What's his secret?
How does he write such beautiful and poetic prose ?
 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
|
What's his secret? How does he write such beautiful and poetic prose ?
What's his secret?
How does he write such beautiful and poetic prose ?
|
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
|
idk but this homie need to close his frickin mouth walkin round lookin like a complete frickin mouthbreather his oral posture finna be fricked ong fr fr SHIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEETT
>Pynchon hasn’t watched Hubermanlab yet
This homie gettin nooo b***hes this year HAHA
>poetic prose
which he sabotages by following up with bathroom humor
pussy
>bathroom humor
you dont have a single example of this
Mason & Dixon, them always going on about eating spotted dick and drinking wiener ale. Literally fifth grade boy humour
Bathroom humor like
is what Mason & Dixon is all about and it's what makes it good.
>what Mason & Dixon is all about and it's what makes it good.
** what makes it unreadable
Ftfy
based. vulgar and stupid "low" humor is not that funny and people just pretend to like it to make themselves seem smarter
He doesn't. You're a mark.
What's a mark
He does tho filtered 🙂
pynchon is wonderful and you're a bitter contrarian. most pleasurable author i've found so far for reading out loud
>for reading out loud
You can like Pynchon, but this shouldn't be the reason why
yes it should. he took care in constructing his language and reading it out loud is a great way to appreciate it, what are you even seething about?
>he took care in constructing his language and reading it out loud is a great way to appreciate it
Every writer in the literary canon did this. Pinch did it about average. I like him, but to claim there's an abundance of beauty there is imaginative
i just flipped GR to a random page and was met with this. to claim there is an abundance of beauty in him, as you put it, is entirely justified.
>"A-and you were so far away then ... I couldn't reach you. . . ."
>Then. Something like pity comes into her face and goes again. But her whisper is lethal and bright as sudden wire: "Maybe you'll find out. Maybe in one of their bombed-out cities, beside one of their rivers or forests, even one day in the rain, it will come to you. You'll remember the Himmler-Spielsaal, and the skirt I was wearing . . . memory will dance for you, and you can even make it my voice saying what I couldn't say then. Or now." Oh what is it she smiles here to him, only for that second? already gone. Back to the mask of no luck, no future—her face's rest state, preferred, easiest. . . .
>They are standing among black curly skeletons of iron benches, on the empty curve of this esplanade, banked much more steeply than the waking will ever need: vertiginous, trying to spill them into the sea and be rid of this. The day has grown colder. Neither of them can stay balanced for long, every few seconds one or the other must find a new footing. He reaches and turns up the collar of her coat, holds her cheeks then in his palms ... is he trying to bring back the color of flesh? He looks down, trying to see into her eyes, and is puzzled to find tears coming up to fill each one, soaking in among her lashes, mascara bleeding out in fine black swirls . . . translucent stones, trembling in their sockets. . . .
>Waves crash and drag at the stones of the beach. The harbor has broken out in whitecaps, so brilliant they can't be gathering their light from this drab sky. Here it is again, that identical-looking Other World—is he gonna have this to worry about, now? What th'—lookít these trees—each long frond hanging, stung, dizzying, in laborious drypoint against the sky, each so perfectly placed. . . .
This is not significantly better than other pomo writers, let alone all writers in the literary canon. Listen, I understand that you haven't read much and you want to defend the little you have read... I understand that impulse, and like I've said a dozen times, I enjoy his writing. I just don't enjoy them for the prose, which is fine, perhaps even better than average, but it's not his focus. Pynchon is an ideas man. He's a man of thoughts. There's nothing wrong with that
Didn't ask
alright, so who would you say is the best prose stylist in english? joyce? nabokov? soemone else?
Shakespeare
>prose
Virginia Woolf, incel
Im the anon you replied to. Yes, Shakespeare is better, but he's not exactly prose now, is he? Sure, Nabokov knows his way around a sentence, and Joyce runs laps around him. Kerouac said Whitman's "Specimen Days" when asked the same question. As for me and my favorite? I think Salinger shined pretty bright when he got going, especially in Carpenters, but I understand that as a favorite choice, not a best choice.
Then there are the obvious names.
Dickens
Faulkner
Twain
Joyce
Melville
Hell, it's the 21st century, we could throw a few women in there for fun.
Shelley
O'Connor
Eliot
And now that I think about it, for a different take on things, one could even say Hemingway.
That alone leaves us with what? Like 5 Americans who are better and more recognizable for their prose than Pynchon? I guarantee you that if I ripped two passages, one from White Noise and one from Gravity's Rainbow, 90% of lit wouldn't be able to tell the difference and would assume it's the same author. Not that either are bad, mind you.
But the best prose stylist was decided an eternity ago. I'm talking, of course, about (me.)
