reddit hated my review of slow learner. is it that bad? i had to push through a tremendous amount of anxiety to produce this. maybe i should accept this as not my best work, but i'm honestly startled by antagonism it received on r/thomaspynchon. happy easter btw, we should all have something better to look forward to.
Slow Learner is evidence that even the most versed and untouchable geniuses are "just trying things out." It has that oblique angle that allows thomas pynchon to participate in an extremely self-reflexive node of history and apply his takeaway with the most mileage in it, that anything with humor is incredibly valuable. But it doesn't arrest you in a laugh (thomas pynchon would never arrest you as long as you're in this universe), it glides into elemental speech about the strangeness and familiarity of institutions and weaves into the unbesmirchable joy of creating under the guise of an involved artistry with the world. Thomas pynchon writes as if he understood our time perfectly well from the year 2691, it seems seasoned with the friendship one has for something studied so closely, while tenderly admitting its shortcomings that may arguably give it a sense of live character. Absolutely and so lovely, thank you for giving this country what it always needed, Thomas Pynchon.
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Sounds like kind of drunken text I would send to chicks I'm dating.
see, I don't mind this response because it makes sense but on reddit I got "burn your thesaurus" when i didn't even use difficult words. it's like everything has to go through some authentication and approval process for them to either crowd around something or shun it and there's no space for works to live between the two extremes. frick reddit (albeit i didn't produce the most stellar work this time)
>burn your thesaurus
I hate frickers who say things like that. Literature should use the correct words regardless if they're rare or not. Redditors are braineless gays.
The average Reddit has the vocabulary or a child
Trolling or the absolute most midwitted pseuds imaginable? Shit like this reads as someone who has no clue how to handle prose but is trying desperately to sound smart and elegant. Using complex vocabulary is fine if you're a skilled writer, but in cases like this it just turns your meaningless drivel into tryhard meaningless drivel.
If you're not an experienced writer you should absolutely be told to put the thesaurus away, you're not impressing anybody with ten-dollar words when there's no substance underneath them.
I liked it, anon
it's vague, but sweet
don't listen to those idiots at reddit, you're alright
awww thanks that warmed my soul
It reads like something written by someone between the ages of 16 and 21. It's hard to glean any substance off of, it's difficult to read and grammatically poor – though sometimes in a creative sense.
Keep at it OP i do like what you were going for stylistically
You are being too generous. It reads like something I wrote at the age of 14 (and I am intellectually slow).
>You are being too generous. It reads like something I wrote at the age of 14 (and I am intellectually slow).
Yeah, definitely reads young. Still, wanted to be a little more generous because, looking back, the things I wrote when I was 17-20 definitely aren't the masterpieces I thought they were at the time.
>anon realized reddit is shit
>something everyone on here has been saying for a decade
>if he continues to grow, he'll realize that this place is similarly devoid of value
That all said, the review sucks. It has no relatability, its juvenile in the way it deep throats and deifies Pynchon, it points to nothing specific, and lacks any humor or personality. It might be good thoughts masked in briefness, but I'll never know unless you post more. For now, know this. Reddit sucks, IQfy sucks, and you suck. See y'all tomorrow
>y'all
You suck, too.
Nibba, we had this conversation literally last week. I live in the SOUTH
how right is Faulkner about there?
Can't speak to that time period. That kind of soullessness is long gone. Now it's the dollar general version of that.
I'm not going to defend myself on this review. it's just not my best work and I didn't realize that until reddit lashed out its ugliest basedfaces at me. i'm primarily a poet and i guess i interact with the world through a rosy tint and there are always chances to deepen and mature my perspective. thanks for taking the time to make an honest response. I hope that according to an infinite timeline we find versions of ourselves that do not suck at some point
>according to an infinite timeline we find versions of ourselves that do not suck at some point
This is the kinda shit I'm talking about. Cut this wayyy down, if not out completely. I promise you, it's not making the writing better, either in pleasure-for-the-reader or adding depth way.
I'm not a pro critic but would say it's best to edit yourself harshly and use the fewest words possible to communicate exactly what you're trying to say. If you're cutting words you were happy with, then you'll be left with an even stronger piece of work. Not sure if that's any help.
I made a version of your review just as an exercise. Note: I've never read Slow Learner.
Slow Learner is evidence that even the most untouchable genius is often just experimenting. It has the oblique angle that allows Pynchon to participate in a self-reflexive node of history and conclude that anything containing humour is incredibly valuable. But it doesn't arrest you in a laugh. It glides into elemental speech about the strangeness and familiarity of institutions and weaves into the joy of creating under the guise of an involved artistry with the world. Pynchon writes as if he understood our time perfectly well from the year 2691. It seems seasoned with the affection one has for something studied closely while tenderly admitting its shortcomings. So lovely. Thank you for giving this country what it needed, Thomas Pynchon.
Sorry to say this but you are either legitimately dumb or underage.
There's nothing wrong with using "big" words. Not everyone has to write like Hemingway's ugly little books
i mean frick this is such a short review i cant really tell how overburdened your language is but your second sentence is hellish - "elemental speech", "unbesmirchable joy" ?
and why are you thanking him
Redditors are moronic, picrel is the kind of writing style they enjoy. But the paragraph could use some work. As another person pointed out, there are a few logical/grammatical errors, but there are also a few words that don't seem to fit stylistically. Example: "unbesmirchable" sounds weird in the context of the sentence. It sounds like you were just looking for an adjective to give emphasis, but this word draws enough attention to itself to ruin the sentence entirely.
Read moar, your writing style is already better than the average redditor/channer, but it is tiring to read in a way that skillfully wordy writers aren't
Hot
This reminds me of trying to read Michael Crichton's Airframe. The dialogue and characters were so effete from the start, I could not get past a few chapters.
The issue is it says nothing about the book at all. You didn't back up your claims with a specific story or details. You just kept using vague descriptors. It's also not that you're using "big words" — you aren't — it's that you're slapping an adjective onto every noun even when it doesn't make sense.
It reads like a contrived book report, not an independent piece written by a critic.
okay guys i am probably never going to post my reviews again, i will stick to poetry and my other creative pursuits. peace and blessings, thanks for the input
🙁
>Asks for a critique
>Gets critiques
>”ok I will quit forever”
I guess you weren’t really cut out for writing then
OR you could take the advice and criticism, apply it to your writing, get better, and earn the respect of those around you through commitment