campus.
Bjaorhtnh
Yeah, this moron does not understand what a nonsequitur [sic] is topkek
Explain how the Were-Gentlemen aren't a nonsequitur. I'll wait.
First, define for us what you think a “nonsequitur” [sic]
I liked both equally tbh.
sot weed is fun and crazy in its own way, really choatic and dark compared to some of the goofiness that Pynch loves to dive into. m&d was amazing in its own right as well.
Both are great and retain their charm.
A terrible feature about IQfy is the constant need to pit one book against another. Or a writer against a writer. Or a list. There is rarely a need for a comparison unless you are elaborating or making a point. These Pokémon battle threads are always one baboon swinging against another. Insults and name calling. Yes, literature is subjective at a certain point so there is no purpose in saying book 2 is better than book 2. In fact it would be much better to say “I prefer” or “I like”, not “__ is better than __”. This has turned into a coarse and crude board and it sounds silly when one anon tries to act the authority. Also the disappearance of middle ground or nuance has been a blow. The based/cringe dichotomy has been a disaster for IQfy. No one tries to make their way out of the comfort zone or shift their perspective to suit a book that isn’t in their specific sweet spot. I would hope a thread about Barth and Pynchon would be above arguing and chest beating over a random word but this isn’t a world for hope I see
You came into a /b/ thread expecting dialogue. That was your problem. If the OP is shit, the thread will be shit. Simple as.
Sometimes a book is better than another book though
Haven't read either of these books but I heard Sot-weed Factor has a lot of rape and cucking which makes me not want to read it
sotweed and it's not close