Nah Pynchon's better
>Hemmingway
lol
I know it's popular for the board to shit on ol hemmy, but the truth is is that he's a talented writer with a unique voice and he never faltered from it. Pynchon had a unique vision, but his voice is technically unimpressive. Not bad, just not something to focus on, and by failing to deliver any kind of rebuttal, I'm going to just assume you agree with me but are too embarrassed to say so. Ill leave it at that.
Didn't ask
Pynchon is a good author to learn what it is that defines an authors style in the prose department. His heavy use of period language makes it easy to cut away those things which are not a part of his style, just compare a few books and find what they have in common at the prose level. GR, M&D and AtD would be the best for this, the others do not go to the same extreme with the period language.
>90% of lit wouldn't be able to tell the difference
Do you think that proves something?
Pynchon wouldn't exist without Hemingway, his biggest influence prose wise.
>Do you think that proves something
I think they WOULD be able to tell the difference between say, Hawthorne and Melville. Or Hemingway and Steinbeck. The point being that I don't think Pynchon is a notable prose stylist in the grand scheme of things, and when compared to the best, doesn't crack the top 5 Americans, let alone like the op said, best of all time
>missed the point
OK, they certainly would be able to tell the difference between a random page from M&D or AtD from a page from White Noise. All that you would prove is that 90% of IQfy (you included) do not know what prose is and reduce it to some vague and undefinable effervescence that books give off.
>do not know what prose is and reduce it to some vague and undefinable effervescence that books give off.
What, you wish I had given adjectives to describe all of the listed authors prose? Pynchons prose is not experimental. Sure, sometimes he'll make use of conversational idioms, but he's not creating words, using obscure rhythms, or stretching the length of his sentences to the 40 page mark. Punctuation is ordinary, the rhythm of narration is often plain, and he, for the most part, sticks to one language. I will give him that he does interesting things with acronyms and occasional puns, but it's not enough to get him even close to the best of all time.
I've posted my writing one time in a thread and it received a fair deal of praise and one comment calling me discount McCarthy, something I disagree with.
You're the one that turned it into some posting contest
I don't know what you're talking about, so probably not.
You already established that you don't know what prose is, no need to devote an entire paragraph to explain that.
Why don't you give me your definition?
It is not my definition. An author's prose style is in the meaning, how the author uses language and literary devices to convey meaning at the prose level and how that informs the larger structures and is informed by them. This is why Hemingway has a distinct style despite his writing conforming to prescription and why you can not understand his writing through prescription which says nothing about meaning and his copious use of subtext.
None of those thing you gave as examples of experimental prose are experimental, even if you use them all it will not make your writing experimental, just a naive imitation.
>obscure rhythms
No such thing, there is not a set of standardized rhythms or even common rhythms in prose. You are just trying to sound smart.
>An author's prose style is in the meaning, how the author uses language and literary devices to convey meaning at the prose level and how that informs the larger structures and is informed by them. This is why Hemingway has a distinct style despite his writing conforming to prescription and why you can not understand his writing through prescription which says nothing about meaning and his copious use of subtext.
Now apply that to Pynchon.
At least engage enough that you can ask the questions required to cause me to hang myself. But that is beyond you, isn't it?
Kek, anon asks you to apply it to the writer you're arguing for and you completely ignore it
Do your own homework
Kek, it's fine to talk out of your ass, but at least have the honor to back down when someone calls you on it
You haven't said anything though
Where did I argue for Pynchon? I know this is probably difficult for you to understand but being right on the internet and getting into autistic arguments does not interest me. Without some level of engagement there is nothing in it for me. Trolls offer more than you do.
Anon, I think you gave a good definition of prose style. Personally, I'd like to see you provide an analysis of Pynchon's style as you seem to know what you're talking about. I understand trolls make it difficult to effort post though. Maybe you could just whip out a couple of lines of analysis for those of us here trying to get something out of this site.
>I know this is probably difficult for you to understand but being right on the internet and getting into autistic arguments does not interest me.
>Proceeds to do it for half a day
What did he mean by this
You're a joke
>getting into autistic arguments does not interest me
>"You're a joke"
This is moronic and you're a moron
>An author's prose style is
>to convey meaning at the prose level
Anon...
Nah
Faulkner too hard?
i've had no input on this conversation thus far but i want to read your prose. shoot me an email whenever, about whatever
>no Fitzgerald or Waugh
good grief zoomers are ruining this fricking board
>Fitzgerald
GR book 2 is a great pastiche of his style
>Fitzgerald
I like him, but I need to read more before I have a firm opinion. In fact, next on my list was This Side Of Paradise
>Waugh
You got me here
OK bud
Whitman
Weed. Lots and lots and lots of weed.
>he thinks prose can be poetic at all
el em ay oh
Clearly you haven't read him
It can
I see my superiority has aroused some controversy
why are there so many Pynchon threads lately? this has to be Pynchon getting bored and spamming threads about himself to see what 4chins thinks about him
Being an industry plant.
BILLIONS MUST READ GRAVITY'S RAINBOW
luv u tom