Quote: (03-06-2013 06:04 PM)cardguy Wrote:
A few reasons why I fucking hate fiction. And think even bad non-fiction is better than 'good' fiction.
Firstly - I would rather read a book by a guy who has actually done something interesting with his life. As opposed to a sappy loser who has probably taken a few creative writing classes - he pondered remorsely like a dog trying to remember where he buried his bone.
Second - I cannot deal with the Theory of Mind which underpins most novels - he said in despair. The idea you can fix a single word to describe your state of mind is dumb - he said angrily.
Never once in my life was I even remotely sure about how I felt about anything - he cried in agony.
This is bad writing, and even pulp writers like Stephen King know to avoid it, the kind of author you are probably railing on (despite his having an interesting life, like most successful authors - but you couldn't be wasting your time criticizing unsuccessful authors - could you?).
Quote:Quote:
My brain - like everyone elses - is continually thinking of about 20 things at the same time. From how hungry I am, how tired I am, how fat I am, to how far it is until the weekend, to how boring the person I am talking to is, to how fucked my pension is, to how warm I am, to some song I recently heard - and another song I want to check out later. [Which reminds me to start listening to a GnR song I was thinking about earlier.] Oh - and I often find myself thinking about the holocaust a lot as well during most conversations. Not sure why... And on top of that - I keep reminding myself to not look bored and try think of a clever way to make the conversation shocking, interesting - or easy to escape from - he said in a wistful confused tone...
I guess you had better stop reading Goosebumps. The reason authors don't detail every thought process is pretty obvious. I got bored reading you talk about how interesting your brain is.
You make a weak argument, son, but you know it. I won't say that real life isn't better than escapism, but we aren't talking about escapism, just if there is or is not a benefit to reading fiction. Out of the people you have access to in your life, how hard can it be to find someone in your shoes? Of the people you do find, their experiences are likely to be more relatable, but hardly as profound as when somebody in a past life, with a powerful intelligence, took it to task and wrote it down. Good luck finding a shrink who can empathize with paranoia and mental breakdown like Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment.
Reading is the only way (that I know of) to step into someone else's head with detail, someone who may be long dead and who lived an inextricably different life. Many great ideas began as a kernel in a novel. It is a way to begin a project that can be continued a century later. Are you going to tell me that Dostoevsky wasted his life writing great works that are universally upheld as a standard of literature when the alternative is that he could have been lifting bricks and drinking vodka? The same goes for more average (but still notable, or there is hardly an argument) novelists like Cormack McCarthy. Its an expression of thought which can't be found elsewhere. Novels are like plays in the fact that the majority of them were written to entertain, not expand. There is an ocean of useless novels.
